Corporations aren't shifting their labor costs onto the tax payers. Government burdens the tax payers with other peoples bills.

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

OK, fine, now who's going to pay for it? Those corporations? Bye.

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of somebody else's money. This would run you out pretty fast.

Do you ever make even a feeble attempt to look at your proposals through the eyes of the other side? You'd find some pretty severe flaws if you did.

(08-25-2018 07:16 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Bernie Sander’s has an idea to force corporations to payback 100% of the public assistance of any employee who has to have it.

So, it's a "cost of living" tax? It is a universal truth that corporations don't pay taxes; their customers do. This idea, if implemented, would simply increase the cost of goods and services and/or put people out of work.

It's not the job of a business to make sure that people have a living wage. It's the job of a business to make sure that they pay people enough money to ensure that their business functions optimally.

If a government decides that it wants to set some arbitrary levels of standard of living then it should be up to the government and the voting public to pay for it.

A business may decide to pay their employees really well so that they have a comfortable lifestyle, but that is a decision based off of business efficiency, not beneficence.

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 07:16 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Should workers for corporations ever have to be on public assistance?

Bernie Sander’s has an idea to force corporations to payback 100% of the public assistance of any employee who has to have it.

What a novel idea.

The guy is smart. That would start forcing some of the money out of the 1% hands.

Thoughts?

Two quick thoughts.

How do you differentiate between a corporation and a small business? The Obamacare 50 employee threshold?

Corporations will just continue down the line of contracting out services.


I do like the idea though.

Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

A random grab bag of services declared as “human rights”. No housing, water, and food? Someone isn’t sufficiently woke.

(08-25-2018 11:14 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

OK, fine, now who's going to pay for it? Those corporations? Bye.

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of somebody else's money. This would run you out pretty fast.

Do you ever make even a feeble attempt to look at your proposals through the eyes of the other side? You'd find some pretty severe flaws if you did.

I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and

We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.

We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

(08-25-2018 01:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 11:14 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

OK, fine, now who's going to pay for it? Those corporations? Bye.
The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of somebody else's money. This would run you out pretty fast.
Do you ever make even a feeble attempt to look at your proposals through the eyes of the other side? You'd find some pretty severe flaws if you did.

I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and
We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.
We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

You've just made it impossible for any US-based business or investment to compete in the global economy. You just ran out of other people's money, because you just ran that money out of the country. Now what do you do?

Again, I ask you the same question I've asked before on other issues. Have you ever looked at any issue from a different point of view? Consider all the people that you are going to hurt financially to pay for your schemes. How do you expect them to react and why?

And no, Muffy doesn't ave to move to Mogadishu to escape your tentacles. Although, quite frankly, off the money you're potentially talking here, Muffy could probably live better in Mogadishu than New York.

(08-25-2018 07:16 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Should workers for corporations ever have to be on public assistance?

Bernie Sander’s has an idea to force corporations to payback 100% of the public assistance of any employee who has to have it.

What a novel idea.

The guy is smart. That would start forcing some of the money out of the 1% hands.

Thoughts?

Two quick thoughts.

How do you differentiate between a corporation and a small business? The Obamacare 50 employee threshold?

Corporations will just continue down the line of contracting out services.


I do like the idea though.

No.

Now, should workers be responsible for putting themselves in a position to make more?

The question would boil down to wages. The next would be just how much to you think corporations should pay for "monkey see, monkey do" jobs?

People in the Bernie camp LOVE to bloviate about $15/hr. What they fail to grasp is that it's not just a wage increase for some, it's cumulative. If you're currently in a position making $15/hr and next week the people in the "trained ape" jobs are making the same as YOU, you're going to go in and ask for a raise. You were worth $8/hr more BEFORE, so why not after?

The only thing doing that would do is create the same situation but on a greater scale.

Corporations should be allowed to pay what they believe is market value for the job in question. If someone's life experiences, skills, and training only allows them access to minimum wage jobs, that's on THEM, not the corporation and not government.

