Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(JSOnline)   Wisconsin Republicans move to ban local governments from passing living wage laws   (jsonline.com) divider line 98
    More: Obvious, Milwaukee County, Republicans, local governments, state Government Accountability Board, proposed state, minimum wage law, Dane County  
•       •       •

2180 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Feb 2014 at 2:30 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



98 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-02-12 11:18:46 AM  
Federalism: IOKIYAR.
 
2014-02-12 11:26:25 AM  
Not that I necessarily agree with it and not that Chris Kapenga doesn't have a face that scores a 98% on the punchability scale, but it sounds like the proposed bill is designed to apply to jobs that are paid from state or federal money so as not to unfairly give more money to localities that have higher minimum wages.
 
2014-02-12 12:52:17 PM  

exick: Not that I necessarily agree with it and not that Chris Kapenga doesn't have a face that scores a 98% on the punchability scale, but it sounds like the proposed bill is designed to apply to jobs that are paid from state or federal money so as not to unfairly give more money to localities that have higher minimum wages.


Uh, I don't think Wisconsin has the authority to do this, especially for projects that fall under Davis-Bacon Wage requirements. Cities are mandated to pay prevailing wages on construction projects that use Federal CDBG (and other) money. The minimum wage is actually *much* lower than prevailing wages for a majority of construction trades.

I mean, unless Kapenga is looking to shut off all federal funding to local municipalities. Oh, he's looking to shut off all federal funding to local municipalities, isn't he?
 
2014-02-12 12:55:35 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: exick: Not that I necessarily agree with it and not that Chris Kapenga doesn't have a face that scores a 98% on the punchability scale, but it sounds like the proposed bill is designed to apply to jobs that are paid from state or federal money so as not to unfairly give more money to localities that have higher minimum wages.

Uh, I don't think Wisconsin has the authority to do this, especially for projects that fall under Davis-Bacon Wage requirements. Cities are mandated to pay prevailing wages on construction projects that use Federal CDBG (and other) money. The minimum wage is actually *much* lower than prevailing wages for a majority of construction trades.

I mean, unless Kapenga is looking to shut off all federal funding to local municipalities. Oh, he's looking to shut off all federal funding to local municipalities, isn't he?


Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner! Because you know the State needs to distribute all of the federal monies as state monies, which they will only do once the State has "it's fair share", aka "Earning interest in banks owned by out buddies so we can skim off the top, instead of spending the fund the way we are supposed to".
 
2014-02-12 01:48:42 PM  
Because fark you that's why.
 
2014-02-12 01:51:04 PM  
Face of evil, right there.
 
2014-02-12 01:55:00 PM  
I was all ready to come in with just a "Christ, what an asshole" quip, but I actually can see how this can cause some anger in the state from other districts. Plus, it might cause the state to put off public works in that region because it'll cost more to fix than in other areas.

I still think it's bad, but at least I can see justification that isn't Snidely Whiplash worthy.
 
2014-02-12 02:05:05 PM  
In my state, Maryland, Republicans are doing the opposite: instead of a statewide minimum wage hike, they want the poorer counties to be able to kerp their min wage low, abd the wealthier counties can raise theirs if they want.
 
2014-02-12 02:16:09 PM  
The more local the government, the better, unless the local government does something we don't like, such as paying living wages.
 
2014-02-12 02:20:14 PM  

nmrsnr: Plus, it might cause the state to put off public works in that region because it'll cost more to fix than in other areas.


As I said above, considering that 9/10 public projects have some level of Federal subsidy in them that already mandate a prevailing wage, this "fear" is overblown. More likely this is just an attempt to deny all funding to areas that the GOP doesn't like (read: urban, Democratic leaning cities).
 
2014-02-12 02:33:10 PM  
As with NC, enjoy your elected government doing what you asked of them, Wisconsin voters. I know some of you tried to kick Walker out, and it didn't work. Sorry for your derpy neighbors, but them's the breaks.
 
2014-02-12 02:44:17 PM  
"Party of small government."
 
2014-02-12 02:50:02 PM  

someonelse: "Party of small government."


Exactly
 
2014-02-12 02:51:48 PM  

vernonFL: In my state, Maryland, Republicans are doing the opposite: instead of a statewide minimum wage hike, they want the poorer counties to be able to keep their min wage low, and the wealthier counties can raise theirs if they want.


