If a person works 40 hours a week, the wages they bring in ought to be enough to pay for...

[reformist2]

... rent, utilities, food, clothing, and health care (if the employer doesn't already provide it.) Basically, the cost of living. Quite a demand, I know. I'll be brazen here and add that any full-time paycheck also ought to be enough to provide for some basic care for one child - food, clothing, health care, education costs, etc - because having children, that's part of life too. It shouldn't be a privilege that only the wealthy can afford.

The fact that this even has to be debated and fought for tooth-and-nail in the United States in the 21st century is shameful and embarrassing.

[niyad]

1. k and r

[William769]

2. Kick & recommended.

[Bunnahabhain]

3. I don't think

that goes nearly far enough. It should also allow a person to save some money for emergencies, fund their retirement, and pay for an annual vacation as these are healthy for people and it is disgusting only the wealthy can afford nice vacations.

[bhikkhu]

4. Absolutely

it is ridiculous that any person working full-time would have to choose between having a roof over their head or food on the table. What was the point of jobs being limited by the 40 hour work week and weekends off, as major accomplishments of the early 20th century, if you have to have to have two of those jobs to live?

[limpyhobbler]

5. Should be more like 30 hours.

But I get your point and totally agree.

[CrispyQ]

6. Nixon proposed a guaranteed annual income.

I don't think it was much & I don't know how far it would go in that time, but can you believe it? A republican?

I think government should provide the following for everyone:

3 hots & a cot
health care
education through college
child care/elder care
public transportation everywhere

We could do this. We are not broke, contrary to what they tell us. We have many untapped revenue streams, but until we actually start to value people over money, nothing will change.

[Bunnahabhain]

7. Indeed

we should not tie work to acquisition of basic human rights but we need to move incrementally. Let's get a basic living wage tied to full time employment first and then we can move to decouple work from a basic income.

[corkhead]

12. The government does - it's called "The Prison System"

except for the child care part. And yes, they always use public transportation when they are transported.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

28. In the 60s many pointed to the 13th Amendment....

It says quite clearly that you can't be FORCED into servitude. IOW: You shouldn't have to work for someone if you don't want to. This was the hot topic of the times as people passed the joy puff.

[airplaneman]

37. I would add basic communication and internet. n/t.

[Bunnahabhain]

43. Don't forget

the Internet is useless without a computer so a computer needs to be part of the basic package for full time work. Ditto communication and phone service, i.e. people should be given basic cell phone service and phone.

[airplaneman]

70. I think of it the way.

If human life is valued then the ability to communicate worldwide must also be valued.
Private enterprise is supposed to supply us this but the list of how I have been ripped off by corporations over the years is quite fresh in my mind. Does anyone else remember a $300 cell phone bill where they would not even tell or let you check out where you were on your "allowed minutes". Well heck Comcast advertised pone, internet, and TV for $34.95 so why am I paying $184.00 for the same thing. In fact my last Verizon "local phone service" bill was $75.00. We are supposed to be of, by and for the people. We need to change it to "only people with money" or share the wealth by making basic necessities available very low cost or free.
-Airplane

[Bunnahabhain]

72. As I said earlier

we must abolish corporations and replace them with employee owned non-profits and government run services. Capital needs to work for everyone not just the 1% bastards.

[hfojvt]

8. what if the rent is too damned high?

In my paper, I am seeing houses for rent from $458 to $1,500 per month and a studio apartment for $350, a 1 bedroom duplex for $425 or a studio for $450. Back when I had house payments, I was only paying about $300 a month. So I think the worker is generally better off if he/she does not rent. But in order to avoid rent, he/she needs to save up money for a down payment.

Also, you did not say anything about transportation which is often another $300-400 a month for car payments, car repairs, gas, insurance, etc. And it is usually $50 a month more for insurance for a person under 25. But sometimes other options are available there - the bus, walking, bicycling. I did without a car for many years.

