A Republican ideal, work until you die

[rjs330]

Yeah? So what? What has that got to do with the topic of this discussion?

Nothing I guess.

 

[rjs330]

One of those conditions is apparently the ability to pay workers not enough to live on in a VHCOL area.

Perhaps mediocre mall-based chain restaurants isn't the best business opportunity in such a market. Perhaps he should consider investing in something with higher prices that can justify the higher labor costs.

Right this is the calloused response I would expect from someone who doesn't respect the small business owner. He was fine until the government got involved and told him how much he had to pay. There were people working for him. People that needed jobs, part time or the younger generation or those just entering the work force to gather some experience before moving on to bigger and better things. This California law just created more people out of work.

Congratulations supporting this.

 

[discombobulated1]

I hear it has been proven that those who stay active after retirement or don't even bother retiring

live longer. I knew this guy who was fairly active at 86, then he entered a retirement home and was dead in about a year or less.. He got lazy IMO, started using a wheel chair when he had used a cane before.

 

[weekEd]

plus it serves as a reminder to go to work driving past the lack of opportunities

 

[JustOneWay]

I hear it has been proven that those who stay active after retirement or don't even bother retiring live longer.

Agree on the stay active, but some elderly folk stay active and are retired.

I knew this guy who was fairly active at 86, then he entered a retirement home and was dead in about a year or less.. He got lazy IMO, started using a wheel chair when he had used a cane before.

It is a good anecdotal thought, however at that age a sickness can come on and take them rather quickly. A wheel chair and cane are good indicators of an actual medical problem rather than laziness. And, there are some people who just get tired of living....

 

[iluvatar5150]

In your mind it might be pertinent but it's not.

My mouth is agape right now.

The majority of those earning minimum wage are as I stated. I proved that. You use the median or mean averages by taking I to consideration everyone older than 26. That's irrelevant because you are comparing about 50 years in comparison to around 10. It's a clever way to do it really.

Wow. I’ve met some folks in the past who could be described as “confidently wrong,” but you’re setting a new standard here.

When you complain about how 50 years of age brackets are skewing the average, you’re complaining about the way that the mean can get skewed. That’s a phenomenon I already explained and I already said that the median (26-27) was more appropriate for this discussion.

But as I showed you the numbers I am clearly correct.

All you’ve shown is that you don’t understand math.

In fact there are more in that age range than all the others combined.

What age range? Under 25? I’ve already shown how that’s not correct.

But either way, you know that you’re talking about the median, right? The age at which half of the people are younger is the median age. The median that you said wasn’t pertinent.

So I'm not going to discuss this with you any longer. I'm not buying your tactics.

lol, TIL that “my tactics” are middle school math.

 

[rjs330]

What I have a problem with is the implied notion that we ought to be prioritizing the ability of some well-heeled bro to open up more chain restaurants over the ability of the workers to make enough to pay rent. Why should labor policy favor that guy over his employees?

If he were providing some needed public service like daycares or nursing homes, then I could see there being a public interest in cutting him a break. But Cinnabons? No. We have enough Cinnabons. Society will chug along just fine without him opening more.

Because these jobs are NOT MEANT for people looking for a career. These jobs are crucial for the economy and for people who need them. They always have been. I don't understand the mindset that every single job out there should pay enough for someone to live on full time. Thats not what they are for. If you think so then you have just cost a lot of jobs for people who need them for certain reasons. If every single state required this the amount of jobs available to shrink dramatically. There would be no Cinnibons or any number of lower paying unskilled jobs out there. Plus those business owners as well. Your lack of understanding of the necessity of these businesses to the economy is astounding.

You are also creating LESS money for these people due to lost wages. Even if the business raises the wage to meet the new minimum required. People would actually loose about $1600 a year.

Costa of EVERYTHING would rise, child care expenses would rise.

I get it it, it sounds good on paper and emotionally.

And as I also pointed out which is a FACT not that many workers actually earn minimum wage. Only 2% of full time workers earn minimum wage. And most of them are the young.

I am not opposed to raising the minimum wage, but I am opposed to raising it too far and definitely opposed to creating a living wage.

 

[rjs330]

Pffft. A lot of people right now cant survive with a job

That's horse hockey. Who's not surviving with a job? I'd like your definition of "a lot". How much is a lot to you? What percentage of full time workers are not surviving?

 

[rjs330]

What age range? Under 25? I’ve already shown how that’s not correct.

No you haven't let show you again.

Minimum wage workers by age U.S. 2022 | Statista

Do you need me to add the numbers up for you? I looks like perhaps you are the one that doesn't understand math.

 

[rjs330]

But either way, you know that you’re talking about the median, right? The age at which half of the people are younger is the median age. The median that you said wasn’t pertinent

No I said the majority of money minimum wage workers are under 25. You are the one who decided to try and counter the truth with using median ages and so on. Know that you could skew a number by comparing an 8 year difference to a 50 year difference in order to try and say the majority of money minimum wage workers were not under 25. Trouble is you are incorrect. The majority of money minimum wage workers ARE under 25.

