Michigan considers $10 minimum wage

[OMGeverynameistaken]

I stopped paying attention here. You are aware of this little event called the "Global Financial Crisis", I trust? Good - then you should also be aware that 401(k)s and similar were disproportionately affected by the GFC. Given Florida's large retired community (many, many people go to Florida to retire due to the climate), that's naturally going to impact consumption levels.

Okay then, if a higher minimum wage is so great- why is it that Washington state which has $9.19/hour as their minimum have 7.5% unemployment while Wyoming only has 4.9% unemployment when they pay only $7.25/hour? It would be $5.15/Hour were it not for the federal minimum wage.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Maybe it has something to do with Washington having 10x the population of Wyoming?

[Terraius]

seems too high for a minimum wage price IMO

"Currently, a minimum wage worker needs to work 80 hours a week in order to afford the rent for a two-bedroom apartment."

Yeah, luxury...

Better than the GOP's suggested minimum wage of bread and water, I guess.

[Terraius]

Okay then, if a higher minimum wage is so great- why is it that Washington state which has $9.19/hour as their minimum have 7.5% unemployment while Wyoming only has 4.9% unemployment when they pay only $7.25/hour? It would be $5.15/Hour were it not for the federal minimum wage.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Maybe it has something to do with Washington having 10x the population of Wyoming?

You take your logical observations of empirical evidence and get the hell out. We here at Nationstates draw conclusions based on numbers. And things.

[Tekania]

It's ultimately the issue with discussions of economic theory here on NSG..... the theories only work with spherical consumers in a vacuum, and when it's pointed out that it does not work IRL, the theorists blame it on the lack of implementation of spherical consumers and perfect vacuums.

[Freiheit Reich]

Michigan people walked 2-3 miles to go to the store in town during the 19th century. People likely walked 2-3 miles to work in small towns and growing cities as well in the 1910's and 1920's (only a few people had cars then). It can be done.

That was before snow ploughs became a common feature of our landscape. I tried that two years ago on a day I took my wife's wheelchair van in for some brake work; I thought I'd drop it off at the brake shop and walk the 200-300 feet to a nearby restaurant, where I could sit and enjoy some coffee.

Then I discovered that the space where the sidewalks had once been were covered with 4-8' piles of hard packed ice, snow, and slush, forming a treacherously uneven barrier that most people would find uncrossable. The only way to walk to the restaurant was to walk right on the fucking road, where every idiot driver zipping along at 40-50 mph could try to fucking kill me. It took me 15 minutes in busy traffic to cover that 200-300' distance, and another 15 minutes to get back.

This year, when I took my own vehicle in, I simply slept in the waiting area; it wasn't worth the effort to leave the shop.

This is typical of Michigan towns and suburban areas in winter. The roads are immediately plowed and the snow is heaped up over the sidewalks/bike paths. Nobody bothers to clear those walks or paths all winter, and walking along the gutter-edge of the road is both dangerous and illegal. A century ago, our towns and cities were designed and managed in such a way as to accommodate pedestrians; in this day and age, if you're a pedestrian, you're totally fucked. Nobody expects anybody to walk anywhere outside our city centers, which are among the most expensive places to live in America.

So no, I reject your example. My personal experience here in Michigan beats the fuck out of yours in Southern Indiana.

Easy solution than is to move away. Many poor people are also foolish enough to live in pricey areas. Why are so many poor folks living in California, NYC, and Baltimore? They would be much better off in Indiana, Kansas, or Oklahoma. Cost of living is lower in those states and tax rates are better. The economy is also better overall in those states.

You could move to Nashville. Better weather, lower taxes, reasonable cost of living, and better economy. Poor people can move, bus tickets are not expensive and hitchhiking is also an option (risky though).

I moved from Florida to Indiana to save money while going to college. You can do the same to have a better lifestyle while poor.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Easy solution than is to move away. Many poor people are also foolish enough to live in pricey areas. Why are so many poor folks living in California, NYC, and Baltimore? They would be much better off in Indiana, Kansas, or Oklahoma. Cost of living is lower in those states and tax rates are better. The economy is also better overall in those states.

You could move to Nashville. Better weather, lower taxes, reasonable cost of living, and better economy. Poor people can move, bus tickets are not expensive and hitchhiking is also an option (risky though).