And in DC, we're trying to find a local Republican. It's hard, what with the assholes y'all keep sending here scumming up the place - to the point where being a Republican in DC...means you were elected by some state with fewer people than cows, who remit to Treasury (on 20th St, down the block from me) less in federal taxes than The District does, to come here and talk about how the poors leech off government and DC is the problem.

// that's actually not-horrible about MD, though
// have the state GOP stopped being hardons in general, though?
// and how does the recreational MJ bill look? (*crossed fingers*)
 
2014-02-12 02:53:24 PM  

theorellior: As with NC, enjoy your elected government doing what you asked of them, Wisconsin voters. I know some of you tried to kick Walker out, and it didn't work. Sorry for your derpy neighbors, but them's the breaks.


Bankin' on Burke this year. Somehow, this state put Walker and Tammy Baldwin in power. Clearly, nothing makes sense here.
 
2014-02-12 03:01:37 PM  
Y'know all those things that are atrocities at the federal level? Well, they're not atrocities at the state level!

Yours, the RNC.
 
2014-02-12 03:06:32 PM  
Oh FFS.
 
2014-02-12 03:10:01 PM  
This guy is just a shiatbag trying to keep poor people from earning more money, as a republican that is his sole reason for doing this. That said it is kinda odd to have a mishmash of minimum wages across the state, I would think you'd end up with a situation where stores and shopping centers build just outside of the zone and other shenanigans.
 
2014-02-12 03:17:31 PM  

Triple Oak: Bankin' on Burke this year. Somehow, this state put Walker and Tammy Baldwin in power. Clearly, nothing makes sense here.


Clearly.  Even though I live here I don't understand it either.   For example, my derpiest brother in law is the most gay tolerant one of the bunch.  His thoughts are "you're born how you're born" yet he totally believes in homepathic medicine and a list of other quackery far too long to explain here.
 
2014-02-12 03:22:26 PM  
I'm as opposed to the Republican's move as the next person with a functioning cerebral cortex...but let's at least be honest subby, they're not banning the efforts...they're only saying they can't use state money to do it.  They have to use locally collected revenue.
 
2014-02-12 03:23:20 PM  
Yeah, similar thing happened in Florida.

Orange County flirted with the idea of mandatory sick pay.  It failed the vote locally.  So the state GOP introduced a bill saying local governments couldn't consider it in the future.  Had to make sure that wouldn't happen again.

Mind you - not legislation banning it in the state, not a statewide vote for or against sick pay, but legislation saying you can't even consider it locally.
 
2014-02-12 03:23:31 PM  
You can't prevent localities from enacting local wage laws.  What you could do is tax all pay between $7.25 per hour and $10 an hour at 100%.  Please try this approach, Republicans.
 
2014-02-12 03:44:50 PM  
What a surprise. A nancy boy republican who's never dirtied his own hands nor done a single second's worth of honest work wants to keep the hard working people of Wisconsin from being paid what their work is worth.
 
2014-02-12 03:50:47 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: As I said above, considering that 9/10 public projects have some level of Federal subsidy in them that already mandate a prevailing wage, this "fear" is overblown. More likely this is just an attempt to deny all funding to areas that the GOP doesn't like (read: urban, Democratic leaning cities).


Also, government contracts for "inner city" areas are best handed to suburban companies run by my friends, employing people from my district, not to those... inner city people. Those are my tax dollars. Why don't those inner city people just get a job instead of looking for handouts!
 
2014-02-12 03:52:07 PM  

eagles95: someonelse: "Party of small government."

Exactly


Small enough to fit in your wallet.
 
2014-02-12 03:53:23 PM  
Can't wait until they pass this and a judge says "Nah, can't do it."
 
2014-02-12 04:01:40 PM  
And Tennessee Republicans are attacking workers and companies

What's going on with all these crazy state republicans?
 
2014-02-12 04:02:44 PM  
PA tried this with fracking laws. The state supreme court threw it out.
 
2014-02-12 04:03:56 PM  

neversubmit: What's going on with all these crazy state republicans?


An astrophysicist would refer to it as maximum density, at which point the structure collapses into itself and becomes a black hole, I believe.
 
2014-02-12 04:04:17 PM  
Why are republicans against everything good and are in favor of everything vile?
 
