OBAMA/TRUMPCARE MEGATHREAD

[cabiness42]

I still wouldn't be happy if suddenly I was making the same amount as the person that's been there 6 months when I'd been there for 6 years. It would make experience/seniority irrelevant.

 

Yes, because when I go through the Drive-Thru at McDonald's, my first thought is, "I sure hope the person taking my order has 6 years experience instead of 6 months."

 

[Iwritecode]

Yes, because when I go through the Drive-Thru at McDonald's, my first thought is, "I sure hope the person taking my order has 6 years experience instead of 6 months."

 

Well it doesn't matter to the customers obviously.

 

But I've worked retail in the past and I know it matters to the employees. If you don't feel that you're being fairly compensated for years of loyalty, it doesn't make you want to care about your job that much. It makes all those raises you got in past years seem pretty worthless when somebody can walk in off the street and make the same amount.

 

[cabiness42]

Well it doesn't matter to the customers obviously.

 

But I've worked retail in the past and I know it matters to the employees. If you don't feel that you're being fairly compensated for years of loyalty, it doesn't make you want to care about your job that much. It makes all those raises you got in past years seem pretty worthless when somebody can walk in off the street and make the same amount.

 

If the job involves such a low level of skill that experience does not make you significantly better at your job, then you shoudn't make more just for being there longer.

[Iwritecode]

If the job involves such a low level of skill that experience does not make you significantly better at your job, then you shoudn't make more just for being there longer.

 

Maybe not, but that's how it works. Otherwise people would never stay at the same job for more than a year and never move up within the company.

 

It builds employee loyalty. It lets the employee know they are appreciated and the company wants to keep them around.

Edited November 21, 2013 by Iwritecode

[illinilaw08]

If the job involves such a low level of skill that experience does not make you significantly better at your job, then you shoudn't make more just for being there longer.

 

Haven't there been a bunch of articles written recently about how Costco is trouncing companies like Wal-Mart because they treat their employees really, really well? Treat employees well and they care more about where they work and they put more into their work. Treat someone like crap (even in a low skill job) and their productivity is going to be crap.

[cabiness42]

Haven't there been a bunch of articles written recently about how Costco is trouncing companies like Wal-Mart because they treat their employees really, really well? Treat employees well and they care more about where they work and they put more into their work. Treat someone like crap (even in a low skill job) and their productivity is going to be crap.

 

Very true, but forcing Wal-Mart to pay higher wages isn't going to keep them from treating their employees like crap.

[illinilaw08]

How are 401k's a failure?

 

Mine has been massively successful.

 

Yours has been quite successful, but we're going to have an entire generation of people who either didn't have the education, the disposable income, or just didn't care enough to contribute like you have who are not even close to having enough money to retire. When they get sick and their families can't or won't care for them, they will be the state's burden.

 

From Forbes... http://www.forbes.com/sites/edwardsiedle/2...erican-history/

[Jenksismyhero]

Please provide an actual budget instead of just assertions about what you think people spend their money on.

 

Please provide me with a number for your "base income" instead of "more than what they get now."

 

HH has a good starting point with his.

[StrangeSox]

Please provide me with a number for your "base income" instead of "more than what they get now."

 

HH has a good starting point with his.

 

No, you made the $15k claim. Support your claim.

[illinilaw08]

Please provide an actual budget instead of just assertions about what you think people spend their money on.

 

I pay $6k annually to repay my student loan debt. Lots of the unemployed and underemployed have significant student loan debt which cannot be discharged in bankruptcy and, if you let the interest get out of hand, will never be paid off...

 

I'm not taking a position on the living wage issue, but I deal with bankruptcy in my professional life and there aren't a lot of people that can actually live on $15k a year... and that's taking the IRS standards of living (which are pretty brutal for debtors as it is) into account.

[illinilaw08]

I don't know the solution either (i've offered voluntary sterilization programs in the past), but I do know that paying a family a "basic income" or "living wage" isn't going to magically solve the problem either. I don't think the money helps at all. You've raised their standard of living slightly, but not enough to stop the generational problem. And again, as is, before becoming a socialists wet dream, we already take care of those kids. They have every opportunity in the world to get out of those terrible situations and succeed.

