NY and Cali are the worst ****ing states to live in by far, especially for a low skilled worked. They tax like crazy.
Printable View
NY and Cali are the worst ****ing states to live in by far, especially for a low skilled worked. They tax like crazy.
This list of worst cities for minimum wage workers has no cities from NY or CA on it:Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/09/the-...e-workers.html
Here's another list of worst states for workers, where they specifically state:
https://www.businessinsider.com/wors...er-protections
Southern states like Alabama, Virginia, and Mississippi ranked poorly, as the minimum wage cannot fully cover the cost of living and because state policies prohibit unionization, Oxfam reports.
Even accounting for taxes. 30% taxes on $15 an hour still nets the employee more than 5% taxes on $7.25 an hour.
Yea but a gut feeling telling him that NY and CA are terrible surely overrules the statistics. Right?Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
It's total bs. I come from a high taxed county (Nassau) and I believe rent to live in someone's basement is about 1,500 a month. You can buy a house/fancy condo in the majority of the country for those kind of prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
Sure, but if you were paid $7.25 instead of $15 an hour you're not affording that either way. Heck, $7.25 for 40 hours a week is only $1,160 a month. You know what you can afford on that? someone's basement lolQuote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
Like I said, minimum wage hikes will never get people over the poverty line, pipe dream. On top of that, the minimum wage there isn't 15, it's about 10. And I guarantee you could make 7.25 work better than that 10 in about 95% of the rest of the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
But a minimum wage hike will help. I just don't buy the notion that giving minimum wage workers and extra $1-2 an hour actually makes them poorer, and that sounds like something people say to justify not having to give them $1-2 more.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
And I've been to much of the country. I've yet to find the place where I would consider my life good on $7.25 an hour.
Why does it make any sense for it to be set at the federal level as opposed to a local level?Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
I think there should be a federal bare minimum that is commiserate with a living wage at the lowest state level (living wage being something along the lines of housing, food, transportation), and states and municipalities/cities should be able to determine their levels beyond that (or keep it at the federal level). I agree, $15 is too much for many parts of the country and it makes no sense to make that the federal level. My position is there is nowhere where $7.25 gets you housing, food, and transportation at a sanitary, safe, and clean manner. To live on $7.25 you are either sacrificing your health, your safety, or your sanity.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
That ain't happening at 15 either, lol. Unless we're talking about the regions with a low cost of living, the same regions that can't afford it. San Fran has a 15 dollar wage I think, right? You make 30k a year there and you're still on government assistance.Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
Sure, if by worst states you mean the most desirable states to live in.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
If you have money...Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)
Wow..Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyc77
It's dead argument bro.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
That's kinda how life works.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
We're specifically talking about people that don't, you know, minimum wage employees, you silly goose.Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)