Poll of the Day > Minimum wage versus National Annual Wage

(+) Yeah! (+)

As it stands now, the minimum wage is and always has been a joke and should be done away with in favor of a national annual salary that could start at say $40,000 a year.

Now there would be some kinks that need to be worked out but it could be done if exchange for the minimum wage.

---

No it'd be communism which is really jus hyper capitalism once the gov't has a monopoly on business anything could go wrong and the company would never be in danger of getting in trouble, but homelessnous should be illegal and I don't think people should have to work for food.

---

Uhhh...no lol what kind of dumb idea is this?

---

UBI

---

Id rather entertain the idea of a maximum wage. Let the ambitious still be able to become rich but say make it so every dollar over maximum wage they make gets divided and split among their employees as a bonus. I feel this would give incentive for workers to make sure quality is good and maybe even freely advertise the product.

---

The US should adopt a NIT or UBI and get rid of the concept of a federal minimum wage.
People shouldn't be forced to work, but work should be adequately compensated.

---

See, I don't think people are forced to work. Most choose to so they can make money. But you could just not work already...
---

LinkPizza posted...

See, I don't think people are forced to work. Most choose to so they can make money. But you could just not work already...

People are forced to work (see the concept of wage slavery).
It's pretty regressive to think otherwise tbh.

---

Judgmenl posted...

People are forced to work (see the concept of wage slavery).
It's pretty regressive to think otherwise tbh.

they don't have to work, but then it's harder to get food and shelter.

their choice
---

Judgmenl posted...

People are forced to work (see the concept of wage slavery).
It's pretty regressive to think otherwise tbh.

Except you really don't need to work. Your life may be worse off for not working. But you don't need to work.
---

I feel like a lot of people would be getting way over worked to make up for the 40k

People at McDonald's would be working like 14 hour shifts 6 days a week to make it worth it to the company

---

With a NIT/UBI based economy, low skill jobs would either get phased out by technology, or those service jobs would have higher demand as people would not need to take low-paying part time work.

---

Judgmenl posted...

With a NIT/UBI based economy, low skill jobs would either get phased out by technology, or those service jobs would have higher demand as people would not need to take low-paying part time work.

Unless they want something they can't afford because UBI will only be so much...
---

Judgmenl posted...

The US should adopt a NIT or UBI and get rid of the concept of a federal minimum wage.
People shouldn't be forced to work, but work should be adequately compensated.

That's unfeasible in America financially, made worse by loads of Americans who would choose not to work if implemented. It's a recipe for disaster.
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

they don't have to work, but then it's harder to get food and shelter.

their choice

"They don't have to work, they'll just die if they don't. It's totally their choice."

---

adjl posted...

"They don't have to work, they'll just die if they don't. It's totally their choice."

Not necessarily die. They might just be much worse off... Many people already don't work. Their lives aren't great, and not even good in some cases. But they are alive and get (scrape) by. You don't need to work...
---

Cost of living needs to be fixed before "MOAR MONEY!!1!" will ever become a real solution.

---

We need a UBI funded by taxing the most successful companies properly, whether it be by VAT or some other method with laws specifically targeting these companies. Then maybe people would actually have some sort of leeway with their lives instead of being slaves to the system. And maybe companies would have to have more competitive wages since people wouldn't be necessarily FORCED to work X amount of hours to pay their bills and survive.

I hope the minimum wage increase works without too much downside but I am worried that it is purely the employees and customers that will bear the brunt of profit loss.

---

LinkPizza posted...

Except you really don't need to work. Your life may be worse off for not working. But you don't need to work.

Yep, it's extremely easy to survive without a roof over your head. And you certainly aren't forced to have a job to have said roof over your head, no sirree.

Arcturusisnow posted...

Yep, it's extremely easy to survive without a roof over your head. And you certainly aren't forced to have a job to have said roof over your head, no sirree.

Definitely easy to survive without health insurance too.

---

LinkPizza posted...

Not necessarily die. They might just be much worse off... Many people already don't work. Their lives aren't great, and not even good in some cases. But they are alive and get (scrape) by. You don't need to work...

You will die without a roof over your head and without a job you can't have one. Stop bullshitting and sucking the republican dick. It isn't a good look.

Judgmenl posted... Definitely easy to survive without health insurance too.

I really hope this was sarcasm.

Arcturusisnow posted...

Yep, it's extremely easy to survive without a roof over your head. And you certainly aren't forced to have a job to have said roof over your head, no sirree.

I don't know why you think that. It that's what you think, good for you, I guess. I literally said it would be harder. Because I don't think it would be easy to live if you didn't have a job. That being said, it's also possible to have a roof over you head without a job in certain cases, so there's that, as well... But the end result is that you aren't forced to work to survive. Like I said, life wouldn't be good, but you could do it...

Judgmenl posted...

Definitely easy to survive without health insurance too.

Many people do, already. And with the way health insurance kind of sucks here, it's not really surprising that people could go without it...

Arcturusisnow posted...

You will die without a roof over your head and without a job you can't have one. Stop bullshitting and sucking the republican dick. It isn't a good look.

No. You won't. People already do that. You could live with someone else who doesn't force you to have a job. You also have many ways of getting assistance without a job. You even have a bunch of homeless people that seem to get by without jobs or houses, as well. You literally don't need a job to live. The job will definitely make you life better, but you don't need it... Also, not a republican. How about you go ask all those living homeless people what jobs that currently work. I can tell you that not all of them work, if you really want to know. I've talk to many around one of my job a few times...
---

You can potentially live without working but your safety takes a significant and possibly lethal hit. Some homeless people survive a long time being homeless, but some don't.