I moved from Florida to Indiana to save money while going to college. You can do the same to have a better lifestyle while poor.

Moving is easy?

What strange and wondrous dimension do YOU live in?

[Freiheit Reich]

Easy solution than is to move away. Many poor people are also foolish enough to live in pricey areas. Why are so many poor folks living in California, NYC, and Baltimore? They would be much better off in Indiana, Kansas, or Oklahoma. Cost of living is lower in those states and tax rates are better. The economy is also better overall in those states.

You could move to Nashville. Better weather, lower taxes, reasonable cost of living, and better economy. Poor people can move, bus tickets are not expensive and hitchhiking is also an option (risky though).

I moved from Florida to Indiana to save money while going to college. You can do the same to have a better lifestyle while poor.

Moving is easy?

What strange and wondrous dimension do YOU live in?

I moved a few times and not that hard (I had a car which helped though). The biggest challenge is getting rid of possessions and finding housing and a job.

1) If you have a car it means you can move easily. You load up car with as much as possible and sell/donate the rest. No car: This means you must sell everything that can't fit in a duffel bag. You can survive with what you can carry in a duffel bag, I did this when I went to Afghanistan and Iraq. A one way bus ticket bought more than 2 weeks in advance is usually less than $150 (this can be saved up even on a low wage job and buy selling stuff).

2) Find a roommate via the internet. Get a few contacts, arrange a date to meet and go. Tell them you want to move in that day. Try to arrange for a bus that gets you in the city early in the morning and meet the contacts and select a room. They may ask for deposit (likely will). You might need $400-500 for 1st month's rent (varies by person, I was only asked for this when I had a roommate).

3) Find a job ASAP. Don't be picky and look for temp. jobs as well. Pound the pavement hard. With a bike this is fine (buy a used bike-less than $100). Walking may work depending on neighborhood as well. Job placement centers exist in some cities but I am unsure how helpful they are.

[Geilinor]

Moving is easy?

What strange and wondrous dimension do YOU live in?

I moved a few times and not that hard (I had a car which helped though). The biggest challenge is getting rid of possessions and finding housing and a job.

1) If you have a car it means you can move easily. You load up car with as much as possible and sell/donate the rest. No car: This means you must sell everything that can't fit in a duffel bag. You can survive with what you can carry in a duffel bag, I did this when I went to Afghanistan and Iraq. A one way bus ticket bought more than 2 weeks in advance is usually less than $150 (this can be saved up even on a low wage job and buy selling stuff).

2) Find a roommate via the internet. Get a few contacts, arrange a date to meet and go. Tell them you want to move in that day. Try to arrange for a bus that gets you in the city early in the morning and meet the contacts and select a room. They may ask for deposit (likely will). You might need $400-500 for 1st month's rent (varies by person, I was only asked for this when I had a roommate).

3) Find a job ASAP. Don't be picky and look for temp. jobs as well. Pound the pavement hard. With a bike this is fine (buy a used bike-less than $100). Walking may work depending on neighborhood as well. Job placement centers exist in some cities but I am unsure how helpful they are.

It isn't as easy as finding a roommate when you have children. Also, do you think unemployed people aren't looking for jobs? Clearly, jobs are difficult to find right now. What if you have a house to sell? That could take time. Also, what would happen if all the poor people moved to inexpensive states? Those states would become crowded and expensive too, if there's so much demand.

[Freiheit Reich]

I moved a few times and not that hard (I had a car which helped though). The biggest challenge is getting rid of possessions and finding housing and a job.

1) If you have a car it means you can move easily. You load up car with as much as possible and sell/donate the rest. No car: This means you must sell everything that can't fit in a duffel bag. You can survive with what you can carry in a duffel bag, I did this when I went to Afghanistan and Iraq. A one way bus ticket bought more than 2 weeks in advance is usually less than $150 (this can be saved up even on a low wage job and buy selling stuff).

2) Find a roommate via the internet. Get a few contacts, arrange a date to meet and go. Tell them you want to move in that day. Try to arrange for a bus that gets you in the city early in the morning and meet the contacts and select a room. They may ask for deposit (likely will). You might need $400-500 for 1st month's rent (varies by person, I was only asked for this when I had a roommate).

3) Find a job ASAP. Don't be picky and look for temp. jobs as well. Pound the pavement hard. With a bike this is fine (buy a used bike-less than $100). Walking may work depending on neighborhood as well. Job placement centers exist in some cities but I am unsure how helpful they are.