2014-02-12 04:05:31 PM  
What is this...I don't even... The Republican Party is a mustache-twirling Snidely Whiplash these days. Up next: They tie their Democratic counterparts to the railroad tracks.
 
2014-02-12 04:05:46 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Why are republicans against everything good and are in favor of everything vile?


Vile pays better.
 
2014-02-12 04:06:31 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Why are republicans against everything good and are in favor of everything vile?


Did you read the article, or just rely on that rock-solid confirmation bias of yours to come to this conclusion?
 
2014-02-12 04:10:31 PM  
Remember Wisconsin, it's not class warfare if you don't fight back
 
2014-02-12 04:15:15 PM  
In unrelated news, Wisconsin cheese scientists discover how to let creepy vampires have day jobs without sparkling.

media.jrn.com
 
2014-02-12 04:17:39 PM  

Dr Dreidel: vernonFL: In my state, Maryland, Republicans are doing the opposite: instead of a statewide minimum wage hike, they want the poorer counties to be able to keep their min wage low, and the wealthier counties can raise theirs if they want.

And in DC, we're trying to find a local Republican. It's hard, what with the assholes y'all keep sending here scumming up the place - to the point where being a Republican in DC...means you were elected by some state with fewer people than cows, who remit to Treasury (on 20th St, down the block from me) less in federal taxes than The District does, to come here and talk about how the poors leech off government and DC is the problem.

// that's actually not-horrible about MD, though
// have the state GOP stopped being hardons in general, though?
// and how does the recreational MJ bill look? (*crossed fingers*)


But of course Congress has control of DC in many ways, like the budget, so it's not like Republicans don't actually ru n it.
 
2014-02-12 04:19:29 PM  

JonBuck: What is this...I don't even... The Republican Party is a mustache-twirling Snidely Whiplash these days


They realize they don't have much time left before demographics destroys their current Southern Strategy incarnation.
 
2014-02-12 04:26:43 PM  
Does the GOP even farking try to hide it's contempt for poor people anymore? This basically serves to help the very wealthy in both obvious and less obvious ways. And only those ways.
 
2014-02-12 04:27:18 PM  
Article accompanied by appropriate picture of smiling douchebag.
 
2014-02-12 04:29:31 PM  

TimonC346: Does the GOP even farking try to hide it's contempt for poor people anymore?


I'd say about 47% of the time, they don't even bother.
 
2014-02-12 04:34:42 PM  

Shryke: TV's Vinnie: Why are republicans against everything good and are in favor of everything vile?

Did you read the article, or just rely on that rock-solid confirmation bias of yours to come to this conclusion?


So you're against living wages, too.

How surprising. Let me guess, those poor poor "small" business owners aren't going to be able to afford it.
 
2014-02-12 04:35:39 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: neversubmit: What's going on with all these crazy state republicans?

An astrophysicist would refer to it as maximum density, at which point the structure collapses into itself and becomes a black hole, I believe.


So then does it follow...

www.bartcop.com
 
2014-02-12 04:39:35 PM  

BitwiseShift: In unrelated news, Wisconsin cheese scientists discover how to let creepy vampires have day jobs without sparkling.

[media.jrn.com image 185x313]


That has to be one of the most punchable faces I've ever seen.
 
2014-02-12 04:42:36 PM  

whidbey: So you're against living wages, too.


I am not even gonna ask if you read the article. No, you just went straight to our HERPADERP button.
 
2014-02-12 04:45:31 PM  

Shryke: whidbey: So you're against living wages, too.

I am not even gonna ask if you read the article. No, you just went straight to our HERPADERP button.


And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages because you would majorly have your ass handed to you here.

What are you even doing here if you're going to act like you're too cool to take a side, anyway?
 
2014-02-12 04:47:22 PM  
Remember, the idea of a "living wage" is a brand new thing invented by far-left secularists. . .


wisdomvoices.com


http://books.google.com/books/about/A_Living_Wage.html?id=KssJAAAAIA AJ
 
2014-02-12 04:47:40 PM  

whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages because you would majorly have your ass handed to you here.


i am against living wages because the concept of a 'wage' is the prime enablement of capitalist control of the proletariat
 
2014-02-12 04:47:43 PM  

neversubmit: And Tennessee Republicans are attacking workers and companies

What's going on with all these crazy state republicans?


