American Politics

[xi0]

But Clinton also uses girlboss power for her own advantage, like with Bernie and acting as if she was the only one or first one to know how dangerous Trump was, when most of us have been saying it all along. It's also weird that Harris gets so much support especially from Black liberals from what I've seen. Like, it's great that she's the first Black female vice president, but her history matters too. It seems Biden is retracting a lot of his promises, like minimum wage increase and $2000 stimulus.

I mean, they were kind of victims, and I'm saying this as a Bernie supporter.

How is he retracting it?

Victims of what? If you're a public advocate for a politician, that means not everything is going to be pleasant.

 

[M3J]

Hasn't he said that the $15 would be for federal workers instead of all? And isn't he saying he'll do $1,400 instead of $2,000?

Doesn't mean you have to bully them badly.

 

[xi0]

Hasn't he said that the $15 would be for federal workers instead of all? And isn't he saying he'll do $1,400 instead of $2,000?

Doesn't mean you have to bully them badly.

Federal minimum wage is just that, plus it means that states can't pay less than that (though some do in some cases).

Bullying is justified depending on the person and what kind of nonsense they're spewing.

 

[kkck]

I am not clear on how the federal minimum wage works. Does that apply only to public employees or is the private sector also required to pay that?

 

[M3J]

Federal minimum wage is just that, plus it means that states can't pay less than that (though some do in some cases).

Bullying is justified depending on the person and what kind of nonsense they're spewing.

So the left misunderstood when he said the increase was for federal/governmental workers?

I'm all for bullying the right, but I've seen some things that Bernie supporters have, and it's pretty hostile. plus, their main argument is "MEDICARE FOR ALL!!" Not much else.

I am not clear on how the federal minimum wage works. Does that apply only to public employees or is the private sector also required to pay that?

As far as I know, the problem was that public employees/federal employees were promised the increase instead of everyone.

 

[xi0]

So the left misunderstood when he said the increase was for federal/governmental workers?

I'm all for bullying the right, but I've seen some things that Bernie supporters have, and it's pretty hostile. plus, their main argument is "MEDICARE FOR ALL!!" Not much else.

No, it means that state minimum wage can't be lower than it either. Minimum wage is whichever is higher, that's why most state's minimum wage is higher than federal and people are calling for it to be increased across the board. Some cities have higher minimum wages than the state they're in as well.

Bully those that uphold the status quo in a system that fails way too many people. Democrats are not blameless.

That's reductionist as hell, that's not the entire platform.

 

[M3J]

No, it means that state minimum wage can't be lower than it either. Minimum wage is whichever is higher, that's why most state's minimum wage is higher than federal and people are calling for it to be increased across the board. Some cities have higher minimum wages than the state they're in as well.

Bully those that uphold the status quo in a system that fails way too many people. Democrats are not blameless.

That's reductionist as hell, that's not the entire platform.

makes sense as the cost of living would be higher in some cities compared to their states. But at least that's a good thing, I guess?

I know they aren't. Only reason why I voted for Biden was because he wasn't as divisive as Trump and could be pushed left more than Trump.

That's literally the main counter I see from them whenever Bernie's criticized or someone prefers another candidate.

 

[xi0]

makes sense as the cost of living would be higher in some cities compared to their states. But at least that's a good thing, I guess?

I know they aren't. Only reason why I voted for Biden was because he wasn't as divisive as Trump and could be pushed left more than Trump.

That's literally the main counter I see from them whenever Bernie's criticized or someone prefers another candidate.

The issue is the federal government shouldn't have to force states to give people a living wage. Yes, higher wages are needed in some places more than others, but treating the entire topic as a states rights issue like the GOP is wont to do is pretty mind-numbing.

I would have voted for a three-legged dog before Trump, so that can't be the only reason.

Well, I would guess many of those people tend to not have to worry about not having health insurance or being bankrupted by medical bills. Funny how that works.

 

[kkck]

The way Biden appears to want to handle the $15.00 minimum wage makes me a tad uncomfortable tbh. How this whole thing should work is... A country's production grows and increases and with that you have increases in minimum wages. That way workers, and ultimately consumers, get their share of the increased productivity and consumer spending power increases. The US has basically neglected this for some 40 years... Biden wanting $15 for a minimum federal wage is fine but it doesn't sound practical to try to correct 40 years of bad policy while in the middle of a pandemic which has caused a crisis more severe than the great recession. Also worth noting with the way politics in the work nowadays you basically have democrats raising minimum wages and republicans fighting tooth and nail against it. Overall its a very banana republic look on an issue which should be handled in a more technical manner (as in, wage increases being tied to productivity increases).

 

[xi0]

The way Biden appears to want to handle the $15.00 minimum wage makes me a tad uncomfortable tbh. How this whole thing should work is... A country's production grows and increases and with that you have increases in minimum wages. That way workers, and ultimately consumers, get their share of the increased productivity and consumer spending power increases. The US has basically neglected this for some 40 years... Biden wanting $15 for a minimum federal wage is fine but it doesn't sound practical to try to correct 40 years of bad policy while in the middle of a pandemic which has caused a crisis more severe than the great recession. Also worth noting with the way politics in the work nowadays you basically have democrats raising minimum wages and republicans fighting tooth and nail against it. Overall its a very banana republic look on an issue which should be handled in a more technical manner (as in, wage increases being tied to productivity increases).