It isn't as easy as finding a roommate when you have children. Also, do you think unemployed people aren't looking for jobs? Clearly, jobs are difficult to find right now. What if you have a house to sell? That could take time. Also, what would happen if all the poor people moved to inexpensive states? Those states would become crowded and expensive too, if there's so much demand.

If you have a house you are in good shape. Rent out the bedrooms of the house besides your own bedroom of course.

OK, they had kids they couldn't afford. Brilliant. The poor people were to blame for this so don't give them pity. OK, this is why child labor laws for full time work should be dropped to 16 instead of 18 (for some help). What to do? Kids make extra money for family doing odd jobs like shoveling snow, raking leaves, and washing cars. The kids can help support the family. Internet makes finding a roommate that will accept kids easier, odds are you will find somebody and you could cut a deal like 'accept us and the kids will do chores for you like wash car once a week, clean bathroom, vaccuum room, etc..'

Kids went from burden to useful.

When I moved to the Louisville area a few years ago I found a job in 3 weeks. I could have found one faster if I wanted to get a job loading boxes as a warehouser or working at fast food but I was not as desperate and I got a security job no problem. Even better, my resume was found on monster.com and I was hired for a better job in Afghanistan 3 weeks after starting the security guard job. 2 jobs in less than 2 months (I felt bad about quitting the security guard job but the pay difference was too huge to turn down and they understood that it was a good opportunity).

Notice I was willing to move to a harsh area to get a good job. Many people will not do this because they are spoiled. I asked friends and family and they were not interested, even with the higher pay. Just like many Americans are too lazy to pick fruit.

Texas is cheaper than New Hamphire and Vermont despite higher growth rates in population so cost of living not just determined by moving. Housing costs in most areas will only steadily rise because poor people won't be going to 1 city alone. Also, if the poor people are moving there the odds are this will create competition for low wage goods and services creating good prices.

Oh, I would also ban zoning laws regarding how many people can live in 1 house. I would allow houses to be turned into apartments easier which will drive down housing costs. I will also decrease zoning restrictions regarding high density housing which can also drop housing costs.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Ahhh, I am intrigued by your modest proposal for preventing the children of the poor from being a burden to their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the public. Tell me, do you prefer stewed, roasted, baked or boiled?

[Freiheit Reich]

Ahhh, I am intrigued by your modest proposal for preventing the children of the poor from being a burden to their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the public. Tell me, do you prefer stewed, roasted, baked or boiled?

I like Swift also but this is hardly the same. Children should be part of the team but in the USA (and a few other places to include China shockingly enough) the children are expected to only focus on school and extracurricular activities and MAYBE if the parents are tough they have to clean their room and feed to family pet.

Children in the olden days would pick berries once they were a few years old and then gain responsibilities from there. Don't coddle them. Also, I would say let the kids keep 20% (and maybe 10% is put in savings for them) and parents get 70%. The kids will feel proud to help out the family and they will grow into responsible adults instead of self-centered and/or screwed up brats/punks like Lindsey Lohan.

[Seangoli]

If you have a house you are in good shape. Rent out the bedrooms of the house besides your own bedroom of course.

It is not that easy to rent out space. There are numerous code and laws to become familiar with. And it also assumes that your house is large enough to house both you, your family, and tenant(s). Then, if you want to make sure you're not renting and living in the same space as a convict or somehow who will squelch on rent, you have the cost of background checks and actually knowing the laws behind how to go about them. Add on top of this the fact that you aren't going to be making *that* much money off of it if you do, and it's a ridiculous thing you just said that has no grounding in a realistic plan.

OK, they had kids they couldn't afford. Brilliant. The poor people were to blame for this so don't give them pity. OK, this is why child labor laws for full time work should be dropped to 16 instead of 18 (for some help). What to do? Kids make extra money for family doing odd jobs like shoveling snow, raking leaves, and washing cars. The kids can help support the family. Internet makes finding a roommate that will accept kids easier, odds are you will find somebody and you could cut a deal like 'accept us and the kids will do chores for you like wash car once a week, clean bathroom, vaccuum room, etc..'

Children are not a commodity, and they can come about because of any number of reasons. Further, in our ever growing education-driven economy, dropping those labor laws would serve only to perpetuate poverty further than it already is. Those laws exist for a damn good reason.