[awoke_in_2003]

17. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_Is_Too_Damn_High_Party

[ErikJ]

20. Dont forget about property taxes.

Mine is about $2000 a year or $166 a month. I think they should do away with property tax because its another regressive tax and means that you never actually own your house even if its paid for. If you dont pay the property goes to the state.

[hfojvt]

42. property tax is included in the payment

and it is not THAT regressive, because the more expensive your house is - the more you pay.

[ErikJ]

45. Exactly. So even the poor pay a property tax

hidden in their rent. The richest have to pay property tax too of course but like sales tax the ratio of the tax to their income/wealth is very small compared to the average property owner.

[belcffub]

91. Its my property taxes that are too high

being a New Yorker I am paying around $7.5k in property taxes per year for property valued at just under $200k... We would like to move to a larger house but its the taxes that keep us here...

[smirkymonkey]

21. In Boston, I am paying $1800 for a studio

and that is on the less expensive side. I could never afford a one bedroom on what I make, which is well above the national average. It's ridiculous.

[CrispyQ]

41. Get a roommate.

That was McDonald's recent solution to employees who could not make ends meet on the wages they pay. Get a roommate & forego heat. There you go. Problem solved.

Years ago I used to take the bus. Then I moved to the burbs & we didn't have the bus. Then the bus came out here & I started taking the bus again. Public transportation has made me a better person. Everyone should have to take the bus at some point in their lives. It will show you just how fortunate you are. And everyone should have to work retail at some point in their lives. It will show you just how awful people are to you for no other reason than that they can be.

America is mean.

Reality TV has not made us a better people.

[maddiemom]

75. Excellent suggestions!

[fizzgig]

55. cheapest two bedroom apartment i can find in my town is $850ish

unless you want to live in a complete shit hole. it generally includes water/sewer, but many don't cover gas/electric. you can barely find even a one bedroom house for under a grand. we pay about $900 a month when you factor in electric and internet and that's still more than a third of our monthly income. and a lot of places require additional pet rent on top of often non-refundable fees of three to five hundred per pet. i can understand needing to clean the carpets if there's been a cat in the house, but it can cost more than a thousand dollars just to have one pet in the house.

and, due to occupancy regulations in my city, two married couples can't share a residence.

we're damn near priced out of our city.

[hfojvt]

82. I usually opt for the excrement hole

although I have been buying places mostly since July 1987, except for a 3 year span when I went to graduate school and taught for a year, 1988-1991. Although that was a fairly long span, I did not buy another place until March 1993. From June 1991 until then, I had been renting space for my bookstore, and living in part of that space (either the back or the basement), and that continued from March 1993 - July 1998 when I bought a building for my bookstore and lived in the basement. But at least that building, unlike the previous two, had hot water, and a mop sink that I used for a shower.

It cost me a lot to buy a place in 1998 though, because I sold it three years later for a huge loss.

[fizzgig]

86. i'd be divorced if we'd stayed in our last place

it was miserable and too small for us. we got lucky and scored 50 percent more space for only a hundred bucks more a month. it's disgusting how much rent has jumped here in just a year.

[Nunliebekinder]

63. No one is forcing you to live in places where rent is $1500 a month.

[reformist2]

64. I guess you want them to move an hour outside the city, then pay for the commute?

I think you'll quickly see it ends up being a wash.

[Nunliebekinder]

66. My personal commute costs $130 a month.

Maybe I'm just lucky to live in the Chicagoland area which has Metra and more or less decent public transportation. Not sure how it is in other places.

[reformist2]

67. That's really good. I know the Boston rail pass is a little more, depends on your "zone."

[Lordquinton]

88. They are forcing us to move out of our home towns

that's not much different really.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

9. Kick and Recommended

Yep, it is shameful that we are having this debate.

[Sometimeswedrown]

10. 9.50 an hour here

425 month rent
100 month utilities
100 month food
Crap car

Not feeling sorry for myself and doing best I can my GF income does help but hers is not a stable paycheck like mine (contractor) we are just above water and already looking to income tax refund to break even.

[putitinD]

51. only $100 for food, what do you eat?