The increase would be gradual. The bill proposed in congress mirrors what they've already done in some states/cities - the goal is an increase until 2025, and then any further increases would be dictated by median wage growth in order for it to address any inflation automatically.

 

[kkck]

The increase would be gradual. The bill proposed in congress mirrors what they've already done in some states/cities - the goal is an increase until 2025, and then any further increases would be dictated by median wage growth in order for it to address any inflation automatically.

Ah, I see, that makes more sense. It's sounds like a potential big shock for the economy but perhaps a manageable one. I need to read up more on how this would work.

 

[xi0]

Ah, I see, that makes more sense. It's sounds like a potential big shock for the economy but perhaps a manageable one. I need to read up more on how this would work.

Yeah idk, I'm not an economist. It just seems like the moral argument should supersede an economical one. If you work 40 hours a week you shouldn't be living in poverty. There's no "greater good" argument to be had when this is going on, regardless of whether this cuts into corporation's profits. The issue with the current system is profitability is valued more than the productivity of workers. This is why you see companies mass-firing people even after they have record profits. Corporations essentially pay the bare minimum to keep people working because the federal government has done next to nothing about it in the last 20 or so years.

The current situation just isn't tenable, especially when you factor in the rise of automation and the very real possibility that many jobs will no longer exist.

 

[M3J]

The issue is the federal government shouldn't have to force states to give people a living wage. Yes, higher wages are needed in some places more than others, but treating the entire topic as a states rights issue like the GOP is wont to do is pretty mind-numbing.

I would have voted for a three-legged dog before Trump, so that can't be the only reason.

Well, I would guess many of those people tend to not have to worry about not having health insurance or being bankrupted by medical bills. Funny how that works.

Oh, I agree, but companies are hella selfish and profit-driven. they've done a great job of dividing workers so that even if they strike, there'll some idiots who'll replace them, while companies will boost up replacing workers with machines. I'm not surprised though, GOP doesn't give a shit about people, they just want businesses and wealthy people to do well even if it kills workers.

Or maybe they do, but they don't think Bernie could get it done. I forgot if Warren was for M4A, but I know BIden isn't. It's weird how liberals don't care to support M4A or wage increase or some other stuff. :\

 

[kkck]

Yeah idk, I'm not an economist. It just seems like the moral argument should supersede an economical one. If you work 40 hours a week you shouldn't be living in poverty. There's no "greater good" argument to be had when this is going on, regardless of whether this cuts into corporation's profits. The issue with the current system is profitability is valued more than the productivity of workers. This is why you see companies mass-firing people even after they have record profits. Corporations essentially pay the bare minimum to keep people working because the federal government has done next to nothing about it in the last 20 or so years.

The current situation just isn't tenable, especially when you factor in the rise of automation and the very real possibility that many jobs will no longer exist.

To me the moral and economic argument should go hand in hand. It's ok to rock the boat. But if you are on the boat its just not in your best interest to sink it. My experience in my country is basically that... except people seem keen on sinking the boat. Over the past few years productivity, employment and businesses have gone down.. And even then you see the minimum salary being increased (except this year). It is indispensable for the government to take real steps every year so that wages increase alongside productivity. That maintains a baseline for poverty, maintains consumer spending power, gives people the ability to afford shit, save money, start their own businesses... Automation is definitely an issue to consider though to me that comes around tax rates. How the government could help here is via making education more accessible so that people can do other things. The minimum wage doesn't actually affect whether automation happens or not, it just changes how fast it happens.

 

[M3J]

Universal basic income. Anyone making under a certain amount should be guaranteed certain amount every month.

 

[kkck]

Universal basic income. Anyone making under a certain amount should be guaranteed certain amount every month.

I will point out this is still a mostly experimental concept that has not been properly or sufficiently tested out yet. AND it should come from taxpayer money.

 

[xi0]

The way I see it is that it's inevitable. Those jobs aren't coming back, and the jobs created by it will require higher education and training that aren't viable for the majority of workers.

 

[M3J]

I will point out this is still a mostly experimental concept that has not been properly or sufficiently tested out yet. AND it should come from taxpayer money.

it has worked well so far though, via $600 weekly stimulus. Prevented an increase in poverty and probably decreased poverty, even.

And there'd be plenty of taxpayer money if companies and the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes.

 

[kkck]

it has worked well so far though, via $600 weekly stimulus. Prevented an increase in poverty and probably decreased poverty, even.

And there'd be plenty of taxpayer money if companies and the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes.

It's not quite the same thing. The stimulus is done via deficit spending. Which is fine for a stimulus. But if this is going to be regular policy then it's cannot indefinitely come from deficit spending. The country's fiscal and monetary policy has to make sense.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 28, 2021, Original Post Date: Jan 28, 2021 ---

The way I see it is that it's inevitable. Those jobs aren't coming back, and the jobs created by it will require higher education and training that aren't viable for the majority of workers.

Yeah, to some extent I agree. But this will still be an experiment on whose effects will be unknown until after the fact. Not sure of what you mean with the education bit. If the jobs require higher education then this is an issue of educating the workforce.

 

[xi0]

Yeah, to some extent I agree. But this will still be an experiment on whose effects will be unknown until after the fact. Not sure of what you mean with the education bit. If the jobs require higher education then this is an issue of educating the workforce.

Well yeah, but nothing is being done to make that education affordable either. Can't really pursue such a thing if you're unemployed. Plus, many won't be capable of doing so either.