Kids went from burden to useful.

Kids, as stated, are not a commodity.

When I moved to the Louisville area a few years ago I found a job in 3 weeks. I could have found one faster if I wanted to get a job loading boxes as a warehouser or working at fast food but I was not as desperate and I got a security job no problem. Even better, my resume was found on monster.com and I was hired for a better job in Afghanistan 3 weeks after starting the security guard job. 2 jobs in less than 2 months (I felt bad about quitting the security guard job but the pay difference was too huge to turn down and they understood that it was a good opportunity).

And here in Wyoming it took me 7 months to find a job that was out of state at a corporation that I had previously worked at, and thankfully payed enough for me to actually travel and live with family. This was not for a lack of trying, mind you, as I had put out nearly 100 applications across all industries I could imagine, including low-paying low-skill jobs. Uprooting and moving to a new area was out of the question, as I had a lease agreement that was still 6 months until terminating and I hadn't the funds to actually do it if I wanted to.

Notice I was willing to move to a harsh area to get a good job. Many people will not do this because they are spoiled. I asked friends and family and they were not interested, even with the higher pay. Just like many Americans are too lazy to pick fruit.

Calling impoverished people "spoiled" is rich. More like they don't have the money to actually move, while you moved to another area to go to school and were likely receiving a good deal of assistance from family and the like at the time. An option that very few people have when they are actually adults.

Texas is cheaper than New Hamphire and Vermont despite higher growth rates in population so cost of living not just determined by moving. Housing costs in most areas will only steadily rise because poor people won't be going to 1 city alone. Also, if the poor people are moving there the odds are this will create competition for low wage goods and services creating good prices.

Showing you obviously have zero idea how economics works. Why the hell would a company lower the price on goods if it has been established that people are willing to pay a higher price for said good? Among everything else wrong with you statement, you honestly have zero concept of how pricing works.

Oh, I would also ban zoning laws regarding how many people can live in 1 house. I would allow houses to be turned into apartments easier which will drive down housing costs. I will also decrease zoning restrictions regarding high density housing which can also drop housing costs.

Those are also there for a damn good reason: Fire codes and safety. Cramming 15 people into a 2-bedroom apartment or house will only lead to horrendous conditions and horrific fire hazards.

Essentially everything you have just stated can be summed up as this:

"I am a spoiled school student who has never lived in the real world" and "I want poor people to remain poor".

The first is what you come off as, and the second is exactly what would happen under your ideas.

[Seangoli]

Ahhh, I am intrigued by your modest proposal for preventing the children of the poor from being a burden to their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the public. Tell me, do you prefer stewed, roasted, baked or boiled?

I like Swift also but this is hardly the same. Children should be part of the team but in the USA (and a few other places to include China shockingly enough) the children are expected to only focus on school and extracurricular activities and MAYBE if the parents are tough they have to clean their room and feed to family pet.

Children in the olden days would pick berries once they were a few years old and then gain responsibilities from there. Don't coddle them. Also, I would say let the kids keep 20% (and maybe 10% is put in savings for them) and parents get 70%. The kids will feel proud to help out the family and they will grow into responsible adults instead of self-centered and/or screwed up brats/punks like Lindsey Lohan.

And watch as our economy tanks and we lose our positioning in the world as a number 1 economy.

Our entire economy is based around educated service industries and high-skilled labor. To do this would be a massive step back into the early 1900s era US. We cannot go back to such, as it would decimate our economy. We should be moving forward, never taking a step back like you seem to want.

[Caninope]

Showing you obviously have zero idea how economics works. Why the hell would a company lower the price on goods if it has been established that people are willing to pay a higher price for said good? Among everything else wrong with you statement, you honestly have zero concept of how pricing works.

That's not strictly true. At most any price, there will always be people willing to pay higher prices. However, past a certain point, the marginal cost of continuing to produce the good outweighs the marginal revenue. Companies might keep a price low because that is where the profit maximizing point lies. That's how pricing works on the microeconomic level.

[Seangoli]

Showing you obviously have zero idea how economics works. Why the hell would a company lower the price on goods if it has been established that people are willing to pay a higher price for said good? Among everything else wrong with you statement, you honestly have zero concept of how pricing works.

