Will increasing the minimum wage to $9/hr be a net positive?

Obamas Union brothers are all for raising the minimum wage, to boost there demands,Which means more money flowing to the dems
Unions win, America loses

Businesses are all ready starting to limit how many hours a person can work to under 30 per week because of Obamacare. Now the SOB is going to try to raise minimum wage forcing employers to cut back on the number of employees they have, costing even more jobs. I don't understand,it's simple math,a business can only charge what the market will bare. To make a profit and stay in business if you can not raise the price of goods and services, you must cut overhead. The easy way to cut overhead is cut the number of employees. We are dealing with a bunch morons.

samhill wrote:Isayre, there are other types of discrimination besides racial among those are economic, if those that have the capacity to grow this economy then why on earth have they not done anything but grow their own, the tax rate was in effect for 12 years, = less employment (in the US) & a much higher wealth rate for those so called job creators.

Because Sam, as I've said many times. "Figures lie and liars figure."

The income tax rate has LITTLE if anything to do with employers hiring people.

There's FICA, UI, Workers Comp, etc.

Whatever you pay an employee, it costs at least 50% more to the employer in taxes.

I have a friend of mine that owns a machine shop. I used to work there when I first got out of school. He's got a fair amount of work right now but told me straight out, "I'd love to hire someone, but I'd get killed in taxes."

So now you have me out of work who could do the job, and him working 6-7 days a week to meet demand, but no job simply because of the taxes. That's happening thousands of times a day all over the country, and you'd like to throw those people an anchor.

Don't have to throw him an anchor Jpete, he isn't going to hire you so he can stay afloat . If the income tax has so little to do with anything then why are so many trying so hard & spending so much to not have to pay it?

samhill wrote:Don't have to throw him an anchor Jpete, he isn't going to hire you so he can stay afloat . If the income tax has so little to do with anything then why are so many trying so hard & spending so much to not have to pay it?

Because income and property tax turn us all into share croppers. When we have to pay the government for the "right" to provide for ourselves, it's slavery.

But that is a different thread.

jpete wrote:Because income and property tax turn us all into share croppers. When we have to pay the government for the "right" to provide for ourselves, it's slavery.

What I don't understand is why that is such a hard concept for so many to grasp.

What I don't understand is why that is such a hard concept for so many to grasp.

Because they are or hope to be beneficiaries of the gov. largess. It is easier then going out and earning it and competing with other people. Class warfare at its simplest most basic form. I am entitled because I exist. IF you want to go earn a bunch and pay taxes, go for it. Just don't cry when we come take more as you knew the consequences of earning money with "our" resources and environment.

Sound about right?

Kevin

Poor spelling, sorry.

KLook wrote:Sound about right?

Yes, sadly it does.

franco b wrote:

jpete wrote:Because income and property tax turn us all into share croppers. When we have to pay the government for the "right" to provide for ourselves, it's slavery.

What I don't understand is why that is such a hard concept for so many to grasp.

Because apparently, the last thing we did on the way out of the womb was sign a "social contract" that gives the government control over us.

I don't remember it but I remember so little from when I was young.

jpete wrote:Because apparently, the last thing we did on the way out of the womb was sign a "social contract" that gives the government control over us.

I don't remember it but I remember so little from when I was young.

It's called your Social Security number. It is De Facto proof of your life long social contract with the government. Without it you would be a free man. With it you are a ward of the state.

I think our parents marriage license may be the culprit. They have you way before birth. I think in some countries the family is sold into slavery(India?) and they are all held responsible for the debt forever. Or until it is paid. This way conceals some of the dirty details of your enslavement. Baaaaaa

Kevin

KLook wrote:I think our parents marriage license may be the culprit. They have you way before birth. I think in some countries the family is sold into slavery(India?) and they are all held responsible for the debt forever. Or until it is paid. This way conceals some of the dirty details of your enslavement. Baaaaaa

Kevin

Ah, yes! And then there is the all important (to the state) birth certificate. When my parents were born your birth certificate (if you had one at all) was some record that resided with a local church, and there was no such thing as Social Security. Then the Fascist Franklin D. Roosevelt came along and gave us all numbers that magically made us serfs working for the good of the state.

lsayre wrote:

jpete wrote:Because apparently, the last thing we did on the way out of the womb was sign a "social contract" that gives the government control over us.

I don't remember it but I remember so little from when I was young.

It's called your Social Security number. It is De Facto proof of your life long social contract with the government. Without it you would be a free man. With it you are a ward of the state.

Even without a SS#, you are still owned by the state.

If you can get a job, your employer is going to report your income and the IRS will come looking for you if you don't file a return.

I have heard of people declaring themselves "sovereign citizens" but it seems like it's more trouble than it's worth.

jpete wrote:

samhill wrote:Isayre, there are other types of discrimination besides racial among those are economic, if those that have the capacity to grow this economy then why on earth have they not done anything but grow their own, the tax rate was in effect for 12 years, = less employment (in the US) & a much higher wealth rate for those so called job creators.

Because Sam, as I've said many times. "Figures lie and liars figure."

The income tax rate has LITTLE if anything to do with employers hiring people.

There's FICA, UI, Workers Comp, etc.

Whatever you pay an employee, it costs at least 50% more to the employer in taxes.

I have a friend of mine that owns a machine shop. I used to work there when I first got out of school. He's got a fair amount of work right now but told me straight out, "I'd love to hire someone, but I'd get killed in taxes."

So now you have me out of work who could do the job, and him working 6-7 days a week to meet demand, but no job simply because of the taxes. That's happening thousands of times a day all over the country, and you'd like to throw those people an anchor.

That is the problem. An employee needs to be able to pay the employer. (not directly of coarse but through work) Now if you pay someone $7/ hr + other costs say that equals $12/hr total. You now have to figure how much you want the employee to pay you. So say you figure you want or need the employee to pay your company $20/ hr. That equates to $32/hr that needs to be charged. Say the employer sells hamburgers and they sell 20 burgers/hr at $4each that's $80. If the burgers cost $2 for materials/ ingredients. There goes $40 off the top, overhead may be the other $8/hr. Now you are at your $20/hr that you need the employee to pay you.
Now we raise the min to $9 that costs the employer $16 instead of 12 and now you are only making $16/hr and your costs of materials goes up because the vendor you buy the ingredients had to raise the price for the same reason described above. This raises your costs to 2.50/ burger and now it is $50/hr . So now we are at $30 - 16 - 8= $6/hr is now what you are now being paid by the same employee.
So that simple 2 dollar increase has cost you $14/hr roughly. Now you have to see if the market will accept a $4.80 / burger to maintain the same level. Or do you try to do more with less employees? Most companies will hire less at least at first.
There are certain jobs that need to be low pay. Students in high school or just out still living at home don't need to earn a living wage. Not saying 9/hr is a living wage but it is more than is needed or that can be justified in a lot of cases and job roles.

You lost me at the first hamburger !! Please stay with making the stoves and not hamburgers flyer 5