I support action against the companies who hire them, no doubt about it. With unemployment at 10% you can't tell me they can't find American workers now who would be willing to work for similar wages. I personally would do whatever it takes to provide for my family. 60 bucks a day shoveling mulch? You bet your ass.
(just to build off what I was saying earlier, and as an excuse to post this picture) Conservatives should be praising such immigration and employment, it's the free market in action! Immigration is just part of free trade, labor is a commodity just as importing or exporting a product is. Really it's that so many people who claim to be die-hard capitalists, are only capitalists for the part they like. When it comes down to it immigration rules are simply blockades to the free exchange of labor, but when that part of pure capitalism comes into play, everyone whips up their protectionist mentality.
^ awesome lol That's also why I don't support raising minimum wage. If you have to pay someone $8/hr to flip burgers, the company is going to find a way to either pass the cost if consumers are willing to pay that extra cost or you'll find a way to make it as cheap/cheaper. Like MSP said, if I had to find a way to support my family I would. Even if it meant getting paid dick to do hard labor.
Shouldn't people have a safety net, though? Shouldn't there be a minimum wage to ensure people can put food in their mouths and a roof over their heads? Or are we to assume that everybody who has a lowly job is a good-for-nothing loser? Couldn't he be going through a tough time? I just don't understand the incongruity between abolishing the minimum wage and executives giving themselves billions of dollars in bonuses. BTW, not trying to attack anybody. Just expressing my thoughts.
Fiddy gets it. It'd be great if we could have open borders and be truly free. (the only way to do that IMO is to abolish welfare programs but that's a different story altogether). Since we cannot feasibly have open borders at the moment, what we need is a "taller fences wider gates" policy. I wish I weren't on my phone otherwise I would elaborate, and even give my answer on that minimum wage question. Maybe when I get up tomorrow.
Oh, I'm not against minimum wage. I'm just against raising it. I'm sure we've all worked crappy jobs for crappy pay. In this recession I'd take whatever work I can get if I were broke. The problem is that we're too expensive for crappy jobs (or perhaps we think we're too good to do that work).
Was that the article that asked the question: "Are cops rehearsing for martial law?" or somewhere in the article entitled: "REAL ID by Any Other Name Stinks As Bad. A bit of clarification on the law was passed down: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...AR2010043002271.html?nav=rss_email/components You know? I don't think this will do a single thing to slow the clamour by illegals and illegal immigration advocates. The "racial profiling" claims were just legal words used in an attempt to quelch any resistance to a free flow of people acrost the border. Now that the whole concept of "racial profiling" hasd been pulled from the legal equation, the immigration-whether-legal-or-not proponents will just play another card.
It was the urban golf story I read about http://news.softpedia.com/news/Form...e-Police-Civil-Rights-Violations-140640.shtml
I get that raising it now is perhaps not a good idea, even though it sounds counter intuitive, but they should be able to raise it to compensate for inflation. I mean, Congress usually raises theirs, and don't tell me it's to attract qualified candidates.... :\\
Seems to me that the arrest was more over drunken antagonism than ID. The ID thing was mearly the legal excuse to get off on the charges. What happens in society when the police are ignoring 911 calls and confrontations with drunks out of fear of lawsuits? It's happening right now and the trend isn't getting better. IMHO: the whole human race would get along better, have societies that run smoother/more efficient, much less crime, a lot smaller divorce rate and once again have a value placed on the concept of honesty..................................if lawyers were banned. Lawyers have the ability to create their own industry and make it where fear keeps them very gainfully employed. Too much of a percentage of population, uses the legal system to bypass common sense and to get what they want by hook or crook.
It has nothing to do with alcohol. The important part of the story: "Rachner remained strong on his position, while being aware of a 1982 Washington Supreme Court ruling according to which arresting a person solely for withholding identification is unconstitutional. The police officer eventually went ahead and arrested the security researcher, citing refusal to provide ID as reason in the official report."
So he was emboldened by prior knowledge of a way out of being drunk and disorderly (speculation via report)? The guy is a proffesional hacker for microsoft. I'm willing to say that if alcohol were not a part of this particular equation, chances are there'd not have been a summoning of peace officers in the first place. I wasn't there when it came down. But from being at many, many situations that were similar, I can envision the scene. Just another cop/ drunk-smartass confrontation............................................happens all the time. We have killers walking the street after being caught, arrested, charged, convicted and convictions overturned because of having access to a good lawyer that found a loophole or a mistake. that's what lawyers are paid to do by guilty criminals and corporations: find loopholes. "illegal is illegal" unless you gain access to the quality of lawyer that can turn a "caught-red-handed case of sodomy, into a simple traffic infraction of following too close"
The raise is actually automatic and they voted to withold it this year (and last). I generally am not a fan of hiking minimum wage just because, but they definately do need to at least attach it to inflation (with some reasonable safeguards in case of massive inflation - more that it doesn't crash right after when things correct)
I didn't know that. How nice for them! I knew that. They did it to save face, IMO. Me neither. I'm not talking about raising the minimum wage willy-nilly; I'm talking about attaching it to the consumer basket and/or inflation, so that it automatically goes up or down. I still believe people need a minimum standard to buy the basics (food and shelter). That's not unreasonable....
I didn't have time to verify via links included, so the scew factor isn't yet quantifiable by me: http://immigrationcounters.com/ As long as this isn't in our neighborhoods, I guess it's easy to ignore: http://www.newsweek.com/id/237196
The downside to tying minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index is that in years where there's deflation, like last year in Colorado, the minimum wage actually drops. Granted it was something like 5 cents but those making minimum wage weren't getting the benefits of the lower costs compared to their income. On the plus side, almost all employers kept their minimum wage employees' pay the same. Ivanalo, you also need to realize that minimum wage isn't really and only for those making it but rather is also for those making a "living wage". That is to say that those making $12ish and more an hour see a pay bump when the minimum wage rises.
Really? Then my GF got screwed a couple of years ago when they raised the minimum wage, cuz she didn't get a raise, even though she was making a "living wage". Anyway, I just can't fathom how those people who espouse eliminating the minimum wage expect people to survive. Imagine having to work three jobs and being unable to make ends meet. If this already happens now, imagine how bad it would be then. There would be no need to outsource, we could just build the sweatshops right here! Anyway, I think I've derailed the thread enough. I'm a legal, white Hispanic, and I live in Illinois. I have nothing to fear (yet).
i think a big change that they need to make for minimum wage (and what seems like it would be common sense) is adjust it on a state or regional level. $7.65 (or w/e it is) will let you live comortably in Houston TX but not so much in say California. (I know a bunch of people that are perfectly happy making minimum wage and living in houston. It can easily be done). The cost of living all over the country is too diverse for a single wage. White-collar salaries vary a lot based on CoD, they need to do the same for minimum wage Thats why a lot of big companies do an annual col adjustment
I'd totally support it. In this instance, I don't have a problem with letting each state decide, as long as there are safeguards in place to prevent states from getting too carried away. What would those safeguards be? I have no clue....
Already been done http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm A fraudulent SSN and the states with the high min wages get a higher rate of undocumenteds. interesting info.....no security clearance needed at SSA http://www.ssa.gov/foia/bluebook/60-0058.htm http://www.socialsecurity.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/A-08-99-42002.pdf
does the federal law not supercede the state one in this case? Obviously the state laws requiring a higher wage matter, but aren't the other ones moot?