That's not strictly true. At most any price, there will always be people willing to pay higher prices. However, past a certain point, the marginal cost of continuing to produce the good outweighs the marginal revenue. Companies might keep a price low because that is where the profit maximizing point lies. That's how pricing works on the microeconomic level.

Ah, true enough I suppose. I was generalizing a bit to much there as I always tend to get a little pissy with the "Poor people are spoiled and lazy" crowd. Which leads into grandiose general statements that may or may not be entirely true.

I would like to point out, however, that cheaper labor does not directly nor necessarily lead to meaningful differences in pricing. Although it can, depending on the industry, it does not necessarily mean as such.

[Caninope]

I would like to point out, however, that cheaper labor does not directly nor necessarily lead to meaningful differences in pricing. Although it can, depending on the industry, it does not necessarily mean as such.

It depends on a variety of factors. Ceteris paribus, I'd most likely think that price increases would be based on the elasticity of demand.

[Seangoli]

I would like to point out, however, that cheaper labor does not directly nor necessarily lead to meaningful differences in pricing. Although it can, depending on the industry, it does not necessarily mean as such.

It depends on a variety of factors. Ceteris paribus, I'd most likely think that price increases would be based on the elasticity of demand.

Rather true I would imagine. I will fully admit that I have only a shaky understanding of this, but from my experience in the retail industry what drives prices more than labor costs is both volume of what is sold and the costs associated with obtaining stock.

Anecdotal for certain, but my experience with Wal-Mart for instance has been that they generally pay their employees a good degree more than the competition (Most everywhere) while still maintaining lower prices than any alternative. Reason being, of course, that they sell a far greater volume of goods and can obtain them at a cheaper price from their vendors and the like (Due to practically ensuring that sales will be high enough to justify the cut in per item profit that the wholesalers face).

Forgive poor terminology here and any poorly worded statements, and if I'm completely off-mark of where this going. I've been horrendously ill the past few days and am only just getting back to thinking anywhere near straight.

Frankly from my experience actual labor costs are only a marginal affair in retail, and don't really affect the price of goods to nearly as significant a degree as other factors.

[Saiwania]

Our entire economy is based around educated service industries and high-skilled labor. To do this would be a massive step back into the early 1900s era US. We cannot go back to such, as it would decimate our economy. We should be moving forward, never taking a step back like you seem to want.

I can see why education is important but I would argue that education in the US really isn't all that impressive. The high school diploma has become almost worthless except for competing against high school dropouts in the labor market. If almost everyone has a Bachelors degree, employers say- "Okay, now what makes you so special in comparison to all of these other candidates who happen to have 4 year degrees as well? We want a Masters or Doctoral degree now for you to even be interviewed for this job."

College tuition is getting ever more expensive in the US and yet, no one seems to care about the credential inflation which is occurring or whether pushing everyone to go to college will be sustainable. I get that some people go to college for the sake of learning but not everyone can afford to get saddled with a student loan that they are later not able to pay off because they chose a degree that wasn't as marketable at the time or to delay their participation in the labor force for 4+ whole years.

It used to be that a degree had real economic value because significantly fewer people had those degrees or needed them, but now it is nothing special if it is common for people to have 2 and 4 year degrees.

[Freiheit Reich]

If you have a house you are in good shape. Rent out the bedrooms of the house besides your own bedroom of course.

It is not that easy to rent out space. There are numerous code and laws to become familiar with. And it also assumes that your house is large enough to house both you, your family, and tenant(s). Then, if you want to make sure you're not renting and living in the same space as a convict or somehow who will squelch on rent, you have the cost of background checks and actually knowing the laws behind how to go about them. Add on top of this the fact that you aren't going to be making *that* much money off of it if you do, and it's a ridiculous thing you just said that has no grounding in a realistic plan.

OK, they had kids they couldn't afford. Brilliant. The poor people were to blame for this so don't give them pity. OK, this is why child labor laws for full time work should be dropped to 16 instead of 18 (for some help). What to do? Kids make extra money for family doing odd jobs like shoveling snow, raking leaves, and washing cars. The kids can help support the family. Internet makes finding a roommate that will accept kids easier, odds are you will find somebody and you could cut a deal like 'accept us and the kids will do chores for you like wash car once a week, clean bathroom, vaccuum room, etc..'

