Barbara Lee, candidate for US Senate from California, defends call for $50 federal minimum wage: 'Just barely enough'

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

California Dem defends call for $50 federal minimum wage: 'Just barely enough'

Rep. Barbara Lee, who is running for US Senate, wants to significantly boost the amount minimum wage workers nationwide are paid.

wgme.com

California Dem defends call for $50 federal minimum wage: 'Just barely enough'​

---

by JACKSON WALKER | The National Desk
Wed, February 14th 2024 at 11:18 AM

WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 20: U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) participates in a news conference outside the U.S. Capitol May 20, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

1
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (TND) — Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., on Monday defended her demand for a $50 federal minimum wage, citing the high cost of living for Californians.
If implemented, Rep. Lee’s proposal would hike the current federal wage roughly seven times the current $7.25 minimum. The remarks came during a U.S. Senate debate in which Rep. Lee’s Democratic challengers called for wages between $20 and $25.

I know what worker productivity means and that means that you have to make sure your employees are taken care of and have a living wage,” Rep. Lee said, noting her past experience as a small business owner.

The representative continued, citing a United Way report that showed $127,000 is “just barely enough to get by” for a family of four in the San Francisco Bay Area. Another individual making $104,000 annually would be classified as low income, Rep. Lee said, citing another report.
“Just do that math. Just do that math,” Rep. Lee said. “Of course we have national minimum wages that we need to raise to a living wage. You’re talking about 20, 25 dollars, fine. But I have got to be focused on what California needs and what the affordability factor is when we calculate this wage.”

Rep. Lee is running to replace Sen. Diane Feinstein, who passed away in 2023. Sen. Laphonza Butler, D-Calif, who was appointed to fill Sen. Feinstein's seat, is not running for reelection.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas., laughed at the suggestion, writing on social media Tuesday “why not $500 per hour?”
"California is a clown car of stupidity," jeered commentator Dave Rubin.
The representative's demands come as fast casual giant Chipotle is warning of a “significant increase” in prices at its California locations. The move is in response to a looming minimum wage hike for California fast food workers in April.
“We anticipate wage inflation will tick up to the mid-single digit range as California wages go up around 20% in April this year,” Chipotle Chief Financial and Administrative Officer Jack Hartung said on an earnings call. “We know we have to take something as a significant increase when you talk about a 20 percent-ish increase in wages.”

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I'm pretty sure she's just trying to move the Overton Window, but this would be a nice compromise with the people who refuse to give a Universal Basic Income. Incentivizes work, but also provides a means to live on limited work and properly compensates true full-time work.

10 hours/week = $25,000 a year
20 hours/week = $50,000 a year
40 hours/week = $100,000 a year

If you're doing real, productive work, I ain't upset at that. Makes a hell of a lot more ethical and logical sense than Blackstone's CEO getting paid $5 million every week, or renters and investors making bank while doing nothing at all.

Also shows how ridiculous it was that people were upset about a $15/hour minimum wage....which is just $30,000 a year. Actual "democrat" posters on this forum were angry that people who worked full-time all year long would pull in $30,000 when you need twice that to afford your own housing in most of the country nowadays!


In the future of almost limitless AI and automation, where there isn't going to be remotely enough living-wage productive work to go around, what's the alternative?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I'm pretty sure she's just trying to move the Overton Window, but this would be a nice compromise with the people who refuse to give a Universal Basic Income. Incentivizes work, but also provides a means to live on limited work and properly compensates true full-time work.

10 hours/week = $25,000 a year
20 hours/week = $50,000 a year
40 hours/week = $100,000 a year

If you're doing real, productive work, I ain't upset at that. Makes a hell of a lot more ethical and logical sense than Blackstone's CEO getting paid $5 million every week, or renters and investors making bank while doing nothing at all.

Also shows how ridiculous it was that people were upset about a $15/hour minimum wage....which is just $30,000 a year. Actual "democrat" posters on this forum were angry that people who worked full-time all year long would pull in $30,000 when you need twice that to afford your own housing in most of the country nowadays!


In the future of almost limitless AI and automation, where there isn't going to be remotely enough living-wage productive work to go around, what's the alternative?

I like that you took this seriously. It’s cute.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I like that you took this seriously. It’s cute.

