Have you ever tried renting an appartment, maintaining a car, bought groceries and keep the lights on, with only 5.15 an hour?
There's just no way. However, the increase and tax cut are only attempts from the Republican congress to stimulate the economy, thereby saving face with the voting public.
2006-07-27 19:38:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bill K Atheist Goodfella 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
once back, that's hardship-free economics. human beings scream for a residing salary, yet do no longer understand quite a few key factors. If purely mandating a minimum salary led to pastime creation and a "residing salary", why stop at $7.25/hr. enable's strengthen it to $20. $30? No?: The implementation of the minimum salary regulation led to pastime loses, and the raising of the minimum salary very nearly continuously leads to more losses, stagnation, or the final decreasing of the conventional of residing... yet it is not any longer the most important situation or unintended effect. The minimum salary regulation replaced into witlessly enacted to provide low-experienced workers with a "residing salary". besides the undeniable fact that, what easily takes position is on account that employers at the prompt are being forced to pay a better salary they're going to employ the proper conceivable applicants (those with skill or extra ideal coaching). This actually ability they employ to get the most bang for the greenback (does no longer you?), which leaves the low-experienced workers unemployed. Or, the 2d selection is that the organization no longer has the capitol it needs for that position so that is now eliminated, or the organization itself can no longer functionality and to that end closes ensuing in even better unemployment. those that do not realize economics do no longer understand the way wages are determined and how expenditures are arrived upon. the reality is that the large large-majority of persons that take minimum salary positions stay there briefly and flow on. Forcing employers to pay better wages reduces the final pastime positions attainable and keeps the bottom experienced workers unemployed. KJ (less than) wisely reported that this isn't a nil sum pastime, and as an instantaneous effect of marketplace manipulation contained in the range of authorities regulation, the marketplace equilibrium will regulate contained in the range of better expenditures. An party must be this: You earn $2 hundred and pay $100. They strengthen minimum salary. You earn $220 and pay $100 and twenty. P.S. Didier Drogba: the excuses you, me and others acquire "thumbs down" rankings is by way of the very undeniable actuality that we use proper grammar, cite hardship-free inescapable economic regulation, and provide actuality over feeling. What we've shown right here stands in stark assessment to each and every thing they have been taught, or trust to be genuine, on account that day one.
2016-10-15 07:15:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by season 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
lol, what if it was you making 5.15, you must be a ditto head. The problem is much bigger than the employees min wage, why do the *** hol es in congress keep raid=sing there own wages.....start their, then go to what corporate welfare is, wake up and educate yourself, ...5.15 is enough when the economy is strong, it hasnt been strong in a long time, over 6 years, and really 40 or so when one person could work and not both married folks had to work like now.
2006-07-27 19:40:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by dwill604 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I know many people who support families on minimum wage and they qualify for food stamps and all DHS aid. Minimum wage is not near enough to support a family and the tax cut is not enough of an aid. There are millions of children who are being impacted by the increase, and since children are our future, we must take care of them. There's already so many not having enough to eat, let alone having appropriate clothing, shoes large enough, medical care, and their needs met. Any time minimum wage goes up I shout a resounding approval as even with an increase, it's still not nearly enough. If you've never lived on a minimum wage job, you should try it. It is a bare existence.
2006-07-27 19:49:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
They probably just want to mooch off the government: eat government cheese, get cheap monthly bus passes, an express lane at the local public hospital's emergency room. Bunch a damn free-rider slackers. Don't they know that you can't get ahead by sluffing off on the job? Every rich person I know got it through lots of hard, hard work - just ask any of 'em. They're honest folks. It's sad, really sad that people can't just look up to the rich as good role models rather than being all hateration at them and green with envy. Makes me sick.
2006-07-27 19:44:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Good Times, Happy Times... 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
omg lol
1st the tax only applies to income over $75 per year
2nd Do u realize that 5.15 after taxes wont even buy your deodorant
2006-07-27 19:39:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Fyn 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
where in the hell do you live??? Rent in the Phoenix Metro Area is average of a grand a month.. who making minimum wage can pay their rent??? Could you live off of that? Grow UP!!
2006-07-27 19:37:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by curiositykillsthecat 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Let's see YOU survive on $5.15 an hour!
See If YOU could pay your rent, utilities, gas, telephone, groceries etc.
YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO!!!
What big tax cut are you referring to??? I haven't received one!
2006-07-27 19:42:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by jennifersuem 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Boy are you out of touch. The cost of living goes up every year, and wages don't. Wal-Mart has sold out America to the Chinese.
2006-07-27 19:39:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by :Phil 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I will assume this is sarcasm... If it isn't you obviously have never been a "wage-slave"
2006-07-27 19:38:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by salientsamurai 3
·
0⤊
0⤋