Hillary would START minimum wage negotiations BELOW a "living wage".

[Bonobo]

Really? That's what we want to support?

THAT is where we are going to start?

Jesus, people have really had their asses kicked in our party and learned to like it.

Pathetic.

The difference between $12/hour and $15/hour at a full time job would be between $400-$500/month.

That sounds awfully close to rent. Close.

Fuck, how cold can you get.

I support Sanders, the candidate who will actually fight for a Living Wage. Hillary? Not ready, willing or able to fight for it. No commitment to the issue.

[Broward]

1. This is what it's come to. Corporatists have hijacked the party.

[Ferd Berfel]

17. Yep. ANd ist' happening in all areas

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027474247#post17

[MissDeeds]

44. Yes

and sadly some will even support corporate candidates with their votes.

[AgingAmerican]

91. The term is 'Creeping fascism'

It has been seeping into every nook and cranny of US culture since the early 80s. It's ultimate goal is privatization/corporatization of everything.

[TheFarS1de]

97. I always loved the movie "Bladerunner"

Never realised this was the future that the corporates actually wanted .

[rjsquirrel]

101. Lol

As opposed to all those progressives we used to elect?"

[Scuba]

2. Yep, at the same time she claims she wants to "be the champion" of the living wage movement.

No thanks.

[sarge43]

51. And of women

How many working women are being screwed over by minimum wage - working two, sometimes three, crappy jobs just to keep their families fed and sheltered.

One of the many reasons I support Senator Sanders.

[Depaysement]

3. +1000

Fight for $15.

[rhett o rick]

4. This issue is very important to her backers. nm

[roguevalley]

5. and its a huge blind spot for her supporters. this woman has never been poor.

what does she care?

[rhett o rick]

7. Her "care" for the poor is like Marie antoinette's. She is willing to let us eat cake.

She may even champion some social justice issues but not to the point that it would cost Goldman-Sachs profits.

[Zynx]

15. Her public position is for a 65% increase in the Minimum Wage and she's a monster?

Oh, okay.

[libdem4life]

69. OK, I'll play. How many Years Has It Been this pittance?

Going on 7 years. Just Wow. And 7 years ago it wasn't a living wage.

"In a recent letter to his “fellow zillionaires”, Seattle entrepreneur Nick Hanauer emphatically endorses raising the minimum wage to as much as $15 an hour as “an indispensable tool smart capitalists use to make capitalism stable and sustainable.” The alternative, he says, is to do nothing and “wait for the pitchforks.”

Even he sees the Oligarchy impending.

[99th_Monkey]

98. And how deeply committed is Hillary, even for $12.

About as committed as Goldman Sachs is, and no further. Like she said during the debate,
about wanting "everyone" to like her. She can bamboozle the rubes, but not GS if she doesn't
do their bidding.

Bernie on the other hand has proven over and over that he's NOT looking to "make nice" with
the billionaire class.

[Dustlawyer]

118. The only way to get "everyone" to like you is to lie to most!

[JackInGreen]

108. A 65% increase on horseshit

Is STILL horseshit, no matter if you're telling us it's punkin'fuckin'pie.

[SCantiGOP]

6. Have you factored in...

That the republicans control congress? Or does that not matter if you can make a point against the eventual Democratic nominee?

[Zynx]

8. They believe that Sanders will lead such a voter turnout wave that they will take Congress, too.

Of course, that's absolutely preposterous. There's almost no evidence to suggest the nonvoters are strictly closet Democrats.

[Ned_Devine]

40. Yes, we are hoping for that

What's wrong with that idea? If you get a bunch of congressional candidates running with the same progressive message, the democrats could end up taking a few seats back. Why wouldn't we think that's possible?

[nc4bo]

50. Mid-term elections + enthusiastic voters + GOTV = A flip.

Next mid terms may turn out to have a much better result for Democrats if people are engaged and enthusiastic.

The exact opposite of our last ass kicking.

[Zynx]

75. Any evidence that this tidal wave of silent progressive voters exists?

[Ned_Devine]

82. Do you want a head count or something?

Just curious; is it okay with you that many of us here that have progressive values are also hopeful that there can be a change if we all come together and vote based on those very values? Is it okay with you that we think that there might be a few more million of us out there (not on DU) with those same values that will come out and vote the same way because they're fed up with the bogus corporate circus going on that keeps screwing us? I don't have official numbers but every time I see the large numbers of people showing up for a Bernie event, it gives me more hope that we do exist. That's my best answer for right now. I'm not ready to settle for less than my values, and that's what the primaries are about.