(08-25-2018 01:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 01:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 11:14 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

OK, fine, now who's going to pay for it? Those corporations? Bye.
The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of somebody else's money. This would run you out pretty fast.
Do you ever make even a feeble attempt to look at your proposals through the eyes of the other side? You'd find some pretty severe flaws if you did.

I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and
We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.
We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

You've just made it impossible for any US-based business or investment to compete in the global economy. You just ran out of other people's money, because you just ran that money out of the country. Now what do you do?

Again, I ask you the same question I've asked before on other issues. Have you ever looked at any issue from a different point of view? Consider all the people that you are going to hurt financially to pay for your schemes. How do you expect them to react and why?

And no, Muffy doesn't ave to move to Mogadishu to escape your tentacles. Although, quite frankly, off the money you're potentially talking here, Muffy could probably live better in Mogadishu than New York.

And you just ended all new drug development on the planet. The US funds it all.

Now we need to talk to other countries about their fixed drug prices which essentially expropriate American intellectual property.

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 07:16 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Should workers for corporations ever have to be on public assistance?

Bernie Sander’s has an idea to force corporations to payback 100% of the public assistance of any employee who has to have it.

What a novel idea.

The guy is smart. That would start forcing some of the money out of the 1% hands.

Thoughts?

Two quick thoughts.

How do you differentiate between a corporation and a small business? The Obamacare 50 employee threshold?

Corporations will just continue down the line of contracting out services.


I do like the idea though.

Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

So you're shifting the costs from taxpayers to consumers because those additional costs will be passed along. That's how a market economy works, costs are built into the product so if costs go up, so will prices.

A $15 minimum wage might work in New Hampshire where white people actually do jobs like collect garbage and clean hotel rooms. It might work in NYC where its too expensive to go to Manhattan to work at $7.25. But with all the illegal aliens in many parts of the country, it will lead to automation and/or more illegals as well as the closing of many businesses.

(08-25-2018 01:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 11:14 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

OK, fine, now who's going to pay for it? Those corporations? Bye.

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of somebody else's money. This would run you out pretty fast.

Do you ever make even a feeble attempt to look at your proposals through the eyes of the other side? You'd find some pretty severe flaws if you did.

I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and

We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.

We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

If you think "jobs are going to China" and capital is going overseas now, just wait until THAT gets enacted.

(08-25-2018 07:16 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Should workers for corporations ever have to be on public assistance?

Bernie Sander’s has an idea to force corporations to payback 100% of the public assistance of any employee who has to have it.

What a novel idea.

The guy is smart. That would start forcing some of the money out of the 1% hands.

Thoughts?

Two quick thoughts.

How do you differentiate between a corporation and a small business? The Obamacare 50 employee threshold?

Corporations will just continue down the line of contracting out services.


I do like the idea though.

How about this though.... a family of 4 making 110k where I am is considered 'low income'. A family of 3 would not be. A family of 8 would be low income well below there.

Why is a corporation responsible for my family choices? Why should someone who CAN'T have kids be paid less for the same work than someone who has lots of them? Why should a couple who both work, each making 70k per year get no assistance, but a couple where one spouse decides to sit at home all day gets assistance (or a pay raise)

The list of 'choices' that go into the conversation are vast.

(08-25-2018 10:02 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  even Trump agrees the MW is too low.

"The minimum wage has to go up. People are -- at least $10, but it has to go up. But I think that states -- federal -- I think that states should really call the shot. As an example, I live in New York. It's very expensive in New York. You can't buy a hot dog for the money you're talking about. You go to other states and it's not expensive at all. Now what it does is puts New York at a disadvantage if the minimum wage is up, companies move out and things, bad things happen. At the same time, people have to be taken care of. But what I'm really going to do on the minimum wage -- but it has to go up.. .. So I would like to raise it to at least $10."