85,000 applicants for 11,000 jobs at the plant
Wow
 
2014-02-12 04:50:04 PM  

whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages


Am I against federally mandated minimum wages? Yes. State mandated? No. Are they smart? No. Do they achieve what they are ostensibly designed to do? No.

In reality, they are here to enrich unions because their labor contracts are based on multiplying the minimum wage to some degree.
 
2014-02-12 04:51:16 PM  

sprawl15: whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages because you would majorly have your ass handed to you here.

i am against living wages because the concept of a 'wage' is the prime enablement of capitalist control of the proletariat


Well as long as we have this stupid shiatty system, the people doing the brunt of the work deserve to be well-paid at least.

We can deal with capitalism and its greedy friends later.
 
2014-02-12 04:52:45 PM  

sprawl15: whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages because you would majorly have your ass handed to you here.

i am against living wages because the concept of a 'wage' is the prime enablement of capitalist control of the proletariat


Did you salute your Che poster when you typed that? Tell me the truth.
 
2014-02-12 04:54:04 PM  

Shryke: whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages

Am I against federally mandated minimum wages? Yes. State mandated? No. Are they smart? No. Do they achieve what they are ostensibly designed to do? No.

In reality, they are here to enrich unions because their labor contracts are based on multiplying the minimum wage to some degree.


Unions deserve to be "enriched." They are practically the only entity out there with a commitment to providing decent jobs with benefits. Sorry if that makes you mad or something.

Also, states are governments too. Because the Feds couldn't get their shiat together, Washington State passed minimum wage requirements that were higher than the rest of the country. Not sure why you'd be against your local governments trying to make life easier for workers.
 
2014-02-12 04:56:23 PM  
Something in the water up there.

"ohh" Ron Johnson
Paul Ryan
Jim No-Sensenbrenner
Scotty Walker

Voting for a "Wisconsin" tag starts tomorrow, unless Wisconsin republicans pass a law forbidding same.
 
2014-02-12 04:56:56 PM  

whidbey: Unions deserve to be "enriched."


No one deserves a god damn thing, until they earn it.

They are practically the only entity out there with a commitment to providing decent jobs with benefits.

The only jobs unions create are the administraive ones designed to run the union, last I checked. Companies create jobs.

Not sure why you'd be against your local governments trying to make life easier for workers.

Legally, I am not. Have you read the article yet?
 
2014-02-12 04:58:24 PM  

Shryke: Have you read the article yet?


Yeah I read it.

It really does make your objections here sound like Republican Party bootlicking.

What the hell is the matter with you? Show us on the doll where the Progressives touched you.
 
2014-02-12 05:00:05 PM  
A Cave Geek
they're not banning the efforts...they're only saying they can't use state money to do it.

Let me inform you how state and county finances interact: That would be everything.
 
2014-02-12 05:00:49 PM  

Shryke: sprawl15: whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages because you would majorly have your ass handed to you here.

i am against living wages because the concept of a 'wage' is the prime enablement of capitalist control of the proletariat

Did you salute your Che poster when you typed that? Tell me the truth


If by "Kissing your Che poster" you meant to inspire fear in people by equating fair wages to evil, evil communism, I'd like to remind you that while 90% of voting republicans are retarded enough to fall for that, everyone else is not.
 
2014-02-12 05:01:18 PM  

BitwiseShift: In unrelated news, Wisconsin cheese scientists discover how to let creepy vampires have day jobs without sparkling.

[media.jrn.com image 185x313]


Man, I was trying to read the article but for some reason that guys teeth were glowing in my peripheral vision. It was like some kind of optical illusion.
 
2014-02-12 05:02:32 PM  

whidbey: It really does make your objections here sound like Republican Party bootlicking.


I don't get it. Which part? I am personally against it, but ok with states regulating it? You have some issue with this? This is unreasonable?

What the hell is the matter with you?

whibey, my stance on this is quite open. You, on the other hand, are unable to handle any view outside of your own. You are the pinnacle of intolerance and demonization, every farking day, all day. And you are asking me what is the matter with me?
 
2014-02-12 05:04:32 PM  

TimonC346: If by "Kissing your Che poster" you meant to inspire fear in people by equating fair wages to evil, evil communism


I equated his proletariat, anti-capitalist screed to communism, you schmuck. Given your immediate misquote of what I said, I am guessing you didn't even read that part.
 