[tazkcmo]

104. Really?

Have you ever heard of Bernie Sanders? While you won't hear much about him and his huge wave of support on network and other MSM channels, you can read all about it on the internet. It's a big deal. Surprised you hadn't heard.

[Duckfan]

120. That would be the next phase

After getting the nomination he would be in states that need to clean house with their legislature. The GOP stench is bad-especially Tex-assistan (Borrowed that from Norman-Goldman). If Bernie can motivate a country, he can surly motivate an entire state. Wiscon-istan comes to mind.

[thesquanderer]

47. Some evidence that Sanders could conceivably flip Congress

Likely? No. But not impossible.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251939923

[sellitman]

10. How about your gut reaction to this instead of

defending your "eventual nominee"?

She is only eventual if you support her.

Do you support this stance?

[George II]

13. Sanders has an almost identical position. Inconvenient truth.

[Mbrow]

25. astroturf

[NorthCarolina]

57. I'm curious since you claim their approaches are almost "identical"

could you please detail what you believe to be both the Sanders and the Clinton positions on minimum wage that demonstrates this "identical" approach?

[notadmblnd]

84. Are you kidding? You're not going to hear anything back from that one.

When to comes to details and providing links to those details, I don't think so. You'll be able to hear snowflakes hit the ground first.

[NorthCarolina]

95. I was just a little taken aback

when I read the comment because in reality the two are quite far apart on this issue (as well as many others). So I was really curious as to why someone would come to believe that, and could possibly have an opportunity to set the record straight for them. Sometimes preconceived notions are every bit a real as facts to the believer.

[libdem4life]

58. Do tell. Define "almost identical position".

[Gore1FL]

67. In the sense that $12/hr is almost identical to $15/hr? n/t

[cannabis_flower]

79. Almost identical?

[dana_b]

105. boom!!

case closed.

[Ned_Devine]

35. Hold up a minute there.

I truly don't believe that she is the eventual nominee, so you can't really frame the debate that way. This is still the primaries and what we're doing is showing the difference on key positions between the two candidates. You know how this works, right?

[SCantiGOP]

100. Yes

It's like having a 45-7 lead at halftime and having better players - you're probably going to win.

[Ned_Devine]

106. Do you really believe you're leaving 45-7 in the 4th quarter right now?

If you do, you're going to be in for some hurt feelings after the first couple primaries.

[thesquanderer]

52. If you give up on any policy that won't be approved by Republican congress...

...then it really doesn't matter who you vote for, because a Republican congress is not going to approve $12 or $15 min wage, or any other significant domestic proposal from either Sanders or Clinton. That said, two things...

...If there's going to be a compromise based on each party getting some things they want, where do you want the Dem starting negotiation position to be?

...Which candidate will more likely champion the causes of the left, move the conversation more in that direction, and perhaps move the next congress leftward?

[Luminous Animal]

60. That is why you start higher.

[JDPriestly]

70. If she only campaigns for $12 per hour, then $12 per hour is her starting wage in negotiations.

Even if she thinks she can only get Congress to vote for $12 per hour, she should be starting to negotiate at at least $15 an hour or more.

She is already demonstrating what a lousy negotiator she is. We have suffered through that problem with Obama negotiating from the ending point and not the starting point.

Hillary shows just how little experience she really has with negotiating and getting a good deal for people when she starts at a $12 minimum wage.

Let's see what else we can get for workers in our wage negotiations. Maybe that family leave deal for new parents? More funding for health care? Let's get everybody covered with health care and let's get the patient's part of the cost covered more by taxes on employers.

If Hillary were smart, she would ask for the $15 an hour minimum wage and see what kind of legislation she could bargain for based on that demand.

Bernie is much shrewder than Hillary when it comes to organizing to fight for people's rights and a good deal for working people.

Hillary just does not have the experience and the street-fighting instincts that Bernie has.

Bernie's stint as mayor taught him a lot. Plus he spent many years in Congress and knows how to get what he wants there. Hillary -- just doesn't have that kind of background. Being a first lady is not like being a representative from a small state fighting for your people. And Bernie has been elected and re-elected so many times, so you know he did a good job for his state. He knows how to bargain and fight for people.