 

And why can't we stop them from having kids? I'm 100% serious when I say that if you become a parent and you can't support your kids you should be charged with child abuse. Maybe the kids need to be taken away. If you purposefully choose to be a stay at home mom to have a 3rd kid and then sign up for welfare (as a cousin of mine did recently) you should be charged with a crime.

 

I'm less concerned with the two teenagers that make a stupid mistake than I am with the grown adult working a full time job at mcdonalds with four kids b****ing about how she isn't making enough money.

 

The foster care system is significantly worse for the kid than the mom that stays home with them and signs up for welfare.

 

I don't disagree with your point that people shouldn't be having kids they can't afford. I just don't see any reasonable way to stop them from doing that (other than making contraception free and readily available - like over the counter at pharmacies available).

[Jenksismyhero]

No, you made the $15k claim. Support your claim.

 

 

Rent $680/month (i'm sure you could find cheaper) http://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/apa/4206018407.html

 

Utilities - $60-80

 

Food - $100 (could easily be done for less)

 

Cheap healthcare plan - $50/month as we learned today and no deductible

 

What else? Misc expenses, call it $100 bucks.

 

So there's $1000 bucks a month with an extra $250/month for the year to spend on other things (public transit, clothes, whatever).

 

Absolutely doable. As I said about 10 times, this is a LIVING wage, not a luxury lifestyle.

 

Your turn. Give me that number. Back up your claim that a universal base income is the way to go.

 

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I pay $6k annually to repay my student loan debt. Lots of the unemployed and underemployed have significant student loan debt which cannot be discharged in bankruptcy and, if you let the interest get out of hand, will never be paid off...

 

I'm not taking a position on the living wage issue, but I deal with bankruptcy in my professional life and there aren't a lot of people that can actually live on $15k a year... and that's taking the IRS standards of living (which are pretty brutal for debtors as it is) into account.

 

IIRC Obama passed a law that you can pay the income contingent plan for 25 years and then whatever is left just gets wiped off. So pay whatever the government thinks you can afford.

 

Edit: either he did or that's always been the case, but yes, you pay for 25 years and the remainder is forgiven:

 

http://studentaid.ed.gov/repay-loans/under...come-contingent

 

Any loan amount that remains after 25 years of payments will be discharged (forgiven). You may have to pay taxes on the amount that is discharged.

Edited November 21, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[Reddy]

I survive off basically ~20K a year give or take in NYC.

 

15K in anywhere that's not NYC is doable, and many do live in this city with wages in that area, and lower.

[Jenksismyhero]

Yeah, that'd be the first move - get the f*** out of a major city.

[StrangeSox]

Rent $680/month (i'm sure you could find cheaper) http://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/apa/4206018407.html

 

Utilities - $60-80

 

Food - $100 (could easily be done for less)

 

Cheap healthcare plan - $50/month as we learned today and no deductible

 

What else? Misc expenses, call it $100 bucks.

 

So there's $1000 bucks a month with an extra $250/month for the year to spend on other things (public transit, clothes, whatever).

 

Absolutely doable. As I said about 10 times, this is a LIVING wage, not a luxury lifestyle.

 

Your turn. Give me that number. Back up your claim that a universal base income is the way to go.

 

$15k might be a good universal basic income level if those numbers are truly representative of an average individual's minimal budget. I don't know why you always assume that I or anyone else actually envisions a luxurious lifestyle as the bare minimum.

 

I support a universal basic income (different from a minimum wage) for a variety of reasons, but the most important is that I don't believe that people should be forced into wage-labor for others' profits as generally their only means of subsistence. The power balance is titled heavily in the favor of the wealthy when you must work for them or live in destitution. A universal basic income would provide for a minimal, spartan life. Because of this, you wouldn't be forced to take a job for a pittance in horrible work conditions with bosses/companies that treat you like disposable garbage. I believe that an overwhelming majority of people would still work and be productive members of society, and there have been studies and experiments that have borne this out. Most people want to feel productive, to be doing something for themselves and for those around them. You don't need the threat of starvation and homelessness to motivate you to work.

[Y2HH]

Australia's minimum wage is somewhere around $15 or $16. I wonder if they've seen that effect.

 

Australia is also 92% white.

