Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What, fool, happens when 2 get sick, or 3 , or....Actually, it prevent an influx of cash at the bottom creating an inflationary run similar to the 80s.And why would that be, if not to mitigate the negative impact and give the market time to adjust? And that's the thing - the market will adjust. You can't just dictate the value of labor (or anything else) by passing a law. Once things settle, the relative value of low wage workers will be the same. To put it another way, when the government decrees that a $10/hr job will now pay $15/hr, all they've really said is that $15 is now worth $10. The real value of the labor in doesn't change. If society doesn't value burger-flipping enough for someone to raise a family flipping burgers, when all is done, whatever games you play with the numbers, society still won't value burger-flipping enough for someone to raise a family flipping burgers.Pretty sure the proposal is for graduated increases over several years.
If you've other information please source it.
I can indeed dictate the value of labor by passing a law. Those laws have been passed since 1933. And....SURPRISE the minimum wage doesn't only apply to burger flippers. I know, crazy isn't it! People who make low wages don't just flip burgers. Some sort garbage at recycling plants, some work cleaning hotels. Perhaps you'd be better to expand you understanding of the labor market.
Well no, you can't. Because I was working at a burger flipper job when the minimum wage went up, and the first thing they did was lay off 3 employees. The minimum wage is always zero.
If they laid 3 people off then they STUPIDLY had3 more employees than needed.
NOW let us consider....
Do we think they are stupid....
OR
Do we think you are full of shit?
Um, Alex, we'll take "full of shit" for the win!
So, I take it from your ignorance based statement, that you know very little about running a business.
No business runs so close cut to the wire. It's dangerous to do that.
If you have a store that requires exactly 5 people to operate, and you only hire exactly 5 people... what happens when one person is sick, and can't come in?
Do you shut down the entire store for the day? What happens when a person quits or goes on vacation? Do you shut down the entire store until you get a replacement?
So typically you have more people hired on, than the minimum you need to operate.
Additionally, many companies have filler positions. Positions that are not required, but serve to keep someone around if needed.
Seriously... do you really think that Walmart Greeters are absolutely required to operate the store? No. But if someone calls off, and they need an extra hand, a greeter can fill in the gap.
This is normal.
The reason they fired 3 people at my store, was because they had a opening shift, an evening, and a mid-shift. They cut back each shift by one person.
How did that work? Well each of us, was required to work more, and cover what that extra person did.
I don't know why you would think that is a crazy concept.
Only morons keep extra staff around on the off chance someone might get sick.
And
Yeah, I'm sure the 92 year old woman handing me a towel to wipe the cart is on her way out to the parking lot to push carts.
You are 100% oblivious to the operations of any business.
And they FINALLY state the truth.The anti-competitive aspect of minimum wage laws is conveniently ignored. They prevent poor people from competing for jobs with what is often the only advantage they possess - the willingness and ability to work for less. This is by design.
They want the poor to compete for LOWER WAGES.
And tell me, speaking for all those opposed to the minimum wage...
Just How Low Will You GO?
$5
$2
How little can you get away with paying a starving person so they can eat?
How about lunch and a place to stay?
That's what they did to the coal miners?
That really is what you want isn't it?
Slave Labor without to problems of being a Slave Owner.
I do I am on the job boards at least once a day looking for my next gig , and I call you a liar not many jobs pay minimum wage in red States with the exception of waitresses who get tipsActually, it prevent an influx of cash at the bottom creating an inflationary run similar to the 80s.And why would that be, if not to mitigate the negative impact and give the market time to adjust? And that's the thing - the market will adjust. You can't just dictate the value of labor (or anything else) by passing a law. Once things settle, the relative value of low wage workers will be the same. To put it another way, when the government decrees that a $10/hr job will now pay $15/hr, all they've really said is that $15 is now worth $10. The real value of the labor in doesn't change. If society doesn't value burger-flipping enough for someone to raise a family flipping burgers, when all is done, whatever games you play with the numbers, society still won't value burger-flipping enough for someone to raise a family flipping burgers.Pretty sure the proposal is for graduated increases over several years.
If you've other information please source it.
I can indeed dictate the value of labor by passing a law. Those laws have been passed since 1933. And....SURPRISE the minimum wage doesn't only apply to burger flippers. I know, crazy isn't it! People who make low wages don't just flip burgers. Some sort garbage at recycling plants, some work cleaning hotels. Perhaps you'd be better to expand you understanding of the labor market.
OH WOW! You spend every day on job boards looking for box folder jobs and THAT makes you an expert on the job market!
Your stupidity is breathtaking.
That trying to ensure a standard of living through the MW is a losing proposition. If society deems a certain standard of living is a constitution level right, society through the legislators needs to levy the taxes necessary, properly identify those recipients who need the assistance and write the checks. Businesses are not welfare distribution centers and shouldn't be.And in 12 years $15 may, in fact, not be enough. So, what exactly is your point?And after the dust settles, they'll be back, complaining that $15/hr isn't enough and they'll want $20.And why would that be, if not to mitigate the negative impact and give the market time to adjust? And that's the thing - the market will adjust. You can't just dictate the value of labor (or anything else) by passing a law. Once things settle, the relative value of low wage workers will be the same. To put it another way, when the government decrees that a $10/hr job will now pay $15/hr, all they've really said is that $15 is now worth $10. The real value of the labor in doesn't change. If society doesn't value burger-flipping enough for someone to raise a family flipping burgers, when all is done, whatever games you play with the numbers, society still won't value burger-flipping enough for someone to raise a family flipping burgers.Pretty sure the proposal is for graduated increases over several years.