2014-02-12 05:06:02 PM  

Shryke: whidbey: It really does make your objections here sound like Republican Party bootlicking.

I don't get it. Which part? I am personally against it, but ok with states regulating it? You have some issue with this? This is unreasonable?


Yes it is. We are talking about changing society for the better. What does it matter where it comes from? Who cares who sets the wage? The Republicans. They want to control the game, and apparently you're fine with that.

What the hell is the matter with you?

whibey, my stance on this is quite open. You, on the other hand, are unable to handle any view outside of your own. You are the pinnacle of intolerance and demonization, every farking day, all day. And you are asking me what is the matter with me?


I don't have to "tolerate" views like this. You're anti-living wage. Concede to it. You think people shouldn't be paid decently, but they have to live shiatty lives until they "earn" your respect. Well, they're not going to.
 
2014-02-12 05:09:21 PM  

Shryke: TimonC346: If by "Kissing your Che poster" you meant to inspire fear in people by equating fair wages to evil, evil communism

I equated his proletariat, anti-capitalist screed to communism, you schmuck. Given your immediate misquote of what I said, I am guessing you didn't even read that part.


ZOMGFG COMUNIZZMS!!!
 
2014-02-12 05:11:02 PM  
Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?

Is it really that entertaining to the rest of you people?
 
2014-02-12 05:14:51 PM  

daemoncan: Something in the water up there.

"ohh" Ron Johnson
Paul Ryan
Jim No-Sensenbrenner
Scotty Walker

Voting for a "Wisconsin" tag starts tomorrow, unless Wisconsin republicans pass a law forbidding same.


I would've voted for that tag a long time ago. Funny thing about that list, something broke in Sensenbrenner and he's actually trying to do some good. I think it involves the NSA stuff, but I don't remember.
 
2014-02-12 05:17:59 PM  

daemoncan: Something in the water up there.


Yeah, hard alcohol during pregnancy.
 
2014-02-12 05:18:47 PM  

whidbey: Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?

Is it really that entertaining to the rest of you people?


I understand. I get sort of addicted to using facts against people who are parroting bullshiat Fox News talking points. But I just cannot care too much. Our nation can head in a direction where we close the income gap or it grows--this person you are debating literally seems to favor more poor people and no middle class. I've decided after a certain point it's honestly not worth my farkin' time. If that's the way it goes, I'll vote and fight against it, but if you are dumb enough to decide that course for this country, I'm not going to be able to change your mind with logic--because man, you're gone.
 
2014-02-12 05:22:15 PM  

whidbey: Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?


because you are a lib
 
2014-02-12 05:22:33 PM  

Triple Oak: daemoncan: Something in the water up there.

"ohh" Ron Johnson
Paul Ryan
Jim No-Sensenbrenner
Scotty Walker

Voting for a "Wisconsin" tag starts tomorrow, unless Wisconsin republicans pass a law forbidding same.

I would've voted for that tag a long time ago. Funny thing about that list, something broke in Sensenbrenner and he's actually trying to do some good. I think it involves the NSA stuff, but I don't remember.


It probably involves "re-election."
 
2014-02-12 05:22:36 PM  

Gyrfalcon: eagles95: someonelse: "Party of small government."

Exactly

Small enough to fit in your wallet.


And your bedroom.
 
2014-02-12 05:25:46 PM  

whidbey: Triple Oak: daemoncan: Something in the water up there.

"ohh" Ron Johnson
Paul Ryan
Jim No-Sensenbrenner
Scotty Walker

Voting for a "Wisconsin" tag starts tomorrow, unless Wisconsin republicans pass a law forbidding same.

I would've voted for that tag a long time ago. Funny thing about that list, something broke in Sensenbrenner and he's actually trying to do some good. I think it involves the NSA stuff, but I don't remember.

It probably involves "re-election."


Sensenbrenner has some pretty solid areas of Republican loyalty in Wauksha county and places like the Stallis to keep him in office. I think he just distributed his crazy to the likes of Vukmir and Lazich.
 
2014-02-12 05:26:37 PM  

TimonC346: whidbey: Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?

Is it really that entertaining to the rest of you people?

I understand. I get sort of addicted to using facts against people who are parroting bullshiat Fox News talking points. But I just cannot care too much. Our nation can head in a direction where we close the income gap or it grows--this person you are debating literally seems to favor more poor people and no middle class. I've decided after a certain point it's honestly not worth my farkin' time. If that's the way it goes, I'll vote and fight against it, but if you are dumb enough to decide that course for this country, I'm not going to be able to change your mind with logic--because man, you're gone.


