Didn't one of her damn speeches leak recently and it was just a long boring mess? She got paid to do a speech because she's a celebrity. It's something they do and are expected of.
Any logical person can see that Hillary is a corrupt politician. Some people make her out to be like Mother Teresa! Hillary Rodham never met a bill she didn't like... Clinton or Hundred Dollar.
This has nothing to do with Obama...he has political convictions, unlike Hillary.
And this is why Hillary Clinton supporters look silly. Over the past few pages, we've asked for ONE example of what you're saying is obvious and something that "any logical person can see".
But, you cannot even provide a single example to back you up. Honey, logic is not on your side, it's actually vehemently against you.
Didn't one of her damn speeches leak recently and it was just a long boring mess? She got paid to do a speech because she's a celebrity. It's something they do and are expected of.
Her Wall Street speeches are boring as hell. This one is at Goldman Sach's and it was just about women being entrepreneurs...
Hillary got paid a lot (well, actually just the standard speaking fee for someone of her status) because she is the only person in history to serve as a First Lady of a governor, First Lady of the President, the first female Senator from NY, a strong presidential candidate, and Secretary of State.
She is the only person, living or dead, who has that impressive of a résumé. Hell, Laverne Cox came to my university to speak the same week Hillary Clinton came to mine and Laverne (as someone who worked to bring her on campus) was a complete diva on what she demanded (organic avocados was one of her demands) and she was not cheap whatsoever. Successful speeches get paid for speeches, why is it scandalous when Hillary Clinton—one of the most accomplished women in American history—gets the same?
hm, I say it does, though not quite at 15. It's still 7.65 where I live and I've had to make do with that for nearly four years and it was pretty ****ing hard. I just got a job three weeks ago that nearly gives me double that but nine dollars or less is just too little on today's day and age tbh.
Ugh, poor bb. I thought I had it bad. That's just too little for a job, especially something like retail where you bust your ass off and get nothing in return (my experience). I am going to get a little pressed if everything is raised to 15 dollars right after I finally secured this nice job though. I guess it'd still be worth it for everyone else, I'm still more in favor of like a nine or ten dollar minimum but eh.
The minimum wage is $7.25 here as well. Fortunately I have a job in which I make well above the minimum wage but even then, I still see how it affects others and how taxing everyday life is for them struggling just to stay on top of bills and having to work two, to three jobs just to get by. All the while aiming for a college degree only to end up in debt after college and then there's the hurdle of landing a job after college.
The idea that the minimum wage is already high enough is disturbing and ridiculous.
The idea that it should be $15 in all locales is dangerous and harmful.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike91
This happens over the course of a few years though. It doesn't go to $15 overnight.
Plus there's a lot of evidence that show raising the minimum wage leads to increased job growth.
And the info about it hurting small businesses is pretty much the conservative response to why it shouldn't happen. It's the same argument they made against Obamacare. There is little evidence to suggest that increasing the minimum wage hurts business. A lot of places that rose the minimum wage apparently saw employment grow at faster rates than the national average.
The myth about small business being hurt just isn't a good enough reason to be against it. Plus most small businesses support an increase in the minimum wage since it leads to lower turnovers. And then there's things like increased worker productivity as well.
More money in American's pockets = more spending, which leads to economic growth.
I don't particularly care if the small business line is a conservative talking point because in this case, unlike so many others, it is legitimately true. One might try to deflect by saying that megacompanies employ more minimum wage workers, but that doesn't change the number employed by small businesses. One might argue that they could raise prices and see increased business, both because of this wage raise, but that neglects to acknowledge that raising prices and increasing spending completely counteracts the increase of wages, and doesn't end up helping anyone.
There is no evidence that more than doubling the minimum wage would yield increased job growth or faster growth rates. Absolutely none. This is because it has never once been done and research and studies are solely based on the incremental changes we have so far seen. Even the United States Department of Labor, which clearly has a vested interest in supporting a wage increase, only bases its statistics, its claims, and its assertions on a $12 minimum wage - no high authority supports $15.
Significant economic authorities actually assert that, while they supported the effort to raise it to $10.10, they would not support pushing the government for a $15 wage:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bloomberg
Katharine Abraham, President Bill Clinton’s commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and later an economic adviser to President Obama, signed the $10.10 letter, but, like Cornell’s Ehrenberg, says she would have said no to the $15 letter. “We have no experience with an increase in the national minimum of that size and I am concerned about what a $15 minimum nationwide would do to employment,” she wrote in an e-mail.
A good rule is to set the minimum at half the local median wage, says Arindrajit Dube, a University of Massachusetts at Amherst economist and a leading researcher on minimum wages’ impact on jobs. That is “in line with the international average and with the U.S. average during the 1960s and 1970s,” he wrote in a paper for the Hamilton Project, a policy initiative of the Brookings Institution. The Dube standard would produce minimum wages above $11 an hour today in Alaska and Massachusetts and above $10 in Connecticut and New York, but slightly below the current federal floor of $7.25 in Arkansas and Mississippi—and under $5 in Puerto Rico.
