Re: Oh my Gawd! Carly!

On Apr 27, 7:42 pm, James Arthur <dagmargoodb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:20 am, MooseFET <kensm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Apr 25, 7:25 pm, James Arthur <bogusabd...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Joel Koltner wrote:
Hi James,

"James Arthur" <bogusabd...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:XEoQj.42$TS5.4@xxxxxxxxxxx
When he did get a minimum wage job, local "living wage" rules meant the kid
earned enough to raise a small family, for bagging groceries. No wonder
they can't afford to hire many workers!

Rather than eliminating minimum wage laws, a better approach might be to
expand the "farm worker" laws to encompass more people? It's a hard
question -- while obviously most teens are living with their parents who are
supported by them, there certainly are older teens out there supporting
themselves largely or completely independently from their parents and as just
as "deserving" of the minimum wage as, e.g., some 40-year-old is.

Or maybe we just need to make it easier for teens to declare themselves as
independents: In college a few kids did that because they didn't qualify for
student loans or grants based on the buckets of money their parents had, yet
said parents weren't volunteering any of it to help the kid put himself
through school either.

Too many exceptions. Why not just let people work for whatever it is
they're willing to work for?

How about:
because it leads to most people being in poverty and a few being very
rich.

Hmm, so the existence of any minmum wage--natural or enforced--means
that all wages are driven to that minimum, and we're all working for
it as we speak.

No that is not what I said. I suggested that the reason to have a
minimum wage was to prevent the majority of people from being force
into poverty.


Why not encourage retirees to get out
and make some pocket change, and contribute to their health & society
even if they don't need the money?

How about:
because we will all be old some day and we don't want to die in
poverty.

Allowing older folks to participate, earn & contribute condemns them
to poverty? I see your point.

Better to prevent them from working, then make up the difference with
government money--it's free, after all.

It isn't free but wouldn't you agree it is worth the cost if it
prevents us from all dieing in poverty.


Grins,
James Arthur

.