SENATE BILL: Living Wage Act (law'd)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:15:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SENATE BILL: Living Wage Act (law'd)
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: SENATE BILL: Living Wage Act (law'd)  (Read 4557 times)
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 15, 2011, 01:03:04 AM »
« edited: December 03, 2011, 09:58:30 PM by bgwah »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsors: Bgwah, Marokai Blue
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2011, 11:02:22 PM »

For some reason I thought this might be controversial!
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2011, 12:07:33 AM »

It's discriminatory against younger workers.  I will not sign a bill that officially discriminates against certain age groups for no apparent reason.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2011, 05:16:14 PM »

For some reason I thought this might be controversial!

Storms kept me offline yesterday.


Such an aggressive increase combined with nothing in the way of small business tax releif will surely lead to an increase in unemployment. It would need a longer implementation period, atleast.

And just for lols the last time MB tried to sneak his marxian ideas through: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102029.0
Grin
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2011, 05:20:05 PM »

As to the President's objection, I can see his point about needing to be non-discriminatory, but the point of this is to ensure that adults can get a job and earn enough to have a somewhat decent living standard. Whereas that is not the same goal of someone younger. And raising the wage so agressively on younger people could make finding employment much harder, in what has already been a hard hit demographic.

Lastly, I would remind Senators, the current minimum is substantially higher compared with RL.  
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2011, 07:22:35 PM »

Forgive me for my brevity, Yankee, but I'm posting on my phone from a midnight movie line at the moment.

"Marxian"? Tongue the minimum wage in Atlasia is hardly substantially higher than rl. Many Candian provinces have higher minimum wages than we do and their economy is in superior shape to ours. Though I signed on to an increase with Bgwah, I will definitely accept amendments. Possibly move the wag to 11 dollars, for everyone, staggered over a couple years, possibly with different levels of increases for each region. Small business relief is also alright with me. Name it!
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 17, 2011, 08:00:15 PM »

Well we could could do it in the form of a tax credit of some kind or in the form of deductions? Which would be more preferable?
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 18, 2011, 03:37:10 AM »
« Edited: December 01, 2011, 06:00:52 PM by bgwah »

In response to the President, I offer the following amendment:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know, does Marokai have to accept it as friendly to?! Tongue
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 18, 2011, 04:46:36 AM »

I do, if it's a question!
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 18, 2011, 10:10:50 AM »

It's discriminatory against younger workers.  I will not sign a bill that officially discriminates against certain age groups for no apparent reason.

The purpose behind such a requirement is to provide a dis-incentive to businesses that provide menial and unskilled jobs to discriminate against older workers.  So while it may appear as 'official' discrimination, it really seeks to prevent it in practice.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2011, 10:57:11 AM »

A lot of the time, Markokai and I agree on things, which is scary to some voters, and sometimes, we don't see eye to eye. Tongue

The amendment makes it better, but with the minimum wage higher than it is in RL, I think raising it even more won't exactly help employment numbers with increasing costs for wages. Mind you, I am not advocating abolishment of a minimum wage at all, but the majority of those making minimum wage, I believe, are summer workers and teens that are not supporting themselves. And adding that age provision is fine, but it does seem discriminatory. I have seen some damn good 17 year old employees when I worked during the summers.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2011, 10:50:17 PM »

Well we could could do it in the form of a tax credit of some kind or in the form of deductions? Which would be more preferable?

Can I get some feedback here? Tongue
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 19, 2011, 07:15:18 PM »

The amendment has passed.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2011, 04:14:23 PM »

Well we could could do it in the form of a tax credit of some kind or in the form of deductions? Which would be more preferable?

Can I get some feedback here? Tongue

This is madness!!!
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2011, 05:03:43 PM »

It's kind of a vague comment. Tongue
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2011, 05:10:13 PM »

What is so vague about it? It asks whether we should use tax credits or tax deductions or even something else to help give small business some relief from the impact of this, aleast intially, so as to avoid them resorting to layoffs. We can even make it conditional on layoff decisions if so desired.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2011, 05:39:44 AM »

I can't support this amended version.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2011, 03:30:21 PM »

^The 21 to 18 difference? Why?
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: November 21, 2011, 03:48:53 PM »

It discourages the hiring of younger, less experienced workers. If we are selling this as a living wage, let it apply to those who are likeliest to have to support themselves. And if not, there should be no age cutoff.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: November 21, 2011, 11:36:03 PM »

It discourages the hiring of younger, less experienced workers. If we are selling this as a living wage, let it apply to those who are likeliest to have to support themselves. And if not, there should be no age cutoff.

I understand your concern, hence my original version, but I'm willing to compromise on this.

What is so vague about it? It asks whether we should use tax credits or tax deductions or even something else to help give small business some relief from the impact of this, aleast intially, so as to avoid them resorting to layoffs. We can even make it conditional on layoff decisions if so desired.

Draft a possible amendment doing this and I'll comment. Smiley
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2011, 12:18:09 AM »

It's too late tonight. Damn West Coast and your Pacific time zone!!!! Tongue
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2011, 09:18:58 PM »

This is just possible text, not an amendment

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2011, 09:21:34 PM »

I'd be fine with something along those lines, though 500k would need to be clarified. Revenue, gross income, something like that.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2011, 09:28:26 PM »

Decisions, decisions.


It depends on what size limitation you want. A company with $500,000 in revenue is much smaller then a company with 500,000 in Gross jncome, and considerably smaller then one with 500,000 in net income.

What is the largest size you are comfortable with?
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 24, 2011, 01:17:06 AM »

I would say $500,000 revenue, but I could support $500,000 gross income.

I don't see much reason why a company that makes $500,000 in net income a year should have to pay workers much less than what's proposed here. I could support making an exception for such companies if and only if they're in restructuring or losing money.

The purpose behind such a requirement is to provide a dis-incentive to businesses that provide menial and unskilled jobs to discriminate against older workers.  So while it may appear as 'official' discrimination, it really seeks to prevent it in practice.

How, exactly, is the language at issue supposed to do this?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 12 queries.