[Sometimeswedrown]

80. Big garden

We live on a huge lot I got veggies for everyone lol

[putitinD]

87. welcome to DU

[KentuckyWoman]

11. Employers don't provide healthcare.

They sometime provide "medical insurance coverage" as a benefit but paying for healthcare is still up to us as individuals.

Sorry, I know I'm being obtuse. I just think there needs to be a real distinction here. MANY of us get "healthcare" through work and still can't afford to obtain services when they are needed.

[Sometimeswedrown]

14. Agreed but

My company provides some health insurance based in California that has a network of physicians of which the only one near me is a hundred miles away. If an emergency this company requires so much paper work and hoop jumping well in short you hope you have no emergency.

It does get frustrating but as I tell her we do what we have to.

[airplaneman]

39. Tell me about it.

I have what I thought was good health care coverage but the co-pays this year alone are already exceeding $15,000. I am not sure how I am going to pay for it at this point.
-Airplane

[freshwest]

13. We have fallen far short of FDR's words, due to RWR and media diversions. We forgot each other.

[valerief]

15. The people who matter don't have to work. Everyone else is expendible. 1% core values. nt

[penultimate]

16. I don't disagree, but how much is enough?

Also, how much is 'enough' of any of those items? What kind of place of living should it pay for? Is a small one bedroom apartment enough? How much food is considered enough? (I'm sure the amount of food I consider enough for me, wouldn't be enough for others or considered too much for other too) How much is enough for clothing? What kind of clothing?

I think those need to be defined, otherwise it gives opponents room to move in to and frame it in their way typical way by saying it will make it so people working low skill jobs should demand salaries that allow them to drive $50,000 vehicles, own huge houses and wear ridiculously expensive clothes that serve no real use. I'm pretty sure no one actually thinks that, but we might as well get in front of that argument before they do it.

[Sometimeswedrown]

19. Minimum wage should be based on the cost of living in ones area

We all know a person in our same job may make more in a different state in my work the same job in say Chicago pays a starting rate of 11.50 an hour BUT you will not find an apartment like mine for 425.00 a month.

If I made 12.25 an hour I could save about 125.00 a month for expenses now in a few months I will get my one year raise of 10.24 but my company has no cost of living raise so that is it.

[Major Nikon]

40. It should be enough for two people working full time with 2 children to stay off public assistance

Or in other words, half of that total family income. The government shouldn't be in the business of subsidizing cheap labor. Those that hire cheap labor should bare the societal cost, not the taxpayer. Furthermore we shouldn't be encouraging employers to hire less than full time employees. Denying benefits for less than full time employees should require the employer to pay into government trust funds on a per hour basis to pay for the societal costs of part time employees.

[Laelth]

73. +1 n/t

-Laelth

[reformist2]

79. +1

[reformist2]

48. Good questions, but I think we could come to a consensus as to what was a decent minimum standard.

It's sort of like the driving age - should it be 15, 16, 17, 18? There's no exact "right" answer, but we all come to a general agreement that it should be in this range.

[gulliver]

18. We don't have an answer.

What if I want to be a "stay-at-home Dad?" We don't say SAH parents are less than wage earners. An SAH parent who is staying home with children, bonding with them, raising them, getting them educated, etc., is arguably much more valuable to society than a "working" parent at McDonald's. A McJob for a working parent is actually a negative in my opinion, daycare or not.

Seniors are another example. They may not make wages at all, but we want them happy. We all turn into them and I'm pretty sure we want to be happy.

The "living wage" answer by itself is not workable, because it skews wages and prices. We can't have a McDonald's worker making the same money as a skilled welder for very long. The economy will just reverse our decision. Our best bet to provide the necessities is to subsidize people on a sliding scale. That's basically what we are doing. The jumble of it all (wages, subsidies, politics, emotions, taboos, crimes, charity, etc.) actually makes for a fairly responsive system. The lack of guarantees makes the system less game-able.

The economy is a complex system. The best answer I have seen is in The Origin of Wealth and, also, The Gardens of Democracy. Basically the democratic government sets the goals and "cultivation patterns" for the garden, but then the garden grows itself.