[ljm2002]

76. That is exactly why you start high...

...rather than conceding ground before negotiations even start.

Geez.

[sulphurdunn]

99. It was democrats playing republican light

centrists that helped lose them congress in 2010.

[bread_and_roses]

107. So - no one champions a position until s/he knows it will "pass?"

I don't think so. A candidate - or an elected official - can stand up and support a position before it can pass - as, say, Bernie did on many issues over the years long before they ever became mainstream enough to pass. That's called integrity among other things. It is also often called leadership.

However, in this case it doesn't even take much courage to champion $15 hr - the fast food and Walmart workers have successfully changed the narrative - it's not only being supported but being enacted in places all over the country. It doesn't sound "outrageous" any more - more and more people understand the simple math involved - all thanks to those same courageous workers. Who changed the narrative by taking to the streets at great risk not by wheeling and dealing in some back room and trading favors.

So what's HRC's problem with it other than that our Corporate Overlords don't like it? We know she can do the math - how can anyone justify her willingness to not only let ordinary workers continue to be ripped off by the Corps, but anyone who pays taxes since it is we who are paying for the social benefits that have to (inadequately and unfair as they are) make up some of the difference just so people can eat?

Besides, it's just bad negotiating - you don't start with your lowest offer - that all too often was Obama's MO too, and look where that got us.

[Lil Missy]

113. Obviously they haven't factored in the Repubs in this.

[Rebkeh]

122. Low turn out happens, in large part, because

they don't offer much. "The R's are bad" is not good enough. Not even close.

Give people a reason to show up first, this is supposed to be a democracy - they are supposed to work for us. Give people something to vote for and they will break records in turn out. We know this to be factual, we've seen it before.

[Ken Burch]

131. the POSSIBLE Democratic nominee.

She has never been inevitable.

[sorechasm]

9. You're assuming that she will start at all

She's only made a pledge for minimum wage increase because Bernie's got our hopes up. She neglected to mention the size of her pledge in the last debate. As soon as she can get Bernie out of the way, this pledge will likely go to the bottom of her pile because 'This Republican Congress has no appetite for raising minimum wage.'

[Zynx]

11. In terms adjusted for cost of living $12/hr is pretty much the highest in the entire world.

I'll be honest that I don't even support a $15/hr minimum wage. There are many parts of this country where the cost of living is so low that this is an almost silly amount to mandate. Yes, $15/hr might be fine in NYC or San Francisco, but in Merrill, Wisconsin? No, that makes just about no sense.

$12 nationwide is even higher than I would go. I would go $10, index it, and let the locals decide if they want to go higher.

[pangaia]

14. I can not believe you wrote what you just wrote. I really can not.

But you did.

Also.. $15/hr in NYC and SF ! Are you kidding me?

[Zynx]

16. What I said is actually true. Adjusted for cost of living, no major country is above $12.

[pangaia]

18. And... what...?

So.... we should be sure to follow... See how low we can go...

[Zynx]

24. ...What? That's not even a rational argument. The European countries and Australia

have all been raising their minimum wages consistently for years. We're not chasing anyone down.

[peacebird]

20. But we are also the only major country without health care for all

[Zynx]

22. Yes, and that can be handled separately. You don't do that through the minimum wage.

I'm all in favor of universal single-payer. If you want to yell at Hillary over something, yell at her over that.

[peacebird]

27. It just means our min wage needs to be higher so people can afford health care

So your comment on other countries min wages is not comparing apples to apples.

[JonLeibowitz]

30. Not to mention free education.

[peacebird]

32. Yes, that too!

Thanks!

[Zynx]

49. Doesn't it make more sense to have those programs instead of having every single employer

try to make good the shortcomings of society? Tell me which makes more economic sense:

1. Collecting taxes from high income individuals and profitable companies to pay for universal social programs.
2. Forcing every business to pay workers a wage necessary to cover all of that.

[peacebird]

61. Yes, but your initial statement is still comparing apples to oranges.

Those other countries have lower min wage because these things are covered. They are not covered herre, so our min wage needs to be higher.
No one who works a full time job should be living in poverty.

[Zynx]

74. Which policy is easier to pursue? Higher social benefits or a massively higher minimum wage?

Let's not engage in the semantics about how much of an argument was stated at which particular time. I'm only going to spend so much of my life on these forums spelling out my positions in comprehensive detail.

