|
thehomemaster posted:Hey look raising the mimum wage is fine, but $15 bucks an hour? Nah, get out. Is there some specific number we absolutely cannot raise the minimum wage above?
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:28 |
|
|
paragon1 posted:If they could fire people to increase profits without it affecting their products or services then why aren't they doing it right now and making their shareholders more money like they're supposed to? Employment levels are manageable currently. Wages have been near the same for a whil now so the big brains in the corporate world have already calculated exactly how many people they can field at 10 an hour as opposed to how many are needed.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Is there some specific number we absolutely cannot raise the minimum wage above? ∞
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Is there some specific number we absolutely cannot raise the minimum wage above? Yes. 7.75 has been said to be the healthiest wage for a low wage earner, but we'd have to actually have an economy to make that work.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Yes. 7.75 has been said to be the healthiest wage for a low wage earner, but we'd have to actually have an economy to make that work. Said by who, besides forums poster and labor economist LeoMarr?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:Higher Min wage seems like a pretty good incentive. Inflation comes later if a bunch of bankers piss the bed when the poor's knock down their lawn ornaments. A higher minimum wage means less people will be employed. Inflation and the minimum wage really have no link, there isn't enough money added to the pot to matter there. What I am suggesting is that Businesses can pay people less, the government picks up the difference and then some so those people take home more money. The government then sets up the incentives so that as those people climb out of minimum wage jobs the subsidies make that profitable for them before leveling out then decreasing.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Foma posted:A higher minimum wage means less people will be employed. Does it?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Employment levels are manageable currently. Wages have been near the same for a whil now so the big brains in the corporate world have already calculated exactly how many people they can field at 10 an hour as opposed to how many are needed. Way to miss the point completely dingus. Why are managers wasting shareholder money paying people they don't need? Why would I choose between 10 people at 5 and 5 people at 10 when I could have 5 people at 5?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Your question implies you think it should always rise, even above CPI. Also, such a massive leap in wages is risky.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Does it? Economists and empiricism say no, but my gut says absolutely, it does.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Does it? Yes It does, do you know why? Because higher wages favor those who already have jobs. a 5 dollar wage increase massively increases your operating costs. SO lets go back to 10 employees at 10 bucks a pop Jumps to 15 10 employees at 15 bucks an hour now costs you 150 instead of 100. a 33% increase in operating costs in a split second. Please tell me some businesses that could handle losing 1600 per day for 10 employees. So maybe they manage with 9 and drop 1 guy. That spot is now gone until the business can handle hiring another person. So the unemployed person that may have gotten that job when so and so moved on now has no job. Because 9 workers are making 15 bucks and they're happy as gently caress why would they quit now?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:Economists and empiricism say no, but my gut says absolutely, it does. I am pretty a majority of Economists would say a higher minimum wage leads to less jobs.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
Foma posted:A higher minimum wage means less people will be employed. Prove it. This is a massive assumption that does not match up with history. Foma posted:Inflation and the minimum wage really have no link, there isn't enough money added to the pot to matter there. The minimum wage jobs will always be there though, and there will be somebody working for them. Why should the U.S. government subsidize Wal-Mart and McDonald's poo poo employment practices?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:10 employees at 15 bucks an hour now costs you 150 instead of 100. a 33% increase in operating costs in a split second. ahahahahahaha oh wait you're serious 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Foma posted:I am pretty a majority of Economists would say a higher minimum wage leads to less jobs. If you're pretty sure maybe you could post some proof, or a survey, or some data. I'm pretty sure a majority of industrial workers long for full communism.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Yes It does, do you know why? Because higher wages favor those who already have jobs. a 5 dollar wage increase massively increases your operating costs. Hm, incorrectly calculated elementary school level math. You have defeated the economists, and recorded history.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:ahahahahahaha Yeah I mean you have less training costs because higher minimum wage does decrease employee turnover for slightly higher paying jobs. However it does not decrease unemployment.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Some itneresting pointers on issues around minimum wage: http://marginalrevolution.com/?s=minimum+wage
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Foma posted:A higher minimum wage means less people will be employed.  less demand for inferior/discount goods might adversely affect dollar stores but that's okay because those stores only exist because of free trade agreements that make it profitable to ship products of foreign labor here
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:ahahahahahaha Yeah, it's well-known that labor is 100% of operating costs. In fact, this is the USA, so it's 110%!!! I mean, that's kind of a bigger deal than 150% being a 33% increase from 100%. Baby steps.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Foma posted:I am pretty a majority of Economists would say a higher minimum wage leads to less jobs. I'm pretty sure I posted a link in this thread that said that you are incorrect and that I hosed yer mum
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
thehomemaster posted:Some itneresting pointers on issues around minimum wage: Lmao yeah let me listen to some George Mason economics professors about literally anything.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Workers don't spend their money on goods/services provided by businesses so smart businesses will pay their workers less. checkmate leftards
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
More recently, Mindy Marks found that the $0.90 per hour increase in the federal minimum-wage rate in 1990 reduced the probability of workers receiving employer-provided health insurance from 66.2 percent to 63.1 percent, and increased the likelihood that covered workers would be reduced to part-time work by 26 percent. Additionally, North Carolina State University economist Walter Wessels determined that a wage increase caused New York retailers to increase work demands. In most stores, fewer workers were given fewer hours to do the same work as before. And if the minimum wage were raised to $10.10 an hour, for example, the estimated 16.5 million workers earning between $7.25 and $10.10 could lose nonmonetary compensation more valuable than the $31 billion in additional wages they are expected to receive.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
thehomemaster posted:Some itneresting pointers on issues around minimum wage:  oh my god this graph look at it
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:
That sure is a graph all right. It has 9000 whole units on the y-axis