[Chaco Dundee]

22. agreed

Worked 7 12th in shipyards most my life.that's 84 hrs a week.raised 3 kids on that income.I am 58 now and still have nothing to brag about exept the healthproblems wich come with sandblasting or any other hard labor.the american dream.

[juajen]

30. I know whereof you speak.

I have a son that has worked hard all his life. He was a welder, and worked at least 80 hrs. a week, until he wore out at 48 yrs. of age and is unable to do the work anymore. Of course, not eligible for workman's comp because he continued working even with a hurting body. He can't get on ss disability because too many people are applying for that and some get it who have never worked, but are diagnosed with bi-polar, or other disorder that is hard to prove. He is now homeless and despondent. He never thought his country would throw him to the wind, but it has. These are sad days, for everyone except high wage earners.

[Chaco Dundee]

34. thank you

I feel terrible about your son.I worked my way up to supervision bevore it got to late.but the hrs.are the same and one can not make up for the damage done in the years long gone.hope your son will get what he long earned and will come to a better fortune.

[City Lights]

23. Well said!

[Shankapotomus]

24. All I know is

If an employer wants that much time out of a person's life, that job better provide for that person's life.

[Flatulo]

25. What has fundamentally changed is that good paying

manufacturing jobs have disappeared, and middle class folk who used to do those jobs are now forced to work in service jobs that pay minimum wage or less. It used to be that kids looking for summer work filled these jobs, now it's people with bachelor degrees.

Where did all that lost money go? Right into the pockets of the ownership class.

[Marblehead]

56. Ross Perot was right

nt

[Flatulo]

57. He really was the first public figure that I can recall sounding the alarm about outsourcing.

Too bad he turned out to be, um, crazy.

[Marblehead]

74. at least he wasn't a liar....

[Nunliebekinder]

65. Time to adapt. When selecting a career path, I'd suggest something that can't be:

a) outsourced
b) automated or done by a machine

So essentially there is now a surplus of people. The ownership class is fully aware of this. We have gotten to the point where machines can do much of the work the humans used to do. It will only get worse from here on out. I see a very grim future for anyone who can't offer anything more than manual labor. My personal prediction is that the effects of climate change will induce food shortages which will result in a global population contraction. The 1% won't be affected, nor will they care.

[Flatulo]

69. There are still fields where the hiring outlook is good, such as medicine and engineering,

but not everyone is suited for these careers.

The trades offer a surprisingly good prospect of a solid income. Try to get a plumber or electrician in this area, or an HVAC guy. It's damn near impossible.

Whats gone, and not likely to return, is basic low-skill buts decent wage manufacturing work. That's the kind of work that my generation's parents did. Work that let them enjoy a home, and maybe put their kids through college.

[pscot]

26. Having children is a privilege

the human race can no longer afford.

[TheMastersNemesis]

27. FORGET IT FORGET IT FORGET IT!!!!!! The GOP Is Determined To End The Minimum Wage.

They will never let a higher wage pass and they have made it clear that they will force their agenda on the rest of us. They will rig the vote so you can't win, they will sadistically suppress all protest. (Look at Wisconsin, Michigan, Virginia & North Carolina). And they will use the threat of violence. (Look at the armed militia they are supporting at the mine in Wisconsin). It is a godamned park the militia will kill you if you try to protest or go in..

People need to wake up. We are losing the country more and more every day.

[Nunliebekinder]

62. Exaggeration much?

Where is there any evidence that the "militia" will kill you if you go in to the park? Intimidation maybe. I'm not totally sure of all the facts in that specific case, but if the mining company had a legal right to be there, what's the problem with armed security? The protesters in the video seemed to be a little bit....off. Especially the girl that was yelling at the top of her lungs, blathering on about how the work was illegal. All while illegally destroying the miners' property.

Would you be comfortable with a work environment like that? Imagine if wherever you work, someone would come in and start screaming at you and taking your stuff , all while wearing a mask. I know I'd demand armed security.