The fact remains that these issues are still driving forces out there, outside the thread.

And the fact that there's so much resistance to paying people living wages, and a huge income gap that's getting bigger tells me that we should be addressing socially conservative views no matter how uphill the battle is, or how superficially it doesn't seem to be worth our time.

Fark is a good place to practice it. Maybe I'm just a freak magnet.
 
2014-02-12 05:45:26 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: neversubmit: What's going on with all these crazy state republicans?

An astrophysicist would refer to it as maximum density, at which point the structure collapses into itself and becomes a black hole, I believe.


Personally I think that a lot of those right wing politicians were being used by an exo-dimensional intelligence, perhaps making their hatred pleasurable. Someone cut that intelligence off and
this caused the affected right wingers to become more extreme with their hatred in the hopes of recapturing that feeling.

/Think that would make a good movie?
 
2014-02-12 05:52:03 PM  

whidbey: Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?

Is it really that entertaining to the rest of you people?



It's hard to respond to someone on ignore.
 
2014-02-12 05:53:55 PM  
Small government.
 
2014-02-12 05:57:27 PM  

whidbey: TimonC346: whidbey: Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?

Is it really that entertaining to the rest of you people?

I understand. I get sort of addicted to using facts against people who are parroting bullshiat Fox News talking points. But I just cannot care too much. Our nation can head in a direction where we close the income gap or it grows--this person you are debating literally seems to favor more poor people and no middle class. I've decided after a certain point it's honestly not worth my farkin' time. If that's the way it goes, I'll vote and fight against it, but if you are dumb enough to decide that course for this country, I'm not going to be able to change your mind with logic--because man, you're gone.

The fact remains that these issues are still driving forces out there, outside the thread.

And the fact that there's so much resistance to paying people living wages, and a huge income gap that's getting bigger tells me that we should be addressing socially conservative views no matter how uphill the battle is, or how superficially it doesn't seem to be worth our time.

Fark is a good place to practice it. Maybe I'm just a freak magnet.


Honestly--the debate my help your form a point--but people like that won't learn until they have some real experience with poor people who work their farkin' arses off and are still poor. Or cannot find a job. Or are elderly and having trouble. It's the mentality of "Well, one day I'll be rich, so I need to act and vote accordingly."

I'd totally be one of these people if I hadn't seen firsthand slums in the inner city, and met the people who are on welfare and subsidized housing. I also did Habitat for Humanity in in Tennessee where there are literally zero jobs to be had. I even hated unions once until I learned about globalization. I'd guess that any mind won't  be changed over an internet thread. That ignorance is deep. They need experience to see.
 
2014-02-12 05:58:58 PM  

Shryke: TimonC346: If by "Kissing your Che poster" you meant to inspire fear in people by equating fair wages to evil, evil communism

I equated his proletariat, anti-capitalist screed to communism, you schmuck. Given your immediate misquote of what I said, I am guessing you didn't even read that part.


You certainly are very irritable.
 
2014-02-12 06:07:12 PM  

Triple Oak: Can't wait until they pass this and a judge says "Nah, can't do it."



They hate that. I think the Repubs in state government are working on legislative workarounds to try to have this stuff only go in front of 'friendly' judges, when they're not otherwise busy with bills like this one.

...or the one that would make it impossible to get schools to change Native American-related team nicknames, or whatever they're outraged about this week.
 
2014-02-12 06:17:53 PM  

Shryke: whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages

Am I against federally mandated minimum wages? Yes. State mandated? No. Are they smart? No. Do they achieve what they are ostensibly designed to do? No.

In reality, they are here to enrich unions because their labor contracts are based on multiplying the minimum wage to some degree.


You know, before this "Right to Work" bullshiat really got going, and the federal government *cough*Reagan*cough* pushed perverse tax policies that favor exporting jobs, reduced taxes on the rich and stuck them on people who work for a living, 21% more of the working population was unionized, and 24% more of the working population was middle class.

Bonus: The bottom 50% of the population owned 10.6% of the wealth then, now the bottom 80% of the population owns 7.6% of the wealth.
 