 

[rjs330]

lol, TIL that “my tactics” are middle school math.

Well it appears you can't add. That's elementary school math lol.

 

[iluvatar5150]

No you haven't let show you again.

Minimum wage workers by age U.S. 2022 | Statista

Do you need me to add the numbers up for you? I looks like perhaps you are the one that doesn't understand math.

Yes, please, add the numbers up. I beg you. Because as I said the last time you posted that link several pages ago, I can't get past the paywall. When I look at that page, I get this:

Not being able to bypass the paywall, I can't see the unobscured image, I can't download the documents, and I can't find out what it's using as a source. I expect it's using the same BLS data that I've already discussed numerous times, but I can't know for certain.


When I dig through the code to find the link to the image, I get this:

That picture doesn't have exact values on the vertical axis and it doesn't have any sort of legend at all on the horizontal axis, but it does look a heck of a lot like the data in table 7 of the BLS link we've already discussed:

Characteristics of minimum wage workers, 2022 : BLS Reports: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

This report presents highlights and statistical tables describing workers who earned at or below the federal minimum wage in 2022. The data are obtained from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a national monthly survey of approximately 60,000 eligible households conducted by the U.S. Census...

www.bls.gov

In that BLS link, the number of minwage workers in each age bracket are:
16-24: 457,000
25-34: 207,000
35-44: 117,000
45-54: 97,000
55-64: 110,000
65+: 36,000

That chart has the same number of broad age brackets as the BLS data and the bars are all exactly the right height. I would bet money that they're showing the same thing.

So, what do we get when we look at the BLS data and add up the brackets for everybody 25+?

207,000 + 117,000 + 97,000 + 110,000 + 36,000 = 567,000

Last I checked, 567,000 is more than 457,000, which means that there are more total minwage workers in the 25+ brackets than there are in the 16-24 bracket.

No I said the majority of money minimum wage workers are under 25. You are the one who decided to try and counter the truth with using median ages and so on. Know that you could skew a number by comparing an 8 year difference to a 50 year difference in order to try and say the majority of money minimum wage workers were not under 25.

NO, YOU CANNOT SKEW A MEDIAN LIKE THAT. THAT'S WHY THEY USE THE MEDIAN. THAT'S THE WHOLE STINKING POINT OF IT.

If I have a set of numbers:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

The mean (i.e. the sum of 1 through 9, divided by 9) is 5.
The median (i.e. the middle, wherein half are less and half are greater) is also 5.

If I change that set to:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 900

The mean is 104
The median IS STILL 5

When you say that the "majority of minimum wage workers are under 25", you're saying that more than half of them are under 25, which means that the median is under 25.

Trouble is you are incorrect. The majority of money minimum wage workers ARE under 25.

Please, show your numbers.

Well it appears you can't add. That's elementary school math lol.

Show your work and I will humbly admit my errors.

 

[RDKirk]

Because these jobs are NOT MEANT for people looking for a career. These jobs are crucial for the economy and for people who need them. They always have been. I don't understand the mindset that every single job out there should pay enough for someone to live on full time. Thats not what they are for. If you think so then you have just cost a lot of jobs for people who need them for certain reasons. If every single state required this the amount of jobs available to shrink dramatically. There would be no Cinnibons or any number of lower paying unskilled jobs out there. Plus those business owners as well. Your lack of understanding of the necessity of these businesses to the economy is astounding.

You are also creating LESS money for these people due to lost wages. Even if the business raises the wage to meet the new minimum required. People would actually loose about $1600 a year.

Costa of EVERYTHING would rise, child care expenses would rise.

I get it it, it sounds good on paper and emotionally.

And as I also pointed out which is a FACT not that many workers actually earn minimum wage. Only 2% of full time workers earn minimum wage. And most of them are the young.

I am not opposed to raising the minimum wage, but I am opposed to raising it too far and definitely opposed to creating a living wage.

Earned income credit takes account of a worker's dependents, which is why it works better in that respect. Nor is it limited to those making whatever the minimum wage is.

 

[rjs330]

Earned income credit takes account of a worker's dependents, which is why it works better in that respect. Nor is it limited to those making whatever the minimum wage is.

Plus it doesn't add to inflation.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Plus it doesn't add to inflation.

If it gives money to people (which it does), then it adds to inflation.

 

[BCP1928]

Right this is the calloused response I would expect from someone who doesn't respect the small business owner. He was fine until the government got involved and told him how much he had to pay. There were people working for him. People that needed jobs, part time or the younger generation or those just entering the work force to gather some experience before moving on to bigger and better things. This California law just created more people out of work.

Congratulations supporting this.

Operators of chain fast food outlets are only "small business owners" in a highly imaginative way, created by large corporations who have the clout to push actual small business owners out of the way.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Operators of chain fast food outlets are only "small business owners" in a highly imaginative way, created by large corporations who have the clout to push actual small business owners out of the way.

They're kind of like outsourced middle management.