I also think the tipped MW should be doubled to 4.26 an hour...JMHO

1) in NY, and I agree. The MW in SF is $15. That's a local decision.
2) the tipped MW is a bit of a fallacy though in that the law requires that you earn (including tips) at least the federal MW which I think is around $7.25 and higher in many places. The 'tipped' MW is not what they're allowed to pay you in total.... just their REQUIRED contribution to your income.... said differently... if your tips are paying you $20/hr, then the company only has to pay you 2.13/hr for a total of $22.13. If the tips are paying you $2.50/hr then the company can't just pay you $4.63 and call it a day. They have to pay you $7.25. I'm pretty sure of this having run the books for a 'tipping' company, but I'll be happy being corrected by someone with actual tax or company running experience

(08-25-2018 01:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and

We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.

We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

Then why don't you and those who agree with you band together and live in a self-governed community and enact such things.... and see what happens.

The funny thing about all of these proposals is they always seem to come from people either not subject to many/any of the taxes or who COULD voluntarily make such contributions already, yet they don't.

Why do we need to wait on the government to do it for us? We'll set up a 501 charity... and you and anyone else who would like to participate can contribute any of those pieces they can... let's start with these as they would be easy to calculate, administer and donate....

35% tax on carried interest, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year... you can merely stop making any charitable donations that don't go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons and not join any private clubs etc (including property taxes) holding property worth over 500,000..... and a voluntary property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000.

Take all that money that the government won't take from you... and elect your OWN government to administer those funds. Assist people in your community, etc etc etc.

When everyone else sees how great that works, it WILL catch on and everyone will do it.

Why does this almost NEVER happen?

It's somewhat close in SF... and I recently gave a mandated 'market adjustment' raise to all of my employees based solely on tenure. Of course, that means my worst employees got raises and my best employees didn't as they were already above the market... and they're not happy as you'd imagine. Amusingly, we also gave out bonuses based on customer satisfaction at our facilities... and of course the poor performers who just got a raise kept the better performers from getting as much of a bonus. The poor employees are very happy. Everyone is encouraged to 'do less'.

A lesson in the problems of socialism in the socialism capital of the US.

I like your first paragraph Hambone and that is a fair argument. Sounds like an argument for being pro choice though.

(08-25-2018 04:33 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 07:16 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Should workers for corporations ever have to be on public assistance?

Bernie Sander’s has an idea to force corporations to payback 100% of the public assistance of any employee who has to have it.

What a novel idea.

The guy is smart. That would start forcing some of the money out of the 1% hands.

Thoughts?

Two quick thoughts.

How do you differentiate between a corporation and a small business? The Obamacare 50 employee threshold?

Corporations will just continue down the line of contracting out services.


I do like the idea though.

How about this though.... a family of 4 making 110k where I am is considered 'low income'. A family of 3 would not be. A family of 8 would be low income well below there.

Why is a corporation responsible for my family choices? Why should someone who CAN'T have kids be paid less for the same work than someone who has lots of them? Why should a couple who both work, each making 70k per year get no assistance, but a couple where one spouse decides to sit at home all day gets assistance (or a pay raise)

The list of 'choices' that go into the conversation are vast.

(08-25-2018 10:02 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  even Trump agrees the MW is too low.

"The minimum wage has to go up. People are -- at least $10, but it has to go up. But I think that states -- federal -- I think that states should really call the shot. As an example, I live in New York. It's very expensive in New York. You can't buy a hot dog for the money you're talking about. You go to other states and it's not expensive at all. Now what it does is puts New York at a disadvantage if the minimum wage is up, companies move out and things, bad things happen. At the same time, people have to be taken care of. But what I'm really going to do on the minimum wage -- but it has to go up.. .. So I would like to raise it to at least $10."