[abelenkpe]

29. Plus retirement

People should be able to retire comfortably after spending their best years working. They should be able to save for retirement and not have to gamble and win with their savings on the stock market.

[tecelote]

31. It must come down to education.

Why would anyone making less than a six figure income vote Republican?

[MillennialDem]

38. Guns, god, and gays. Oh and "they're going to make it one day"

[JoeyT]

44. From what I've seen: Mostly racism, homophobia, and sexism.

They hate minorities, hate LGBT people, and hate women. Doesn't matter how shitty their elected officials make their lives, as long as they can make the life of someone they hate shittier.

[reformist2]

47. The good news is that younger voters aren't buying the hate the Repugs are selling.

The voting base of the Republican Party is literally dying off.

[OnionPatch]

32. Exactly

We need minimum wage laws like described. But also, this should be framed as a moral issue. We used to believe that all work was honorable. But we've lost that somehow. Now we only value the accumulation of wealth at any cost. I can't imagine how anyone can believe that someone who works all day, every day, doesn't deserve a basic living. But they do and we need to work to change that mindset.

[Phlem]

33. Spot On!

The media and life at this point keeps us so busy and unaware that the very fabric of living in the US is slipping away.

-p

[airplaneman]

35. we have a right to decide how the wealth of this nation is going to be shared.

Corporations create wealth. The new norm to grow a corporations is to screw the employees out of as much as possible for the benefit of the few. It used to be that unions were the vehicle to fight for fairness and sanity. We as a people and a society have the right to say what is fair and what is not. Corporations used to be willing to share the wealth with its workers and were happy with 6-12% profit. The new norm is 30-50% profit and the raping of both workers and "customers" in order to obtain that wealth.
-Airplane

[Bunnahabhain]

36. Corporations are the problem

We should abolish them and move to employee owned non-profits or government owned organizations only. We need to make capital work for everyone not just the 1%.

[HiPointDem]

46. kr

[RainDog]

49. k&r n/t

[world wide wally]

50. The sad thing is how many of these working poor vote Republican...sorry to say this but

Duuuhhh!

[Curmudgeoness]

52. I don't disagree

that a person working 40 hours should make enough money to live a decent life, but there are so many problems with stating what that wage should pay for. Since you are stating that it ought to be enough to also provide for expenses for one child (or two or whatever we decide on), does that mean that if I am single with no children, I would be paid less because I have less responsibilities? Would a young person still living at home make less because he/she has less necessities to cover? Will everyone be judged by how much they need to determine how much they make, instead of what job they are doing?

My mind went to this right away because I still remember the days when women were paid less than men in the same jobs because "the men had the responsibility of being the bread winner". Raises were not given to women in the same positions for the same reason.

I just don't know how this wage can be determined.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

53. In 1963, living in San Diego at Mission Beach, making $1.50 hr.

working 40 hrs. a week, I met those needs.
Now working 40 hrs. at minimum wage won't even pay the rent there.
What's the solution?
I know that part of it involves better wages, lower cost housing, cheaper health care (universal), a return to free higher state education and affordable food.
I also know that these goals are possible because I experienced them in 1963.
Maybe some are not paying their fair share of taxes and being too greedy with our future.

[HiPointDem]

54. yes. i remember when minimum wage got you a decent enough living situation. with kids, i

don't know, but i do know you could get a decent apt, not next to crackheads, on minimum or thereabouts in seattle in the 60s-early 70s. two minimum wage workers could actually get a nice apt.

[Hey There2]

84. A Living Wage is $20.00 an hour if we don't have another Real Estate Bubble

[Chico Man]

58. What about the value of the job?

Should that matter?

Everyone is entitled to provide whatever value they are able to..

Take professional gamblers, or musicians, or artists.. Should they also be entitled to this minimum wage? Or only "state sanctioned" jobs?

Just wondering where the line is drawn.

Are you saying there should be a pool of government jobs that anyone is entitled to if they so desire- that provide the services and benefits you describe?