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Foma posted:I am pretty a majority of Economists would say a higher minimum wage leads to less jobs. thehomemaster posted:Your question implies you think it should always rise, even above CPI. Also, such a massive leap in wages is risky. We had a 45% increase less than ten years ago. When will this risk appear?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:If you're pretty sure maybe you could post some proof, or a survey, or some data. quote:Surveys of economists[edit] Here is your wikipedia poo poo dump. But it is pretty much common sense if you increase the cost to business there will be some marginal jobs that are no longer worth it. Sure helping out the other workers earn more might make up for it and not too many people will be impacted, but ALL THAT IS UNNECESSARY. If you just lower the minimum wage add those marginal jobs back in then add some more marginal jobs. Then have the government give money too all those workers so they make more then they would have made with a modest increase in the minimum wage. then you tax the rich some to pay for all this
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Who cares about low-skilled workers, they're just Mexicans, right?paragon1 posted:You gonna cite something or do we just go with our guts? Because mine disagrees with yours. Yeah but America, man. They're just patently out of step. This is how you do it. http://workplaceinfo.com.au/payroll/wages-and-salaries/history-of-national-increases
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
Foma posted:
Being that we can't seem to tax the rich, a min wage hike is a nice door prize.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
$15 an hour is ridiculous. I've made minimum wage most of my young life (which was $10.50 CAD where I live), and that was more than reasonable considering the work I did was extremely simple and required no education or training. Also, at the time finding a job was much harder than putting up with the low pay. Now that I recently finished my education I'm making around $14 an hour, and the idea that some teenager can get a zero-skill job and start getting paid more than I did after years of studying is absurd. If you want to get paid more, go to school, get promoted, or get a job with hazard pay. Otherwise, consume less. Raising the minimum to $15 for work that any stupid teenager can do is just going to make everything really expensive for everyone else and make it even harder for uneducated people to get jobs. You're not going to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor this way, all this will accomplish is expand the lower class and raise the poverty line.paragon1 posted:You gonna cite something or do we just go with our guts? Because mine disagrees with yours. Ervin K fucked around with this message at 02:25 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
Ervin K posted:$15 an hour is ridiculous. I've made minimum wage most of my young life (which was $10.50 CAD where I live), and that was more than reasonable considering the work I did was extremely simple and required no education or training. Now that I recently finished my education I'm making around $14 an hour, and the idea that some teenager can get a zero-skill job and start getting paid more than I did after years of studying is absurd. If you want to get paid more, go to school, get promoted, or get a job with hazard pay. Otherwise, consume less. Raising the minimum to $15 for work that any stupid teenager can do is just going to make everything really expensive for everyone else and make it even harder for uneducated people to get jobs. You're not going to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor this way, all this will accomplish is expand the lower class and raise the poverty line. Yes no need for economic justice, because there are an infinite supply of jobs for educated people. And teenagers are the only people who work minimum wage jobs. It is quite easy to support a family on that level of income, as well. My crystal ball is telling me something... You are white, childless, and single
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
Ervin K posted:$15 an hour is ridiculous. I've made minimum wage most of my young life (which was $10.50 CAD where I live), and that was more than reasonable considering the work I did was extremely simple and required no education or training. It's adorable that the basic objection to an adequate minimum wage is basically "I personally don't think the work is worth that much, and besides I walked five miles to school, uphill both ways..."
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
If you qualify for food stamps while working 40 hours a week, then you're not being paid enough and the government is subsidizing whatever lovely company you're working for.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
I don't see how communists think that this is a better idea than redistribution from the wealthy?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Horking Delight posted:If you qualify for food stamps while working 40 hours a week, then you're not being paid enough and the government is subsidizing whatever lovely company you're working for. Don't think of it as subsidizing a company, think of it as a government job, that is economically beneficial, cheaper for the government to run, and with less overhead costs. I mean you could have them digging holes, then filling them in, but this way more people get hamburgers or tiny american flags.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Ervin K posted:$15 an hour is ridiculous. I've made minimum wage most of my young life (which was $10.50 CAD where I live), and that was more than reasonable considering the work I did was extremely simple and required no education or training. Also, at the time finding a job was much harder than putting up with the low pay. Now that I recently finished my education I'm making around $14 an hour, and the idea that some teenager can get a zero-skill job and start getting paid more than I did after years of studying is absurd. If you want to get paid more, go to school, get promoted, or get a job with hazard pay. Otherwise, consume less. Raising the minimum to $15 for work that any stupid teenager can do is just going to make everything really expensive for everyone else and make it even harder for uneducated people to get jobs. You're not going to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor this way, all this will accomplish is expand the lower class and raise the poverty line. There's a lot to unpack in this post but I'm not quite sure I'm qualified.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:economic justice quote:because there are an infinite supply of jobs for educated people. quote:And teenagers are the only people who work minimum wage jobs. It is quite easy to support a family on that level of income, as well. quote:My crystal ball is telling me something... You are white, childless, and single  Thanks for the stale response of arguments we've all heard a million times already. Horking Delight posted:If you qualify for food stamps while working 40 hours a week, then you're not being paid enough and the government is subsidizing whatever lovely company you're working for. Vivian Darkbloom posted:It's adorable that the basic objection to an adequate minimum wage is basically "I personally don't think the work is worth that much" Ervin K fucked around with this message at 02:41 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Foma posted:Don't think of it as subsidizing a company, think of it as a government job, that is economically beneficial, cheaper for the government to run, and with less overhead costs. I'd rather the company just be nationalized and the shareholders sent to the firing squad.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:28 |
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:There's a lot to unpack in this post but I'm not quite sure I'm qualified. I'm an ubermensch because I barely attained an Associate's degree
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:36
|
|