[Texsox]

Don't buy any luxury items that Americans think are rights and it's pretty easy. We're talking about a living wage - what you need to provide you with life essentials. 15k is MORE than enough.

 

$15,000 less 15% + $870 for taxes = $11,880 http://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable

 

$11,880 / 12 = $990 (- stare income taxes)

 

Rent? Food? Clothing? Transportation? Health Care?

 

Could it be done? I don't think so for most of America.

[illinilaw08]

IIRC Obama passed a law that you can pay the income contingent plan for 25 years and then whatever is left just gets wiped off. So pay whatever the government thinks you can afford.

 

Edit: either he did or that's always been the case, but yes, you pay for 25 years and the remainder is forgiven:

 

http://studentaid.ed.gov/repay-loans/under...come-contingent

 

Still requires payments for 25 years. On $15k, I'm struggling to see how student loans fit into your budget.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'd be all in favor of a multi-year, stepped phase-in of minimum wage increases to be similar to those 1960's levels, then tie annual increases to a standard market basket measure. I guess that is too easy.

 

And I think that is a heck of a lot better solution then "providing" a minimum income, which I am wholly against.

 

[StrangeSox]

Australia is also 92% white.

 

So? You'd still see the same effect, more-qualified college students taking lower-level-but-now-higher-paying jobs regardless of race, if it's a real effect to be concerned about.

 

Raising minimum wages (or providing a UBI) has a racial aspect because of the disproportionate number of minorities in poverty in this country, but there's plenty of white poverty. There are poor white people and college-going middle and upper class people of color. You could be correct that this change would lead to more middle-class college students pushing out working-class people from low-skill jobs, but it wouldn't be a directly racial thing.

 

To put it another way, why would McDonalds in America hire the college-going middle-class person over someone who isn't going to college, but McDonalds in Australia wouldn't?

[StrangeSox]

$15,000 less 15% + $870 for taxes = $11,880 http://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable

 

$11,880 / 12 = $990 (- stare income taxes)

 

Rent? Food? Clothing? Transportation? Health Care?

 

Could it be done? I don't think so for most of America.

 

At those income levels, you're going to be getting most if not all of your taxes and then some back thanks to the EITC, which functions as a backdoor basic income.

[Y2HH]

So? You'd still see the same effect, more-qualified college students taking lower-level-but-now-higher-paying jobs regardless of race, if it's a real effect to be concerned about.

 

Raising minimum wages (or providing a UBI) has a racial aspect because of the disproportionate number of minorities in poverty in this country, but there's plenty of white poverty. There are poor white people and college-going middle and upper class people of color. You could be correct that this change would lead to more middle-class college students pushing out working-class people from low-skill jobs, but it wouldn't be a directly racial thing.

 

To put it another way, why would McDonalds in America hire the college-going middle-class person over someone who isn't going to college, but McDonalds in Australia wouldn't?

 

They probably do.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

$15k might be a good universal basic income level if those numbers are truly representative of an average individual's minimal budget. I don't know why you always assume that I or anyone else actually envisions a luxurious lifestyle as the bare minimum.

 

I support a universal basic income (different from a minimum wage) for a variety of reasons, but the most important is that I don't believe that people should be forced into wage-labor for others' profits as generally their only means of subsistence. The power balance is titled heavily in the favor of the wealthy when you must work for them or live in destitution. A universal basic income would provide for a minimal, spartan life. Because of this, you wouldn't be forced to take a job for a pittance in horrible work conditions with bosses/companies that treat you like disposable garbage. I believe that an overwhelming majority of people would still work and be productive members of society, and there have been studies and experiments that have borne this out. Most people want to feel productive, to be doing something for themselves and for those around them. You don't need the threat of starvation and homelessness to motivate you to work.

 

That's 95% of the country though. That's our system. We work, we get paid, we hopefully can make our income and/purchases make us additional money, and then we die. Whether you make 10 bucks an hour or 40, you generally spend according to what you make and are still a slave to your employment. What's the alternative? Forcing an employer you pay you a base amount isn't going to change that.

[Iwritecode]

Still requires payments for 25 years. On $15k, I'm struggling to see how student loans fit into your budget.

 

One could argue that college is a luxury.