Children are not a commodity, and they can come about because of any number of reasons. Further, in our ever growing education-driven economy, dropping those labor laws would serve only to perpetuate poverty further than it already is. Those laws exist for a damn good reason.

Kids went from burden to useful.

Kids, as stated, are not a commodity.

When I moved to the Louisville area a few years ago I found a job in 3 weeks. I could have found one faster if I wanted to get a job loading boxes as a warehouser or working at fast food but I was not as desperate and I got a security job no problem. Even better, my resume was found on monster.com and I was hired for a better job in Afghanistan 3 weeks after starting the security guard job. 2 jobs in less than 2 months (I felt bad about quitting the security guard job but the pay difference was too huge to turn down and they understood that it was a good opportunity).

And here in Wyoming it took me 7 months to find a job that was out of state at a corporation that I had previously worked at, and thankfully payed enough for me to actually travel and live with family. This was not for a lack of trying, mind you, as I had put out nearly 100 applications across all industries I could imagine, including low-paying low-skill jobs. Uprooting and moving to a new area was out of the question, as I had a lease agreement that was still 6 months until terminating and I hadn't the funds to actually do it if I wanted to.

Notice I was willing to move to a harsh area to get a good job. Many people will not do this because they are spoiled. I asked friends and family and they were not interested, even with the higher pay. Just like many Americans are too lazy to pick fruit.

Calling impoverished people "spoiled" is rich. More like they don't have the money to actually move, while you moved to another area to go to school and were likely receiving a good deal of assistance from family and the like at the time. An option that very few people have when they are actually adults.

Texas is cheaper than New Hamphire and Vermont despite higher growth rates in population so cost of living not just determined by moving. Housing costs in most areas will only steadily rise because poor people won't be going to 1 city alone. Also, if the poor people are moving there the odds are this will create competition for low wage goods and services creating good prices.

Showing you obviously have zero idea how economics works. Why the hell would a company lower the price on goods if it has been established that people are willing to pay a higher price for said good? Among everything else wrong with you statement, you honestly have zero concept of how pricing works.

Oh, I would also ban zoning laws regarding how many people can live in 1 house. I would allow houses to be turned into apartments easier which will drive down housing costs. I will also decrease zoning restrictions regarding high density housing which can also drop housing costs.

Those are also there for a damn good reason: Fire codes and safety. Cramming 15 people into a 2-bedroom apartment or house will only lead to horrendous conditions and horrific fire hazards.

Essentially everything you have just stated can be summed up as this:

"I am a spoiled school student who has never lived in the real world" and "I want poor people to remain poor".

The first is what you come off as, and the second is exactly what would happen under your ideas.

We are being hypothetical. I would not require paperwork if you want to rent out rooms in your house. Tenement housing would be allowed. You can choose to live in crappy housing if you want. Fire safety is an issue but again, people make choices. Poor people have less choices but the govt. should not be the nanny in telling them a place is not safe enough for them.

Your industry sounds hard to get a job. How many fast food jobs did you apply at? What about warehousing, cashier, fruit picking, etc.? My guess is like many Americans you did not want to apply for low wage jobs even though they are easier to get.

Rent: Require 2 months rent as security deposit and 1 month payment upfront (may have to cut a deal though to make it worthwhile for the guy). If he is 2 weeks late then start eviction proceedings, even if it takes 2 months the deposit covered you. $300-500 a month is not a lot of money? Sounds like a lot to me.

I worked 30 hours a week at age 17 and managed to get good grades. I could have handled 40 hours without any problem. I was hungry for work because I used to be greedy. I had almost $9,000 saved by graduation and most of this was only off McDonald's work (I admit parents paid for my expenses until I graduated high school though but this is even the case for many poorer families).

My school money came from GI Bill, I never borrowed money from family. I bought my own car as well. The army is an option for younger poor people in good shape, many don't take this option. Recruiters will help you study for ASVAB test, they want you in there (selfish reasons but it benefits both of you).

Spoiled? I joined the army 3 weeks after graduating high school and worked 4 years in conflict zones. I did this for work related reasons. These were not comfortable jobs.

A company will not lower the price of a good but a competitor might. Prices of goods are often lower in larger towns than small country towns even though people in the countryside might be poorer? Why? Competition drives down prices. More people usually means more competition. These people won't demand luxury goods. They will want stores like Family Dollar, Walmart, thrift stores, etc. The market will happily provide these things.