I also think the tipped MW should be doubled to 4.26 an hour...JMHO

1) in NY, and I agree. The MW in SF is $15. That's a local decision.
2) the tipped MW is a bit of a fallacy though in that the law requires that you earn (including tips) at least the federal MW which I think is around $7.25 and higher in many places. The 'tipped' MW is not what they're allowed to pay you in total.... just their REQUIRED contribution to your income.... said differently... if your tips are paying you $20/hr, then the company only has to pay you 2.13/hr for a total of $22.13. If the tips are paying you $2.50/hr then the company can't just pay you $4.63 and call it a day. They have to pay you $7.25. I'm pretty sure of this having run the books for a 'tipping' company, but I'll be happy being corrected by someone with actual tax or company running experience

(08-25-2018 01:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and

We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.

We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

Then why don't you and those who agree with you band together and live in a self-governed community and enact such things.... and see what happens.

I think that's California...

I think this is a horrible idea and another reason why Sanders and his ilk are a threat to America's future.

I have no problem helping those in need that work through some type of workfare program and subsidizing those that simply can not take care of themselves due to a physical or mental prohibition. I think we can find the funds to handle this without doing what ever Liberal do-gooder instantly does...."bring a gun into the room" and use the force of government to solve the problem.

(08-26-2018 09:08 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I think this is a horrible idea and another reason why Sanders and his ilk are a threat to America's future.

I have no problem helping those in need that work through some type of workfare program and subsidizing those that simply can not take care of themselves due to a physical or mental prohibition. I think we can find the funds to handle this without doing what ever Liberal do-gooder instantly does...."bring a gun into the room" and use the force of government to solve the problem.

trying to 'do-good' isn't a bad thing...

(08-26-2018 09:12 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 09:08 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I think this is a horrible idea and another reason why Sanders and his ilk are a threat to America's future.

I have no problem helping those in need that work through some type of workfare program and subsidizing those that simply can not take care of themselves due to a physical or mental prohibition. I think we can find the funds to handle this without doing what ever Liberal do-gooder instantly does...."bring a gun into the room" and use the force of government to solve the problem.

trying to 'do-good' isn't a bad thing...

Doing good isnt a bad thing. Trying to do good is often disasterous.

(08-25-2018 01:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 11:14 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:37 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its a good idea for large corporations, who are effectively shifting their labor costs onto the taxpayers. But there's a whole lot of mess involved with implementation. A living wage minimum wage act, and requirements for health care, child care, and education as a fundamental right would probably be a better way to go.

OK, fine, now who's going to pay for it? Those corporations? Bye.

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of somebody else's money. This would run you out pretty fast.

Do you ever make even a feeble attempt to look at your proposals through the eyes of the other side? You'd find some pretty severe flaws if you did.

I see nothing wrong with a 15 dollar minimum wage and

We could pay for it, easily with a 35% tax on carried interest, recapture of health care reserves, reinstating estate tax levels of greater than 5 million with taxation, a AMT flat tax of 35% on all income over 350,000 per year, a requirement that all charitable donations go to the public good and not be accessible by a private group of persons, an end to tax free status for private clubs (including property taxes, which would help the states and cities immensely) holding property worth over 500,000.....as well as a ban on pharmaceutical companies charging more in the USA than they do in the G20 for drugs, etc. If that doesn't cover it, a Federal property tax on people who hold real property in excess of 1,000,000 might help too.

We'd probably run a budget surplus at those levels.

There's the full blown socialist we all knew lurked just under the surface. Admit it, this all stems from jealousy of and hatred for the rich and those who've worked to position themselves to live better than you.

(08-26-2018 09:12 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 09:08 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I think this is a horrible idea and another reason why Sanders and his ilk are a threat to America's future.

I have no problem helping those in need that work through some type of workfare program and subsidizing those that simply can not take care of themselves due to a physical or mental prohibition. I think we can find the funds to handle this without doing what ever Liberal do-gooder instantly does...."bring a gun into the room" and use the force of government to solve the problem.

trying to 'do-good' isn't a bad thing...

It is if you're the only one who thinks it's good.