|
|
Post by Mr. Tumminelli on Sept 14, 2015 12:50:22 GMT -8
OK everyone, new post for today. It is actually a video from a rising presidential candidate. **PLEASE NOTE: just because I post something for debate, especially from a presidential candidate, doesn't mean I endorse said candidate. No jumping to conclusions  www.freespeech.org/video/bernie-sanders-anything-less-15-hour-povertyDo you agree with Sanders that making anything less than $15 an hour leads to poverty? Does the US government have a responsibility to support those who work minimum wage jobs? |
|
|
|
Post by Sam Caldwell on Sept 14, 2015 18:27:15 GMT -8
The median wage in America is $30,000. 40 hours a week * $15 a hour * 4 weeks a month * 12 months a year = $28,800. This means that the average person would now made just below the average pay. No one wants to live paycheck to paycheck, but this could have the unintended side effect of actually making everything slightly more expensive in order for businesses to recoup the cost of what they are spending "extra" per employee, so nothing would change.
I would say that the US government does not have the responsibility to help people who are working minimum wage jobs, especially after the wage increase. That means that more people should not need help. Hopefully those resources could then be directed to those unemployed and/or homeless.
To summarize, I think that the raise increase could increase prices and send more people below the poverty line than before, and the US government should not assist those who are working minimum wage jobs and have a place to live.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noah Wolfe on Sept 14, 2015 19:40:04 GMT -8
I do agree that trying to live off of anything less than $15 an hour leads to poverty. I also believe that the government should try to help people living off of a lower income, however, minimum wage jobs require little to no experience and should be for people entering the workforce not for those trying to feed their families. Plus, $15 in another part of the country is worth a lot more than in Santa Cruz County
|
|
|
|
Post by Deven F. on Sept 18, 2015 21:23:43 GMT -8
I do agree that earning less than $15 an hour leads to poverty for an adult trying to support a family. One of the articles we read in class on Friday says that at this rate, one would only earn around $31,000 a year which is not nearly enough for a family and will certainly mean poverty. The federal government should support minimum wage workers because it should be the government's job to make people's lives better and helping to bring people out of poverty surely aims to do this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deven F. on Sept 18, 2015 21:31:43 GMT -8
In reply to Noah, although he claims that minimum wage laws should be for those entering the workforce, unfortunately in reality there are many older people who are trying to provide for a family. The article we read in class states this exact point. Also, he says that $15 an hour could afford someone more things in different parts of the country which is true to a very limited extent. This applies to real estate and possibly some other things but not really to other things like food and clothing that one would need to support his/her family.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan F. on Sept 19, 2015 13:45:02 GMT -8
I think that even if we change the minimum wage to 15$ an hour it will not change anything. This is because many businesses are greedy and will want to make as much as they do now in profits. So they will raise the prices for goods. So the average cost of living will be the same rendering it useless. If you want to stop abuse of workers you need another plan. Though this one wont work.
|
|
|
|
Post by jessica90zamudio on Sept 19, 2015 14:57:44 GMT -8
I agree with Sanders although I don't agree that the minimum wage should be brought up entirely to $15 rather do simple increments in order to have a positive effect on the Economy and so that this way the millions of people won't lose there jobs and low skilled workers will still have a way of earning money. The raise should be done because $9 an hour is no longer the sufficient amount of money needed to live in certain areas and also to the increasing prices on gas there should be an increase on the minimum wage. The government does have a responsibility because the people of the us are paying there taxes and $9 for 2015 is no longer sufficient for affording to live. $9 is not adequate because there are various components to living such as clothes, food, shelter, and other commodities and gas which is a huge component because of its steep price point. The government does have responsibility because it's job is to maintain an economy and minimum wage that helps out the lower class, middle class the most but that distributes the money or income between all the classes equally. Because separation is creating a division also caused by the minimum wage.
|
|
|
|
Post by jessica90zamudio on Sept 19, 2015 15:04:26 GMT -8
I disagree with Ryan because things will change if the minimum wage increased,there will be less poverty and will help the lower class and middle class. Even though prices will be raised due to an increase in minimum wage it won't be drastic because the minimum wage will be increased in increments not in one jump. This plan will work because it will be enforced that the minimum wage be brought up first to $12 then $15 in this process the economy will adjust and create a positive effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sachi Land on Sept 19, 2015 16:11:19 GMT -8
I think that the government does have the responsibility to support those who work minimum wage jobs or are in need of financial aid. However, I do not thinks this means that any pay less than $15 an hour leads to poverty. In order to support people who receive the minimum amount of pay, the solution would be for the government to help provide those in poverty with the things they need, like giving them food or shelter. This way, people who make the smallest income could get the things they need while avoiding the the complications of raising the minimum wage. It could cause prices to rise and create even a bigger gap between the rich and poor.