The reason other countries provide more in the way of universal benefits and don't take their minimum wages to the sky is precisely because it is better economic policy to do what they have done. I favor following their agenda rather than striking out on a path that hasn't been pursued by, well, anyone. Trying to make up the whole difference with the minimum wage is not a policy anyone has attempted. Instead, let's pursue greater universal benefits and a higher minimum wage, but not one that attempts to make up the whole difference of our lack of universal benefits.

This helps avoid the distortion of imposing costs on less profitable employers that are absorbed in other countries by the taxes on more profitable employers and high wage earners.

There. That's my full argument. I'm sorry that I didn't take the time out of a busy holiday to state it all in my first iteration.

[AgingAmerican]

93. Minimum wage would be easier

Because it could be done via executive order, effectively bypassing congress and letting the courts fight it out. Congress is completely useless, so bypassing it at every possible turn is the way to go.

So what if it makes the Republicans angry. Everything makes them angry already so it would just be more of the same from them.

[artislife]

34. You don't support 15/hr?

Because I have read that if minimum wage had kept up with inflation it would be closer to $20.


Why did people 30 years ago deserve more for their time at minimum wage jobs than they do now? The argument that it is pretty much the highest in the world takes in a lot, shitloads actually, of countries who push the bell curve down.


We love to be number one but even $15 wouldn't do it. Can you agree that because of buying our own health insurance we are actually one of the most expensive countries to live in. Add in all our necessities that other countries don't have. They don't always have to buy their university degree, they don't always have to buy a car and fuel and insure it, they don't have to buy phone, internet and cable like most of feel we have to. Those countries...nope.

Maybe it is because I live in the Greater Seattle Area and I see that this can pass and it needs to pass.

[Zynx]

45. Denmark doesn't actually have a minimum wage that high.

That's a derived figure from collective bargaining agreements.

Further, Australia has a much higher cost of living than the United States. Adjusted for cost of living, it's more like $11.43. To say we should match Australia is like saying a bank teller in Omaha should be paid what one in Manhattan is.

As for the other issues, by all means, take care of those costs the way other countries do. Don't place the burdens on employers across the board. Use taxes to take from those who can pay for it to provide the programs. Not all employers are rolling in dough. It's economically horribly inefficient to create what's in essence a back door flat tax on all businesses to pay for these things.

[artislife]

54. The thing is that we don't take care of those other things

We need more money, besides isn't it consumerism that fuels the economy. The more everyone has in their pockets, the more it gets spent locally. That goes to those small businesses.

Your arguments are very .....well, they don't seem that progressive to me.

[Zynx]

78. I think you would find that we support a very similar level of a guaranteed living for people.

I just don't like the idea of imposing what is in essence a flat dollar amount tax on all employers to make up for deficiencies in what should be universal entitlements. There are fewer economic distortions in creating universal entitlements rather than saying all employers, regardless of industry, have to provide the full range of social benenfits through higher wages.

I'm approaching this from a policymaking perspective. Taxes on net income and high wage earners are less distortive than increasing costs at the source. Therefore, I would prefer to pay for all of this through that avenue.

We get to the same place, which is more money in people's pockets, but we don't create unnecessary distortions in employment markets that aren't currently able to bear them.

Let's not get into this nonsense of who is a true progressive. I think we are actually close to the same place in terms of end goal. I just don't favor doing it through the minimum wage.

[artislife]

90. I actually read your other posts after this

And wanted to amend my post to reflect that. Then got a holiday call.

So I apologize for my jump to conclusion.

[DanTex]

110. You read wrong. $12 would be the highest minimum wage in history adjusted for inflation.

[99Forever]

42. Ahh yes. The Race to the Bottom Agenda.

Which political party is it you claim to be a member of?

[Zynx]

48. One that believes in using data and reason to construct good policy.

If we get in the $10-$12 an hour range, we'd be at the top of the world, when adjusted for cost of living.

We should provide single-payer health care, heavily subsidized needs based tuition, housing support, etc through progressive taxes that are collected from those with the incomes to pay for them and not through forcing every employer to make good the shortfalls of society.

[99Forever]

62. Oh my.

One of those "serious adult in the room" types.

I'm ever-so-fucking-impressed by Republican Lite Talking points.