2014-02-12 06:22:28 PM  

exick: Not that I necessarily agree with it and not that Chris Kapenga doesn't have a face that scores a 98% on the punchability scale, but it sounds like the proposed bill is designed to apply to jobs that are paid from state or federal money so as not to unfairly give more money to localities that have higher minimum wages.


This could easily be fixed by all other localities raising their minimum wages in kind. That's kind of the point, in fact. Create a race to the top for once, instead of the other way.
 
2014-02-12 06:25:54 PM  

Triple Oak: theorellior: As with NC, enjoy your elected government doing what you asked of them, Wisconsin voters. I know some of you tried to kick Walker out, and it didn't work. Sorry for your derpy neighbors, but them's the breaks.

Bankin' on Burke this year. Somehow, this state put Walker and Tammy Baldwin in power. Clearly, nothing makes sense here.


At this point I think Burke's best bet is to walk into some backwater bar at 8 AM and start shotgunning beers and not ceasing until that pantywaist Walker shows up to give her a drinking competition.
 
2014-02-12 06:36:58 PM  
$11.32? Well at least they didn't got full retard and make it $15 like the living-wagers were pushing for. That would have been a complete disaster. I don't think people understand the economic impact of raising the minimum wage that high that fast. $11.32 is a lot more moderate so it shouldn't entirely ruin the local economy, but it will be a tough go for a while.

...Lets assume for a minute that a federal $15/hr living wage law was passed. What would happen? Well, first off most things would cost 10-20% more almost immediately. Especially things that have minimum to $14/hour workers anywhere in their production process, which is a heck of a lot of stuff. This price increase would make getting paid $15/hr like getting paid $12.50/hr. That sucks, but I will admit it is still better than making minimum wage. However, what about the person who was making $15/hr before? He is still making that much, so he just took a $2.50/hr pay cut. As a matter of fact, everyone in the country BUT low-wage workers just took a 5-20% pay cut, and that paycut will take more than a decade to properly correct itself.

Many businesses, especially smaller ones, immediately go out of business. About 2/3rds of the people who were having to work two jobs to get bye now only have one job, and are barely making what they made before (though at least they are working less). However, about 20% of the people who had two jobs are out of work entirely now, and about half the people that had just one lower paying (<$12/hr) job are out of work as well.
The US can no longer compete in international markets because of the price increase. This causes a massive drop in exports, which takes tons more businesses down as well. Lots of people from all over the wage spectrum are out of work, and those jobs that are available are filled with the best of the best already. Unemployment is probably over 12% within 6 months, over 15% in a year, then it goes back down because nobody is looking anymore, but in reality over 20% of the US is out of work.
The US spirals into depression, which affects the global economy, and things get pretty much just as bad as they were in 1934. It takes 15 years minimum to recover, 15 years of basically wasted human potential because innovation is stunted as well... 2029 pretty much looks like what we would all expect 2019 to look like... 10 years of human development lost to people who think solving poverty is as simple as paying everyone a bunch more money. Worst yet, after those 15 years the minimum wage will be too low and we will need to raise it to $25/hour to achieve a "living wage". The "problem" will not be resolved.


I am not against a higher minimum wage. I am all for it as a matter of fact. I think it is too low for sure. But it still has to come in small doses or it will be economically devastating.
 
2014-02-12 06:54:17 PM  

Shryke: sprawl15: whidbey: And you're obviously not going to concede that you're against living wages because you would majorly have your ass handed to you here.

i am against living wages because the concept of a 'wage' is the prime enablement of capitalist control of the proletariat

Did you salute your Che poster when you typed that? Tell me the truth.


look at the violence inherent in the capitalist system
 
2014-02-12 07:08:27 PM  
demaL-demaL-yeH
Bonus: The bottom 50% of the population owned 10.6% of the wealth then, now the bottom 80% of the population owns 7.6% of the wealth.

It's working.
 
2014-02-12 07:20:28 PM  

Shryke: In reality, they are here to enrich unions


Union Thugs!  OOGA BOOGA BOOGA!

/DRINK!
 
2014-02-12 09:25:14 PM  

whidbey: Seriously, why is it I'm the one always stuck "debating" these hardline social conservatives in threads like this?


Probably the same reason a schizophrenic always has to be the one stuck fighting the CIA alien lizards all by himself.
 
