- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Biggest problem with "living wage" debate. It factors in child costs
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:31 pm
This is what bothers me most about the "living wage" debate. We live in an economy where theoretically your pay is determined by your productivity on the job. A person working full time at federal minimum wage is actually earning slightly ABOVE the federal poverty line.
When Bernie Sanders goes on stage and says, to cheers, that "no worker in America should work full time and live in poverty"....he is including an entire non-economically relevant factor....children. Children will knock you below the federal poverty line, holding your income level equal.
But me having a child SHOULD NOT entitle me to a higher level of pay. My pay should be determined by my production, not the needs of my children.
By introducing children into the equation, you are completely disconnecting the traditional marriage between pay and productivity. You are saying your pay shoulnd't only be determined by your productivity, but by the needs of NON-PRODUCTIVE offspring.
Should we provide assistance to minimum wage workers with children? That is up for debate. But it seems ridiculous to me to include child care expenses when labeling a worker "underpaid"... it is introducing an irrelevant factor. An employer is not getting revenue from the children of his workers.
When Bernie Sanders goes on stage and says, to cheers, that "no worker in America should work full time and live in poverty"....he is including an entire non-economically relevant factor....children. Children will knock you below the federal poverty line, holding your income level equal.
But me having a child SHOULD NOT entitle me to a higher level of pay. My pay should be determined by my production, not the needs of my children.
By introducing children into the equation, you are completely disconnecting the traditional marriage between pay and productivity. You are saying your pay shoulnd't only be determined by your productivity, but by the needs of NON-PRODUCTIVE offspring.
Should we provide assistance to minimum wage workers with children? That is up for debate. But it seems ridiculous to me to include child care expenses when labeling a worker "underpaid"... it is introducing an irrelevant factor. An employer is not getting revenue from the children of his workers.
7
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:42 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
One of my biggest gripes is that the virtue signaling morons who whine about "living wages" CONSTANTLY support inflationary policies.
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:49 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
I believe Senator Sanders indicated in his plan that it would be free. As in, no-cost. So stop confusing us with all that businussy hocus-pokery and start handing over them living wages.
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:50 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Bernie's ideals that you mentioned are discriminatory against people who are unable to sire/bear children.
Where is the sky screaming outrage? Are the infertile not a minority? Food for thought.
Where is the sky screaming outrage? Are the infertile not a minority? Food for thought.
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:51 pm to TigerAxeOK
And I am getting downvoted. 
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:51 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Labor should be paid at market rates with 0 consideration to the financial needs of the employee.
Posted on 6/17/18 at 9:54 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
traditional marriage
Well, there’s your problem. Bigot
Posted on 6/17/18 at 10:09 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Well of course all living wage should be based on the individual and a standardized family.
The federal poverty level is $23,050 for a family of four. That's a standard that is reasonable.
For the individual it's like $15,000.
For each child the poverty level raises $5,000.
So if you had 6-8 kids (which is not uncommon for migrants and poorer communities) - your poverty level would be $70,000 and under...which is not poor at all for a couple with two kids. That's middle class but for all those extra kids.
Companies shouldn't have to support a family of 10 because you refuse to buy condoms. You aren't living on a farm in China. Child costs put families into poverty. It's the biggest irony in the world. Rich folks plan forever for 1 kid...but those who are least equipped to pay for the cost of children seem to plan for nothing.
You want to be irresponsble to society, society has no duty to bail you out.
There's no reason people in modern society should be having so many kids...unless you have a farm in the middle of nowhere Northern China and need and use child labor.
The federal poverty level is $23,050 for a family of four. That's a standard that is reasonable.
For the individual it's like $15,000.
For each child the poverty level raises $5,000.
So if you had 6-8 kids (which is not uncommon for migrants and poorer communities) - your poverty level would be $70,000 and under...which is not poor at all for a couple with two kids. That's middle class but for all those extra kids.
Companies shouldn't have to support a family of 10 because you refuse to buy condoms. You aren't living on a farm in China. Child costs put families into poverty. It's the biggest irony in the world. Rich folks plan forever for 1 kid...but those who are least equipped to pay for the cost of children seem to plan for nothing.
You want to be irresponsble to society, society has no duty to bail you out.
There's no reason people in modern society should be having so many kids...unless you have a farm in the middle of nowhere Northern China and need and use child labor.
Posted on 6/17/18 at 10:09 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Well of course all living wage should be based on the individual and a standardized family.
The federal poverty level is $23,050 for a family of four. That's a standard that is reasonable.
For the individual it's like $15,000.
For each child the poverty level raises $5,000.
So if you had 6-8 kids (which is not uncommon for migrants and poorer communities) - your poverty level would be $70,000 and under...which is not poor at all for a couple with two kids. That's middle class but for all those extra kids.
Companies shouldn't have to support a family of 10 because you refuse to buy condoms. You aren't living on a farm in China. Child costs put families into poverty. It's the biggest irony in the world. Rich folks plan forever for 1 kid...but those who are least equipped to pay for the cost of children seem to plan for nothing.
You want to be irresponsble to society, society has no duty to bail you out.
There's no reason people in modern society should be having so many kids...unless you have a farm in the middle of nowhere Northern China and need and use child labor.
The federal poverty level is $23,050 for a family of four. That's a standard that is reasonable.
For the individual it's like $15,000.
For each child the poverty level raises $5,000.
So if you had 6-8 kids (which is not uncommon for migrants and poorer communities) - your poverty level would be $70,000 and under...which is not poor at all for a couple with two kids. That's middle class but for all those extra kids.
Companies shouldn't have to support a family of 10 because you refuse to buy condoms. You aren't living on a farm in China. Child costs put families into poverty. It's the biggest irony in the world. Rich folks plan forever for 1 kid...but those who are least equipped to pay for the cost of children seem to plan for nothing.
You want to be irresponsble to society, society has no duty to bail you out.
There's no reason people in modern society should be having so many kids...unless you have a farm in the middle of nowhere Northern China and need and use child labor.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News