For instance, in 2014, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that an increase of the minimum wage from $7.25 to $9.00 would result in the loss of 100,000 jobs. But a rise to $10.10, CBO estimated, would swell that number fivefold, to 500,000.
Scaling that calculation up to a $15 minimum wage would almost certainly increase net job losses beyond that, Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution, told PolitiFact.
"It’s very hard to believe that a minimum wage hike to $15 would produce the same adverse impact on employment as a hike to just $10.10," Burtless said. Indeed, the potential adverse impacts are "likely to be considerably bigger" at $15, he said.
The negative impacts could be especially big in lower-cost rural areas. Raising the minimum wage to $15 is one thing for bigger cities where the cost of living is more expensive; these are the places where the movement has flourished in recent years. But in rural areas, Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell has written, "would likely throw many, many more people out of work."
...
A majority of the economists we contacted expressed even greater skepticism about a $15 minimum-wage increase.
Burtless was one with this view. His Brookings colleague, Henry Aaron, was another, calling a $15 minimum wage "terra incognita."
Timothy M. Smeeding, director of the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin, said he’s willing to take the job-loss trade-off that might follow an increase to $10.10. "But $15 is too high," he said. "Job losses would be much higher and employment would fall for the lowest-skill workers."
Harvard University economist David Cutler concurred, saying he "would be uneasy about $15 everywhere. I am much more comfortable with $12 everywhere."
Brookings Institution economist Barry Bosworth said since he’s "unsure of the effect" of a $15 minimum wage, he’s "reluctant to sign on to a number so far out of line with the historical experience."
That lack of historical experience also worries Roger Noll, a Stanford University economist. He also said that in this political environment, the idea of getting a $15 minimum wage seems unlikely. Even Clinton’s $12 proposal, he said, would require working Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, "which is possible but unlikely."
The most likely scenario if Clinton wins the presidency, Noll said, would be for the minimum wage to be raised in three or four steps over two or three years to between $10 and $11.
"This would be in the range of past changes, and so would be likely to produce a net benefit to low-wage workers but a small increase in unemployment," Noll said.
And Tara Sinclair, an economist at George Washington University and the jobs site Indeed, suggested that successful policy proposals for low-wage workers expand beyond just the level of the minimum wage.
"I'd like to have more focus on finding ways to get people to move up over time out of minimum wage jobs, no matter how high the minimum wage ends up being," she said.
There is in fact a wealth of evidence that raising the federal minimum to such a high level could be a dangerous and damaging move, even if it is implemented gradually. We need to be conscious of our economic situation and we need to mandate gradual wage increases based on the situation we're currently in and are projected to be in.
More money and more spending cannot happen if we don't have the money and if the net spending and wages don't actually increase enough because of layoffs, staff reductions, and closing doors - or if costs of everything rise proportionally to wages. There's a very real chance of such a mandate actually having a net-negative effect.
Even so, that makes very few places which need a $15 minimum wage relative to the number of places that don't need it and might need something smaller.
Just for further information on wage levels and the concept of poverty:
Wages above the Federal Poverty Level by household population, assuming only one full-time working member:
So assuming that one is paying for less than six people the household would technically be above 100% of the federal poverty level with wages lower than $15 per hour. Now, I know very well that this is still a near impossible situation for most people - I wouldn't honestly expect a single mom with a couple kids to survive on $9.70 an hour - so I support raising the wage, but so few households actually need that much money to survive that mandating such a wage doesn't make sense to me. I don't think we should be striving for "technically out of poverty" and thus I support a $12 minimum wage and gradual steps toward that after a couple years. Assuming two parents and two kids - the average American household - $12 an hour per parent would actually yield an good, comfortable life in many places (including my home town, for example). Granted this is dependent upon location and more money could be needed in other areas, but most places still don't need $15.
For full disclosure I'll note that I'm mostly supported, along with my brother, by my mother's wages of about $24 an hour and her fiancee who we live with. In the past, I have been in the situation of being the child of a single parent, two-child household when my mother was making just $11 an hour, 24 hours a week because that was the only job available - which is the equivalent of about $6.60 an hour with a full time job. It's not the worst situation I'm sure but I know what it's like to live under the poverty line and I don't make my arguments against the $15 wage lightly.
RCP average, June 26, 2008: Obama 47.1, McCain 40.4 (O +6.7)
RCP average, June 26, 2012: Obama 46.8, Romney 44.2 (O +2.6)
RCP average, June 26, 2016: Clinton 46.1, Trump 39.4 (C +6.7)
2008 final margin: Obama +7.2
2012 final margin: Obama +3.9
2016 final margin: Hillary + ?
We got this in the bag, y'all. Both margins for Obama were relatively close to the final ones.
And as an aside, I'm still firmly in the $12 nationwide camp, but I believe it should be $15 in major metropolitan areas, like NYC, Chicago, DC, San Fransisco, Seattle, LA, etc, where they actually need it.
She got paid to do a speech because she's a celebrity. It's something they do and are expected of.
I guess it'd still be worth it for everyone else, I'm still more in favor of like a nine or ten dollar minimum but eh.
There is little evidence to suggest that increasing the minimum wage hurts business. A lot of places that rose the minimum wage apparently saw employment grow at faster rates than the national average.