---

LinkPizza posted...

Many people do, already. And with the way health insurance kind of sucks here, it's not really surprising that people could go without it...

ffs I was being sarcastic.

---

Judgmenl posted...

ffs I was being sarcastic.

I know... Especially based on your post before. I wasn't, though. It sucks here...
---

doesn't a minimum wage basically say that low-paying jobs are not allowed to exist? it doesn't really mean that low paying jobs will pay more, it means those jobs will just be removed as options if at all possible, or made more complex or require more experience or effort.

(I guess in other words, very theoretically, it should increase unemployment, though also increase the value of employment. employment is more valuable but harder to get. something like that.)

---

I think an annual min. salary is probably better, because it'll allow for more flexible work ours. It would need to be implemented in tandem with adjustments to part-time vs. full-time status requirements and other variables so employers don't take a person that at 40h/week would bring in $100k annually, but then give them the required amount to get away with only paying them 40k (assuming that would be the min. for skilled labor) and just hire two people, pay each one less, and save $20k per year. It would need a lot of considerations regarding worker protections, but makes more sense. Likewise, they'd need to classify jobs differently for annual wages.

Entry level stuff like fast food or retail should not carry the same annual income as a teacher or a mechanic or something. That would be absolutely stupid. A class system really would need to exist, but the mobility would be there as well as the guaranteed incentive of "go to school, move into a high class, and definitely be farther ahead." The gov't would win by having more high tax payers and businesses would have more skilled, enthusiastic workers.... in theory lol

The poverty wave is coming for us all.

Raddest_Chad posted...

Entry level stuff like fast food or retail should not carry the same annual income as a teacher

that is preposterous, most people think the latter work harder, grading papers after school spare me the sob story
a teacher position is HIGHLY selective doesn't mean they expend more calories or are more emotionally aware

---

RoboXgp89 posted...

that is preposterous, most people think the latter work harder, grading papers after school spare me the sob story
a teacher position is HIGHLY selective doesn't mean they expend more calories or are more emotionally aware

It's not so much about how much more they work its about its a skill not just anyone can do and they had to go to college for it. Its also a vastly more important job. We could survive easily without fast food. Its just a convienience. It would suck for say truckers though if fast food went to the way side.

---

I had a teacher in high school who didn't show up for our class so much that we got switched to another teacher...

she had tenure though, so she didn't get fired
---

The way America built the Middle Class after WW2 was by paying people a decent wage in which they then could go out and make purchases but as it stand now America has gotten away from that model and we have more and more people struggling to make ends meet which means that will eventually dwindle down and create havoc for businesses.

We have over the course of the last few years, seen some of the most well known stores going belly up i.e. Sears, JC Penney, Neiman-Marcus, J. Crew, Bed Bath and Beyond, Steak N' Shake, Nordstrom, Ruby Tuesday, Dave and Buster's, Toys R Us, Chuck E Cheese, The Gap etc to name a few and while the pandemic obviously played a role, some of these businesses were going under before the pandemic.

In order to have a great economy, employers have to lift up their employees by paying a fair wage that enables people to have disposable income and right now that isn't the case.

We have people who own businesses that have made them billionaires many times over yet they pay people barely $30,000 a year and an economy can't be sustain in that manner.

---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

I had a teacher in high school who didn't show up for our class so much that we got switched to another teacher...

she had tenure though, so she didn't get fired

Tenure is so stupid, if you're bad at your job you shouldn't be protected, you should be fired, especially if its a job as important as teaching

---

BUMPED2002 posted...

The way America built the Middle Class after WW2 was by paying people a decent wage in which they then could go out and make purchases but as it stand now America has gotten away from that model and we have more and more people struggling to make ends meet which means that will eventually dwindle down and create havoc for businesses.

We have over the course of the last few years, seen some of the most well known stores going belly up i.e. Sears, JC Penney, Neiman-Marcus, J. Crew, Bed Bath and Beyond, Steak N' Shake, Nordstrom, Ruby Tuesday, Dave and Buster's, Toys R Us, Chuck E Cheese, The Gap etc to name a few and while the pandemic obviously played a role, some of these businesses were going under before the pandemic.

In order to have a great economy, employers have to lift up their employees by paying a fair wage that enables people to have disposable income and right now that isn't the case.

We have people who own businesses that have made them billionaires many times over yet they pay people barely $30,000 a year and an economy can't be sustain in that manner.

you act like land lords and the gov't have no guilt in this

people spend like the first week and a half of every month jus paying property taxes

---

RoboXgp89 posted...

you act like land lords and the gov't have no guilt in this

people spend like the first week and a half of every month jus paying property taxes

Paying taxes on a home you already own. That's ridiculous.

it's insane how much we spend on property taxes

it should be like 600-800 a year lol
why are we paying someone in the gov't a pay check every month??

and my dad spends more on taxes in one year than I make
I actually make less money then what he spends on taxes

---

BUMPED2002 posted...

As it stands now, the minimum wage is and always has been a joke and should be done away with in favor of a national annual salary that could start at say $40,000 a year.

Now there would be some kinks that need to be worked out but it could be done if exchange for the minimum wage.

I support this idea. We need to make inflation even more out of control after all.
---

minimum wage - Puts some people out of work, raises the price goods and services for everyone.

national annual salary - If people don't have to work they likely won't which reduces availability of goods and services, increases dependency on the government, compensation for labor would have to be increased as motivation which raises the price of goods and services.

Neither should be pursued. Both fail to solve the problem of everything being too expensive and increase the number of people unable to afford them.

---