[libdem4life]

66. Let me add....

[Zynx]

80. I think you somehow ignored the fact that I called for radically redistributive policies.

I think doing it all through the minimum wage is a less favorable way to go.

Of course, though, throw around insults and feign outrage in place of actually reading what people say. That's a way to win elections, I'm sure.

[99Forever]

87. This character would have us believe...

... that any of that stuff is going to get thru but a Living Wage can't.

A textbook example of total cognitive dissonance, if ever there were one.

[libdem4life]

89. Well, you know the old "set expectations low" so you can go higher. Backwards, IMO

And the Republican Congress should be thoroughly shamed over and over and get those "little people" aka Peasants, to demand it. That's what Bernie's trying to do. And yes, it can be done.

As mentioned by one of the zillionaires in my other post, paraphrased...best to prop up capitalism...and it surely needs it...or face the pitchforks (aka overthrow the Oligarchy).

[Zynx]

73. I actually had a serious argument and you just dismissed it. I would like to say I'm surprised.

I'm not, though.

As far as who is following the pattern of the Republicans, I would say it is you. Refusing to engage in serious argumentation is one of their hallmarks. One of the things the Democrats have going for them is that we are the one party in the country right now that actually tries to use facts and data for policy.

[99Forever]

86. Keep digging.

You're doing just fine.

[MadDAsHell]

132. Well since you haven't made an argument on this thread PERIOD...

It's kind of sad that you're tearing someone else down for having the guts to.

Or are you just waiting to see which viewpoint is most popular so that you can jump on board?

[libdem4life]

65. Here come the hand it to the "locals", aka State's Rights. Voting Rights, too?

$24,000 a year less 25% = $1800 Since that's not quite to poverty level, they won't get food stamps and there is little if any difference in food costs. Gas prices may be a bit lower, but if you're anywhere rural, one drives more.

I've lived in the City for many years, now rural, and newsflash...a decent family house "out here" is about $1000 plus per month. Then you add on utilities...another $200 based on the season...and it gets real hot and real cold... and well, I hope you get my point. That's why two incomes are absolutely vital...like it or not...who's raising the kids.

http://oklahomacity.craigslist.org/search/apa?search_distance_type=mi&bedrooms=3

Unions...$15 an hour.

[Zynx]

71. There is a moral difference between variances in the cost of living and basic human rights.

I'm sorry you can't see that.

Also, Oklahoma City is not a rural area. It's a properly urbanized area with close to normal national levels of income.

There are massive swaths of Wisconsin where the typical house goes for well under $100,000, sometimes closer to $70,000. There typical monthly payments are quite low.

[libdem4life]

85. I don't the "moral difference". Ever bought a tank of propane? There are all of two

metros in Oklahoma. OKC and Tulsa...the rest of the state is Rural and small town where there Are No Decent Jobs. Housing prices have skyrocketed here.

I have a friend who looked (around our rural town almost 30 minutes from the Metro) for months. And no, $100,000 is becoming the norm unless it needs significant upgrades. New homes are going for $125,000 range. So, that's for someone "out on the street" looking. She opted for a new mobile home, still the payment and space rent is over $500 a month.

Back to the minimum wage...$15 for all...not the whim of some local yokel. But certainly $12 would mean only two jobs instead of 3 for many households.

[Dem2]

92. We're up against the douche governor who lowered it from $10.10 to $7.25

And here I read that $12 is shit. This is what compromise is all about. The ones who push for $15 have the right idea. The ones who say any compromise at all is a corporatist sell out and that candidate is shit are just trying to promote Bernie. That's their prerogative I suppose, but let's not call others names who realize a compromise is how it will end up being signed into law.

[George II]

12. Where do you get that from? While I'm waiting, here is Sanders' position on the minimum wage....

....FROM HIS OWN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE!

https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-living-wage/

"We must increase it to $15 an hour over the next several years."

Sounds like he want to "START minimum wage negotiations BELOW a "living wage"."

Sound familiar? My how easy it is to either twist or misrepresent the truth, huh? Nice try.

[Zynx]

29. Frothing at the mouth is much more fun. Don't get in the way of that.

[JonLeibowitz]

31. Not "start negotiations" with Rethuglicans -- "start increases to get to $15". Clever deflection

Gradual increases is what the progressive cities all over the country are doing. Hillary does NOT stand with them in the national push.