[Posteritatis]

68. Oy. (nt)

[snappyturtle]

59. Wouldn't it be nice to have a 40 hr. work week and then one

that pays a liveable wage. Sorry, but I don't see it happening yet.

[blackspade]

60. Well said.

[Smickey]

61. Kick and Highly Rec.

This country has been on its way to laughing stock for some time now, unfortunately it's just not funny.

[Laelth]

71. k&r for labor and for economic justice. n/t

-Laelth

[bvar22]

76. There used to be a Political Party that believed that same thing.

It was called the "Democratic Party",
but bears NO relationship with the Party that calls itself that today.

The leader of the OLD Democratic Party,
believed everything YOU believe, and much more:
THIS is how HE said it:

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be [font size=3]established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens."

---FDR, Economic Bill of RIGHTS, State of the Union Address, 1944

Please note that FDR specified ALL of the above as Basic Human Rights to be protected and administered by OUR government Of the People,
and NOT as Commodities to be SOLD by For Profit Corporations.

There was a time, not so long ago, when voting FOR The Democrat
was voting FOR the above Basic Human Rights.
Sadly, that is no longer true.

I MISS that Democratic Party.



You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS,[/font]
not by their speeches, promises, or excuses.

[Mnemosyne]

77. Hear, hear! nt

[hotrod0808]

78. What people do not understand...

...about The Minimum Wage is that, those things were the original intent behind it's establishment. A one-worker household was supposed to be able to afford those basic necessities on a 40-hour check. Somewhere along the was, it became about the absolute least an employer legally has to pay a worker.

[reformist2]

83. True. But sadly, almost 100 years later, we're having to reinvent the wheel.

[electricray]

81. I will actually suggest that the 40 hour bar isn't appropriate

What a person earns ought to be earnable in the hours available to them. If WalMart will only employ people 31 hours per week, then the cost of your list ought to be earnable in 32 hours. The forty hour work week ought to pay for more than just the basic necessities of life for one person. It ought to pay for an entire family of four and then there should be enough leftover that the family can set aside 10-20% of their income for emergency, vacation, and other parts of the American Dream. The wage should also be able to pay for a retirement income as well. When you add this all up it seems like a lot but it doesn't matter what the final total is, that should be the basis for any industry. True, things might cost more, but in my opinion they should cost more. Workers should earn more. Then there would be a true supply and demand economy. Prices are kept artificially low currently because desperate people are selling their labor at a deep discount. Corporations have no reason to adjust their margins and price appropriately because the governments that grant them their existence don't require them to actually serve the society they are milking. We need to start looking at low prices as a weapon. They are not a benefit to struggling families, they are the yoke that struggling families labor under.

[HumansAndResources]

85. My Reflections on This Thread:

1. Don't support McDonalds - no more McJobs. Each 3 workers can start their own hamburger stands and be self-employed - provided "the state" doesn't regulate them out of business for McDonalds - er, I mean "for our safety" (yeah, right).

2. Mining operations - who made that stuff in the ground? Why do a few rich people claim to own it all - or get the government they own to give them the "exclusive right" to extract it? The Earth is our birthright, and we should each get a share of what is extracted from it - note I said "we" not "the government" - so that "we" can choose, and "afford," the services that "we" wish to pay for.

3. Heath Care from "jobs" - why should these be connected at all? Some corporation needs to provide for me? Do they "own" me? How did they get this power over us such that we "need" them to do these things "for" us?

4. Re: Living Wages / Minimum Wages - Begging for better slave-compensation. If we owned our share of the Land and Resources of our nation, we would not need "handouts" or "protections" from government from those who claim to "own" Creation (whether athiest-universe-created or God-created is irrelevant, in this analysis).

5. "Work is Honorable" - Being ripped-off by Crony-Market thugs, an increasing percentage funded by "government contracts" is not honorable. Being a free human being with a place to "be" regardless of "income" is honorable. Choosing to exert effort to produce things people want to trade for is also honorable. Being "coerced" into "work" under the threat of homlessness is not "honorable."