I'm fairly certain you know what "she's just trying to move the Overton Window" means, which shows that yet again you're being disingenuous rather than actually consider any viewpoint other than your own.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I'm fairly certain you know what "she's just trying to move the Overton Window" means, which shows that yet again you're being disingenuous rather than actually consider any viewpoint other than your own.

What’s more disingenuous than just throwing out numerically symmetrical numbers instead of trying to create situations to stabilize service workers lives and not chasing failed state controlled economic income mandates?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

What’s more disingenuous than just throwing out numerically symmetrical numbers instead of trying to create situations to stabilize service workers lives and not chasing failed state controlled economic income mandates?

If you were trying to create a perfect recursive sentence right there, you won.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

If you were trying to create a perfect recursive sentence right there, you won.

You were legitimately owed by a progressive senator candidate in a blue state suggesting that minimum wage be an attractive number multiple

Again, why not $1000?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You were legitimately owed by a progressive senator candidate in a blue state suggesting that minimum wage be an attractive number multiple

Again, why not $1000?

When are you going to admit you know what "just trying to move the Overton Window" means?


You've been shytting on the idea of a $15/hour minimum wage for the last 10 years. Just $30k a year for full-time work, hardly a liveable income, and yet you attacked it over and over. What's she's doing is continuing to expose your ass. She wasn't calling for $50/hour because she thinks anyone is actually going to consider $50/hour, she's calling out that number to emphasize how insufficient current working-class wages still are.


Here's a question for you. How much an hour do you make? And, if you had a family, how much would you actually be able to put to the side each month on that income?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

When are you going to admit you know what "just trying to move the Overton Window" means?

This is such lazy argumentation from you “@Rhakim”.

Who gives a fukk where she’s moving it? Yall were moving the goalpost from barely 2 years ago in the “fight for 15…” now its…well why not 50?

I mean fukk it, why not $1000? You haven’t said why this is such a bad idea

You've been shytting on the idea of a $15/hour minimum wage for the last 10 years.

Because I do not, nor have I ever, considered a minimum wage to be the standard of a basic quality of living and have never thought it should become one

Just $30k a year for full-time work, hardly a liveable income, and yet you attacked it over and over.

“livable” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

For instance, municipalities are FINALLY changing zoning laws and building more housing and allowing more repurposing of old property…which is SHOCKINGLY bringing down housing prices around the country.



You dont need to spike inflation (a real thing as we’ve seen in real time) by ignoring other quality of life issues such as housing, on a fundamental level

Oh and gas is low as hell right now so if EV’s aren’t going to make the cut, might as well make it easy to get around conventionally.

What's she's doing is continuing to expose your ass. She wasn't calling for $50/hour because she thinks anyone is actually going to consider $50/hour,

Oh, so she’s trolling. Got it.

she's calling out that number to emphasize how insufficient current working-class wages still are.

You do that by mitigating the weakness of the power of the dollar in an economy that doesn’t provide for more return on spending, as I just mentioned.

Expanding healthcare access, making education cheaper, making housing cheaper etc.

You make the things people need to live cheaper, you can’t just MW your way out of poverty

Here's a question for you. How much an hour do you make? And, if you had a family, how much would you actually be able to put to the side each month on that income?

I’m not answering this.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

This is such lazy argumentation from you “@Rhakim”.

Who gives a fukk where she’s moving it? Yall were moving the goalpost from barely 2 years ago in the “fight for 15…” now its…well why not 50?

Oh, so she’s trolling. Got it.

Now I'm starting to believe you really don't know what "Trying to shift the Overton Window" means.

No, it doesn't mean "moving the goalpost" or "trolling".

And yes, considering that the fight for a $15 minimum wage started 12 years ago, why are you surprised that it isn't actually sufficient anymore in 2024?

I’m not answering this.

Of course you won't.

You don't want to openly admit that you think you're better than everyone else, and what's good enough for them isn't nearly good enough for you. You also don't want to admit that your expenses are such that, if you actually had a family, $15/hour would be a fukking joke and $50/hour would be barely borderline.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Now I'm starting to believe you really don't know what "Trying to shift the Overton Window" means.

You keep doing this thing where repeating some basic shyt and having it rejected means people don’t understand you.

No. I just think you’re not using the term properly and if you really mean this, then you AND Barbara Lee are idiots.

You can’t move the Overton window without actually being serious. e.g. “hey lets talk about pegging MW to inflation”…not “hey lets move the MW to $50 cause…reasons"

You’d just sooner admit to gaslighting.