Please defend her positions, if possible, without twisting words against their own meaning.

[Ed Suspicious]

114. Really not clever at all.

[artislife]

37. That is how the Seattle $ 15 and hour was worded to

That is actually how a lot of new regulations are enforced as not to give hardship to businesses as they rearrange their revenue and expenditures. Most people who actually follow legislation know this is the model.

[Ferd Berfel]

19. Hillary is a creature of Wall Street

Like her husband and Obama

Bill Clinton (NAFTA, GATT, WTO, Glass-Stegal, TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT, ending welfare as we know it), Obama (TPP, the Deportation fiasco coming up)

NOTE: just this week YOU no longer get to know where your meat is coming from because of the WTO. What's next?

The democratic party is fast becoming the republican party of your grandfather.

[BlueJazz]

21. I'd like to see the US minimum wage linked to the cost of health care. Since we can't seem to ...

...have a society that offers what other advanced countries offer, we'll force the companies and manufacturers to help pay for health care through the back door.

[HereSince1628]

23. Begin negotiating by showing good-faith with a pre-emptive compromise

That'll make for a smooth transition...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. Can we expect her to evolve in the negotiations, settle for $6.35 and proclaim it a victory?

[Gman]

28. $15/hr is too much.

A small company with 4-5 employees would pay an extra $2000-$2500/month not including additional Medicare, Social Security and unemployment tax payments. That could very well make then unable to compete with larger companies with larger economies of scale. They can't raise prices to pay for it for obvious reasons.

People should understand the economics of things.

[lumberjack_jeff]

36. Why do those economies of scale not function at $9 per hour?

It would be a net positive for the economy. Putting more money in the hands of the huge pool of people who will immediately spend it would be a boom.

Employers in Washington State are thriving at $9.47/hour despite competing with other states paying $7.25.

So far, high minimum wages are correlated with strong economies.

A $15 federal minimum would be great. Washington could then raise ours to $20, maintaining the same differential and our competitive advantage over red states.

[Gman]

59. There are a lot of variables

That may or may not make it conducive to that much. Re economies of scale, in general if a large company can sell something for 50 cents each less because they by greater quantities, for example, the smaller company can't match it.

[Zynx]

38. There are also parts of the country where the typical house only goes for $50k.

And you can buy a perfectly fine meal at a diner for $6 or $7. In those areas, $15/hr would cause *serious* distortions. Total median household income in those areas is frequently between $30k and $40k a year, sometimes with two earners working part-time. I don't know how going to $15/hr an hour in those areas will work. In total there are 1000 US counties, roughly speaking, with median household incomes below $40k a year, which would suggest that going to $15/hr would affect at least a meaningful portion of that wage scale. When median household income is below $40k, that means the median wage earner is probably below the cut off of $30k. Mandating higher wages in such areas is probably not beneficial.

[zalinda]

111. I totally don't understand this post

"Total median household income in those areas is frequently between $30k and $40k a year, sometimes with two earners working part-time."

This is in what universe? Twenty hours a week at $10 an hour equals $10,400 a year, without deductions. Two earners makes that about $20,000 a year. At $15 an hour, it's $15,600 a year, without deductions. Where on earth can you make $30,000 to $40,000 a year for 2 part time jobs, and buy a good house for $50,000 and a good meal for $7? I'd like to know, because I want to move there.

Z

[artislife]

39. You should study how the Seattle $15 an hour is set up. nt

[Gman]

55. I'm not totally familiar with Seattle

And I can support $15 for a company with more than a certain number of employees. But where I live arbitrarily raising it to $15 won't work.

[Hoyt]

33. I think her plan is minimum of $12 in podunk America, more in high cost areas. Whatever it is, she

has a better chance of getting something enacted.

[artislife]

41. Why does she have a better chance?

Because she asks for less?


Or because it is her?

[lumberjack_jeff]

43. "Something"? Is that what we're hoping for?

[Hoyt]

46. Read the title and you will know what "something" is. Sorry I didn't spell it out for ypu.

[lumberjack_jeff]

53. I can read.

It causes me no measure of despair that our highest aspiration is to hope for a candidate who will ask for something modest, measured, politically feasible and reasonable.