6. Corporations: Limited liability must go - you play and pollute, and you must pay. If they had to buy their natural-resources from You and Me, and we didn't need "their jobs" to have a place we are permitted by "their police" to "be" and to trade with "their permission" licenses, that would fix the other part of the "corporate" problem. Real competition from empowered people would whittle them to nothing.

7. It was better "back when" - Yes, corporate profits were lower, but population / area was lower, and profits from the rape of the developing world were being used to pay us off (unions controlled the Democratic Party back then). Now we are one of the nations being ripped off by "Transnational Corporations" instead of "American Business." Welcome to Colonization.

8. State of the Democratic Party - "You will know them by their WORKS, not by their speeches, promises, or excuses," as bvar22 noted above. Yes - in addition to what I put in #7, there is the Koch-Brothers-Funded DLC to blame. The "administration" recently took down their 2008 website with all the campaign promises, but you can still read it and weep about "hope" here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130425082834/http://change.gov/agenda/ethics_agenda/

9. Property Taxes - start with a $300K exemption until all persons have land they "own" as a birthright and all mineral-resources have been re-allocated to Individual citizens, at which point the tax is moot. Who will "pay for schools"?? People who "choose" to have children, of course. Better yet, they can form their own schools and not torture their children in "obediance-indoctrination" "day-prison" facilities.

------------------

The Most Important Point I am trying to make here, is to Debunk the GRAND ILLUSION that we need to Beg-Petition Corporations and Government for the right to exist. When we Own Our Planet we don't need to Beg Anyone - EVER! When We Own Our Resources and Land, We can produce with those of our choosing. No "forced" collectivism either Corporate or Government induced is "necessary" for us to have good lives.

Consider the technology and energy we have unleashed since the "40-Hour Work Week" was introduced. Is there any reason, given the Massive Increases in per-person productive capacity, that we need to "work" more than 5 hours / week to meet our basic needs? Why has this not been realized? Rent-seeking by Land-"Lords," Barrons is the primary reason - they have stolen our planet and now claim the right to sell it back to us in exchange for "work" - now 'deregulated' so they can stick it to us even worse. This must end.

[reformist2]

90. I actually agree with you - we all deserve to share the wealth, whether we can find work or not!

Sadly, though, we have to reinvent the wheel and convince the American public that people who work full-time have a right to a decent living, before we can introduce the bewildering (to them) concept that people who don't work also have a right to something from this economy that needs fewer and fewer workers. The economic system we have now is actually perverse - the more efficient it gets at producing things, the greater the abundance, the fewer people there are who have the money to buy any of it!

[thesquanderer]

89. I disagree with the premise

EVERYONE is entitled to food, shelter, clothing, and health care, and okay, being able to have a kid. Whether they work 40 hours or not.

Therefore, the wages paid are not, specifically, the issue.

The current system (let's say not generous enough, but that's another discussion) provides money or programs for these necessities to people whose 40 hour paychecks are too small, people who are unemployed, or who can only find a part-time job, etc..

A minimum wage high enough to cover all those expenses is not likely, and also would then provide that high a minimum wage even to people who don't need enough money to cover all those things (kids still living with parents during or just out of school, summer jobs, etc.). I don't think it's realistic to expect no-skill first jobs to pay enough to fully cover everything you mention, nor do I think it's necessary. (In addition, that high a minimum wage would be inflationary... and then the new wage may, itself, quickly be insufficient.)

I think the idea of a minimum wage that is not enough for a fully paid for independent self-sufficient life is okay provided that their are sufficient programs in place to help those who are in situations where that wage is not sufficient to meet their basic needs. And that is pretty much the system we have, even if it's in need of some adjustments. The 16 year old working his first summer job at at McDonald's isn't bringing home enough to cover a complete independent life, but doesn't need to. A 35 year old who unfortunately finds himself in the same employment position probably needs things like SNAP (food stamps), housing assistance, etc. If it's not enough, maybe it's those programs that need improving, rather than expecting companies to pay minimum wages of $20 an hour or whatever to everyone.