[Forster Keys]

What a load of nonsense. If you're going to give out examples to prove our points, I'll direct you towards most of the minimum wage using Western world and be done with it.

Haiti is in the west while Singapore is in the east. Haiti's minimum wage has not helped poverty. Singapore is doing far better than Haiti.

You want a western country with minimum wage: Haiti is a good starting point.

Armies automatically cause every nation to fail. Iceland and Costa Rica are coping fine. The Congo isn't? That's proof right?

You don't get it do you? Minimum wage does not automatically bring prosperity. But it certainly doesn't hamper it. Western Europe is prosperous, the majority of them have high minimum wages... France, Scandinavia, UK... need I go on?

[Dolphin with an AK-47]

Brilliant. Well done Michigan!

[Freiheit Reich]

I like Swift also but this is hardly the same. Children should be part of the team but in the USA (and a few other places to include China shockingly enough) the children are expected to only focus on school and extracurricular activities and MAYBE if the parents are tough they have to clean their room and feed to family pet.

Children in the olden days would pick berries once they were a few years old and then gain responsibilities from there. Don't coddle them. Also, I would say let the kids keep 20% (and maybe 10% is put in savings for them) and parents get 70%. The kids will feel proud to help out the family and they will grow into responsible adults instead of self-centered and/or screwed up brats/punks like Lindsey Lohan.

And watch as our economy tanks and we lose our positioning in the world as a number 1 economy.

Our entire economy is based around educated service industries and high-skilled labor. To do this would be a massive step back into the early 1900s era US. We cannot go back to such, as it would decimate our economy. We should be moving forward, never taking a step back like you seem to want.

Kids can go to school and work. I worked 30 hours a week in my last year of high school. I could have easily handled 40 but this went against labor laws. I was also required to take a 30 minute break after 4 hours of working even though it was not necessary (a child labor rule). I could not clock in after 20 minutes (the cash registers will not let you if you are below 18 so they can follow labor laws).

I am saying let kids work more hours if they want to after school. This might also mean less self-entitled teenagers and 20 something year olds.

[Caninope]

Kids can go to school and work. I worked 30 hours a week in my last year of high school. I could have easily handled 40 but this went against labor laws. I was also required to take a 30 minute break after 4 hours of working even though it was not necessary (a child labor rule). I could not clock in after 20 minutes (the cash registers will not let you if you are below 18 so they can follow labor laws).

I am saying let kids work more hours if they want to after school. This might also mean less self-entitled teenagers and 20 something year olds.

What state were you in? Federal labor laws concerning the hour restrictions of a minor stop at age 16. This is why I had a friend who worked 80 hours in one week at her job before our senior year of high school.

[Freiheit Reich]

Kids can go to school and work. I worked 30 hours a week in my last year of high school. I could have easily handled 40 but this went against labor laws. I was also required to take a 30 minute break after 4 hours of working even though it was not necessary (a child labor rule). I could not clock in after 20 minutes (the cash registers will not let you if you are below 18 so they can follow labor laws).

I am saying let kids work more hours if they want to after school. This might also mean less self-entitled teenagers and 20 something year olds.

What state were you in? Federal labor laws concerning the hour restrictions of a minor stop at age 16. This is why I had a friend who worked 80 hours in one week at her job before our senior year of high school.

Florida:

http://www.ehow.com/facts_5173398_child ... orida.html

[Seangoli]

We are being hypothetical. I would not require paperwork if you want to rent out rooms in your house. Tenement housing would be allowed. You can choose to live in crappy housing if you want. Fire safety is an issue but again, people make choices. Poor people have less choices but the govt. should not be the nanny in telling them a place is not safe enough for them.

And without out it slumlords will run rampant. It already happens with the regulations that exist, and with reduced restrictions it would be an even larger problem.

Your industry sounds hard to get a job. How many fast food jobs did you apply at? What about warehousing, cashier, fruit picking, etc.? My guess is like many Americans you did not want to apply for low wage jobs even though they are easier to get.

Last year was a particularly rough year in the industry for various reasons. Generally finding a job in the field is not difficult when one has 7 years of experience. Problem was I competing for entry-level positions in some cases with people who had 20 years experience and leadership positions due to how much of a pounding the economy took on the industry.

And you assume completely wrong. As I said, I applied to damn near everything I could think of. Including fast-food/retail.