[Hoyt]

56. Fine, get nothing. Sanders won't get $12 or even $9 in rural areas. But he can claim he tried.

[Hiraeth]

116. Why do you think Sanders can't but, you think HRC can? Explain please.

[Hoyt]

123. Look at what time Sanders has accomplished. Now look at Clinton. If nothing else, Clinton can

threaten Cogress, she's got the photos so to speak. Sanders waving his arms won't convince GOPers, even when he is right.

[Hiraeth]

124. are you implying blackmail?

threats?

[Hoyt]

125. She'll get the job done. I've supported one George McGovern in my life. Not wasting a vote on anoth

unless, by some miracle, he wins the nomination.

[Hiraeth]

126. winning at any cost? doesn't matter how one plays the game? am I understanding you correctly?

[Hoyt]

127. No you are not. Quit reading while pointing at each word.

[Hiraeth]

128. then why do you use THOSE words? I am reading for comprehension.

[Hoyt]

129. No, you are reading one word at a time Read in chunks and in context.

Good luck to you.

[Doctor_J]

63. It's all theater, bonobo. here's how it will play out

Hillary proposes $12

Ryan (who will have a huge majority, Clinton will have no coattails at all) proposes $7.50

Minimum wage moves to $8.25, Ryan promises a one year moratorium on votes to repeal Gingrich Care. Insurance executives pop champagne corks (Dom Perignon)

Hate radio screams how the $8.25 will crash the economy

Hillarians claim this shows that Clinton kicked Ryan's ass

Number of American children in poverty rises again

[Ferd Berfel]

68. Not if get Bernie in there.

Enough of the Wall street crap

Feel The Bern

[JonLeibowitz]

117. Saving this comment in case Hillary gets elected...sheesh what a depressing prospect.

[Ino]

119. Just one detail...

Minimum wage moves to $8.25, implemented in stages over 4 years' time.

Otherwise, exactly!

[NotHardly]

64. I'm going to need a link to that quote from Hillary...

thanks, just like to make sure I can read the original.

[Ferd Berfel]

72. Of Course she would - it helps Wall Street. And the rest of us should be grateful

she doesn't go along with them on eliminating min/Wage all together.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

77. I think my first job was $3 an hour....

Back when my first car payments were $60 a month.

[Lancero]

81. And in the name of compromise, she'll settle for a lower amount.

So, end result, we'll get $10. Maybe.

[Snotcicles]

83. The last thing we need is another, start in the middle, and settle for less, negotiator. nt

[Hiraeth]

88. Let 'em eat cake !!

[pa28]

94. Fight for $15 has become ask politely for $12.

Settle for $9.50 or so.

[bvar22]

96. ...AND THAT is BEFORE the inevitable 3rd Way Triangulation and "compromise" with The Republicans.

Working America will be lucky to break even, if not lose ground with a 3rd Way "negotiator".

[tazkcmo]

102. And phased in over time.

That way once we get to 12 it'll be just live 7.25 now. Perfect!

[NotHardly]

103. Please provide a link to this declaration... I'd like to see for myself

I posted this once but apparently questions aren't allowed in the bernieblocks

[WillyT]

109. + 1,000,000,000 - What You Said !!!

[Lil Missy]

112. Better chance to get $12 passed with a Repub Congress. $30 would be nice too but would never pass.

Neither would $15. I prefer a partial win as opposed to nothing at all.

[Ed Suspicious]

115. 0 chance if that's the starting point.

[Bonobo]

121. Yep, that's it. nt

[gordyfl]

130. One of the Many Things I've Been Learnig

about Bernie Sanders is he's a good negotiator and a good fighter.
Hillary would begin negotiating from the center and then settle for the center-right compromise. Then she'll blame the Republicans.

[Sunlei]

133. seems noone IN Gov. TODAY can even raise American workers out of the patethic $7.25 federal min.

[jmowreader]

134. A minimum wage indexed to local cost of living would be best

Demanding $15 per hour will inevitably lead to "I, Donald J. Trump, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States."

The problem is too complex to boil down to a 140-character tweet, but I'll try to be brief.

Where is $15 per hour the perfect "living wage"? It's not in Grangeville, Idaho; I'd be shocked if more than five people in the whole City of Grangeville, including the doctor, made $15 per hour. And in San Francisco, $15 per hour means you'll be able to cut your roommate collection to the point where you can stop sleeping in shifts, but you'll still be on an all-bean diet.

What would work better is a nationwide $12 "lowest" minimum wage that can be raised in a region to compensate for the cost of living.