No, it doesn't mean "moving the goalpost" or "trolling".

You play dictionary games because you can’t win on policy.

And yes, considering that the fight for a $15 minimum wage started 12 years ago, why are you surprised that it isn't actually sufficient anymore in 2024?

You didn’t answer why $1000/hr isn’t on the table.

Of course you won't.

Go back to defending a mythical minimum wage worker (less than 2-5%, depending on the demographic/field, make minimum wage

You don't want to openly admit that you think you're better than everyone else,

…I mean...

and what's good enough for them isn't nearly good enough for you.

…I mean...

You also don't want to admit that your expenses are such that, if you actually had a family, $15/hour would be a fukking joke and $50/hour would be barely borderline.

OK @Rhakim, why shouldn’t it be $1000?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You keep doing this thing where repeating some basic shyt and having it rejected means people don’t understand you.

No. I just think you’re not using the term properly and if you really mean this, then you AND Barbara Lee are idiots.

You can’t move the Overton window without actually being serious. e.g. “hey lets talk about pegging MW to inflation”…not “hey lets move the MW to $50 cause…reasons"

You’d just sooner admit to gaslighting.

Breh, "Let's talk about pegging MW to inflation" would be asking for the bare minimum necessary, it would NOT represent an effort to shift the Overton Window. I'm 100% convinced now that you really don't know what I said there.

You didn’t answer why $1000/hr isn’t on the table.

Because it wouldn't demonstrate anything.

Talking about $50/hour, and showing how minimal even that wage actually is to meet basic needs in today's economy, helps prove something about why $15/hour isn't that much at all. Saying $1000/hour would have no such effect. I thought that was obvious from the beginning, but clearly I was overestimating you.

There's a reason why you don't want to mention your own hourly wage or give a figure for what would represent your own minimal family expenses. Because you know that admitting how hard it is for you to make such a budget would prove the same point she was making.

 

[the cac mamba]

OK @Rhakim, why shouldn’t it be $1000?

i knew i recognized that pretentious posting style

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Because I do not, nor have I ever, considered a minimum wage to be the standard of a basic quality of living and have never thought it should become one

Do you know what housing, food, transport, health care, quality education, and legal representation all have in common?

Access to every single one is mitigated by how much money you have.

You can try to equalize access to every one of those, one at a time, municipality by municipality. It's hard as fukk. Or you can actually raise the floor of how much money the people at the bottom have and improve their chances at all of them all at once.

You dont need to spike inflation (a real thing as we’ve seen in real time)

Inflation is barely impacted at all by minimum wages. Increasing the wage floor disproportionately helps the people at the bottom, it's not possible to cause an increase in inflation nearly as large as the boost you're giving the poor when the extra funds you're injecting are only going to the poor.

There's a reason why those who care about the rich (see: Reagan Administration) are always OBSESSED with inflation. The fact that the poor get more money while the power of the wealthy's dollar decreases slightly is a double loss for them.

Oh and gas is low as hell right now

This is out of touch as fukk.

Gas isn't "low as hell" right now, and gas is only a minor portion of the cost of transportation. Are you simultaneously going to bring down the cost of a car, cost of maintenance, cost of insurance, AND gas prices? Or maybe just make sure they have more money to start with.

Expanding healthcare access, making education cheaper, making housing cheaper etc.

You make the things people need to live cheaper, you can’t just MW your way out of poverty

Even if you COULD do all of that simultaneously, which is almost impossibly difficult in a capitalist society, that still wouldn't equalize access. If the cheapest shyt were somewhat cheaper, but there continued to be massive disparities in wages, then poor people could at most just hope to get the very bottom level of everything. The worst education, the worst health care, the worst housing, etc. And it's easy as fukk for the rich to continue to create incentives (luring doctors away, luring lawyers away, luring teachers away, buying up extra housing, etc.) which keep the poor from getting jack shyt.

If you increase the low-end wages and bring them closer to the other wages, you give the poorest people a chance to actually be competitive in each of those domains, so that they can access the real shyt and not just get the dregs of everything else as mediated by capitalism.

 

[88m3]

great way to inflame inflation and give corporations an even greater stranglehold over society and the economy




I regularly pay people that much or more for skilled labor but it's really an outrageous sum of money for the majority of the workforce