2014-02-12 09:38:59 PM  

whidbey: Yes it is. We are talking about changing society for the better. What does it matter where it comes from? Who cares who sets the wage? The Republicans. They want to control the game, and apparently you're fine with that.


Hard for me to determine wtf you are advocating, other than an unlimited, arbitrary, "living wage". A million dollars an hour ok? May I ask if you can puzzle out why that might not work?

I should have my head examined asking you such questions, but I try to be polite.
 
2014-02-12 09:39:38 PM  

sprawl15: look at the violence inherent in the capitalist system


Pravda.
 
2014-02-12 09:40:49 PM  

TimonC346: ZOMGFG COMUNIZZMS!!!


May I ask how you would classify the comment I quoted, other than communist? Let me guess: "social democrat"?
 
2014-02-12 09:42:00 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: "Right to Work" bullshiat really got going


Please explain why you feel a law enabling a person to refuse to pay union dues to a union he doesn't want to be a part of is "bullshiat".
 
2014-02-13 12:08:32 AM  
republicans, farking up every state they're in charge of
 
2014-02-13 12:16:47 AM  

Shryke: demaL-demaL-yeH: "Right to Work" bullshiat really got going

Please explain why you feel a law enabling a person to refuse to pay union dues to a union he doesn't want to be a part of is "bullshiat".


It's a way to encourage free riders, who benefit from collective bargaining without paying for it. The sole purpose of so-called "right to work" laws is to bust unions. Are you really so obtuse that you haven't seen the effect of "right to work"[SIC] on wages?
 
2014-02-13 01:02:37 AM  
Welcome to the party of small government.
 
2014-02-13 09:21:46 AM  

RanDomino: A Cave Geek
they're not banning the efforts...they're only saying they can't use state money to do it.

Let me inform you how state and county finances interact: That would be everything.


I'll concede...It's a SERIOUS impediment.  But it's not a ban.  We can criticize it without being dishonest.  Perhaps an "in-effect" ban, but it's not an outright 'ban'...
 
2014-02-13 11:17:45 AM  
A Cave Geek
I'll concede...It's a SERIOUS impediment. But it's not a ban. We can criticize it without being dishonest. Perhaps an "in-effect" ban, but it's not an outright 'ban'...

I'm not sure what you're arguing? A de facto ban is a ban, yes. If I say you can drink water but not anything that contains hydrogen, I'm banning you from drinking water even if I try to say otherwise.
 
2014-02-13 11:25:25 AM  

Shryke: whidbey: Yes it is. We are talking about changing society for the better. What does it matter where it comes from? Who cares who sets the wage? The Republicans. They want to control the game, and apparently you're fine with that.

Hard for me to determine wtf you are advocating, other than an unlimited, arbitrary, "living wage".


Playing dumb again. How cute.

A million dollars an hour ok? May I ask if you can puzzle out why that might not work?

Playing strawman builder again. How cute.

I should have my head examined asking you such questions, but I try to be polite.

I really wonder what psychological forces are at play here to hate real people that much.
 
2014-02-13 11:41:28 AM  

RanDomino: A Cave Geek
I'll concede...It's a SERIOUS impediment. But it's not a ban. We can criticize it without being dishonest. Perhaps an "in-effect" ban, but it's not an outright 'ban'...

I'm not sure what you're arguing? A de facto ban is a ban, yes. If I say you can drink water but not anything that contains hydrogen, I'm banning you from drinking water even if I try to say otherwise.


I'm arguing that they CAN still pay higher than federal minimum wage, they just have to collect local taxes and fees above state level to do it.  They're basically saying they can't ask the state for more money to make this change.
 
2014-02-13 02:44:55 PM  

Shryke: demaL-demaL-yeH: "Right to Work" bullshiat really got going

Please explain why you feel a law enabling a person to refuse to pay union dues to a union he doesn't want to be a part of is "bullshiat".


If you don't want to be part of the union, you can go work somewhere else.  Isn't that how it works when the pay is a pittance, the benefits are bullschitt, the hours are ungodly and the air is full of asbestos?
 
Bf+
2014-02-13 02:55:30 PM  

someonelse: "Party of small government."


Yup... And local control.
Well, except for control of cellphone tower siting, shoreland zoning restrictions, landlord-tenant regulations, public employee residency requirements, family medical leave rules for private companies, frac mining, large soft drink bans...
and now, living wage laws.
 
Displayed 98 of 98 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report