Sanders brings up a good point, but there is more than one solution to preventing poverty than raising the minimum wage. It's the government's problem to keep its citizens out of poverty, so they should provide people with their basic needs. We can use that money that would be used to raise the minimum wage to directly give people the necessities. We can prevent poverty without the roundabout route of raising pay that could potentially result in inflammation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sachi Land on Sept 19, 2015 16:17:40 GMT -8
Sam brings up a good idea when he says, "the raise increase could increase prices and send more people below the poverty line than before." I agree with him- not only could raising the minimum wage have no real benefit in the long run, it could have negative results as well. However, I don't agree with him when he says, "the US government should not assist those who are working minimum wage jobs." If the government doesn't help, who will? The companies?! No. It is the governments job to help its citizens, which includes those in or in the danger of poverty, so it is very much their responsibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Savannah Smith on Sept 19, 2015 17:04:49 GMT -8
Poverty is not being able to pay your water or insurance bill, not having to skip the ski trip for Christmas. While I wish that everyone could makes lots of money and never have to worry, I do not agree with Mr. Sanders that an hourly wage of $15 will make that happen or eliminate poverty in the U.S. According to the Trent Hamm, a contributor to the respected personal finance website the Simple Dollar, the average household (2.5 persons) spends "$9,004 on transportation, $6,602 on food (of which $2,625 is spent at restaurants and $3,977 is spent on food eaten at home), $5,528 on insurance and pensions, $1,604 on clothes, $2,482 on entertainment, $17,148 on housing, $3,631 on health care, $1,834 on cash contributions (donations and legally required spousal and child support), and $3,267 on other expenditures." With $15 an hour for 40 hours a week and a month of vacation, the average family could make $66,000 if my math is right [44(15x40)]. This is not poverty. The issue may be people who work minimum wage jobs who lose their jobs, have debt, or cannot work 40 hours a week. The issue is stabilizing work conditions for everyone, not how much someone makes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Savannah Smith on Sept 19, 2015 17:15:55 GMT -8
Deven, I would like to point out that today having a "family" or children is a choice. If a working couple decides to have children they should be fully aware of the costs of raising children and maintaining financial stability. Maybe if someone wants a family they should wait until they are in a better financial position, or - better yet - not rely on a single person's paycheck for more than one person.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paige D. on Sept 20, 2015 8:23:52 GMT -8
Bernie Sanders says "you should be able to not live in poverty" if you work forty hours a week. People are getting jobs and working over 5 hours a day to try and support their families. However, I do not think that this is a valid reason to raise our minimum wage because not every person receiving minimum wage is in poverty. It really just depends on how many people you are trying to support with that one minimum wage job. If one is trying to support a family of six and is only working in a job that gives the minimum wage, then yes you will not be able to provide the basic needs to everyone in your family. On the other hand, if one is just trying to support themselves, and themselves only, then the minimum wage amount is an amount that will give one to, maybe two individuals their basic needs. The families of six that have these minimum wage jobs do need the support of the government. The government can provide them with the shelter, food, water, and safely they cannot afford for everyone in the family. The government does not need to support all minimum waged workers since some, such as people living alone, do have just enough support from their low payed job to get by. Minimum wage is a problem that needs to be addressed by the government for some families that are in poverty but not all people receiving minimum wage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paige D. on Sept 20, 2015 8:31:17 GMT -8
I agree with Sachi when she says that "we can use that money that would be used to raise the minimum wage to directly give people the necessities" that they are lacking. If people are willing to raise the minimum wage for every person receiving it, then all that money should be enough to support all the people suffering from not having their basic needs. Most of these people are families that need shelter and food for every person in their family. They are not getting enough money for everyone in the family to have the healthy amount of necessities in life. This suggestion that Sachi gives and I agree with is just another solution to the problem of poverty that should be addressed by the government.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sydney Livingston on Sept 20, 2015 9:49:07 GMT -8
I do not think that making under $15 an hour leads to poverty. Many people think that poverty is not being able to buy brand name clothes or live as comfortably or as luxuriously as one may desire. This however, is not poverty. It is just living with less money than the average middle class. In addition not all people that work for a minimum wage are in poverty and there are some people that make more than minimum wage who are. This is just because it is about how one spends their money and how conservative they are in using it. In addition, Bernie Sanders does not have any evidence or proof to back up his statement that if you are working for less than 15 dollars and hour, than you are living with a poverty wage. He is generalizing that everyone who earns less than this certain amount will live in poverty. The U.S. government should not have responsibility to help those working for minimum wage because not all minimum wage workers need this financial help. They should help the people and families in poverty who cannot provide the basic needs for themselves. The government should keep an eye on the minimum wage workers, but should only be obligated to help those who are truly in poverty and cannot support themselves.
|
|