If you've other information please source it.
Why should it be illegal? Why can't I work for $3 bucks an hour if I so choose ?Meh - Biden's plan is a slow PHASE-IN. It would destroy nothing and cost very little. Had the minimum wage kept up with inflation, it would be $24 and hour at present. Try supporting a family as a single parent (let alone yourself) on $7.25 an hour (15 grand a year) and let us know how that goes.
So any job that won't "support a family" should be outlawed? Why?
Nope, these are essential workers for the most part. None of us could live well without them.
If you establish a minimum wage that will support a family, then you're saying all jobs that pay less than that are illegal, right? How are you not?
I'm saying nothing of the sort. I'm saying that the last minimum wage increase to $7.25 occurred in 2009. Ya figure we're about due for at least 12 bucks?
Hmmm.... it seems like you're lying. But maybe you just don't understand reality.
If we have a national minimum wage, that makes jobs that pay less illegal. That's the fucking point of the law.
It's funny that's you are trying to deny that. Do you not understand how the law works?
Yes, I'm saying that anything less than 12 bucks should be illegal. Remember too that the Biden plan is INCREMENTAL and not a sudden deal. A buck a year for the next 5 years seems pretty reasonable. Would you disagree?
Because the law says that no employer is permitted to pay you that...
Are you just playing dumb? Or are you really too fucking stupid to realize that he was asking for the justification for the law? Why should it be illegal?
Seriously... do you really think that Walmart Greeters are absolutely required to operate the store? No. But if someone calls off, and they need an extra hand, a greeter can fill in the gap.
Why should it be illegal? Why can't I work for $3 bucks an hour if I so choose ?Meh - Biden's plan is a slow PHASE-IN. It would destroy nothing and cost very little. Had the minimum wage kept up with inflation, it would be $24 and hour at present. Try supporting a family as a single parent (let alone yourself) on $7.25 an hour (15 grand a year) and let us know how that goes.
So any job that won't "support a family" should be outlawed? Why?
Nope, these are essential workers for the most part. None of us could live well without them.
If you establish a minimum wage that will support a family, then you're saying all jobs that pay less than that are illegal, right? How are you not?
I'm saying nothing of the sort. I'm saying that the last minimum wage increase to $7.25 occurred in 2009. Ya figure we're about due for at least 12 bucks?
Hmmm.... it seems like you're lying. But maybe you just don't understand reality.
If we have a national minimum wage, that makes jobs that pay less illegal. That's the fucking point of the law.
It's funny that's you are trying to deny that. Do you not understand how the law works?
Yes, I'm saying that anything less than 12 bucks should be illegal. Remember too that the Biden plan is INCREMENTAL and not a sudden deal. A buck a year for the next 5 years seems pretty reasonable. Would you disagree?
Because the law says that no employer is permitted to pay you that...
Are you just playing dumb? Or are you really too fucking stupid to realize that he was asking for the justification for the law? Why should it be illegal?
He asked a clear and concise question. I gave him a clear and concise answer.
So eat a dick, you stupid fuck...
it's better than being a industrial maintenance guy
Thanks for the anecdote. In hindsight, would it have been better for that job to have been a part-time job with another job as your primary source of income? Business models and modeling can be important. It can be more difficult for small businesses since even large corporations who can afford to hire entire departments to help them conform to rational choice theory can still have problems.A case in point is the self-employment/small business venture I engaged in back during the mid 1980s.
As sub-contracted part of another persons business, delivering furniture purchases people made from a small chain of local furniture stores. I paid him a percentage of my gross revenues, based upon a scale of fees charged per type of furniture and/or distance (radius) from the store I operated out of.
I also had to cover operating expenses of the small truck I used. Also, I hired a guy to help carry the furniture (other end of the sofa say) and paid him minimum wage at the start, hoping I might be able to give him a raise later if things went well. After all these expenses/costs, what was left was the profit which I got as my "wage" to live off of.
I invoiced and was paid on a weekly basis. There were many weeks when my hired help got a bigger paycheck than I did. Most of the time, he just rode in the passenger seat from one stop to the next, reading the paper or his book, doing "window time". All he had to do was show up each day and help out a few moments through the work day.
I on the other hand was the one taking the risks and sometimes sweating bullets wondering if there would be enough business/income to cover it all and leave me anything when the day/week was done.
I had no guarantees, and that's the case with most businesses. Part of why so many will fail within the first few years, or later on if the customers don't come through the door (so to speak) and spend enough on the goods and/or services you offer to cover your costs/expenses and provide enough profit to make it worth staying in business and feed your family, cover your rent/mortgage.
I'm sure my helper thought he should be paid more, but he wasn't sharing the costs of the operation nor taking any of the risks. When it came time for me to fold and bail out of the contract, not making enough to live off of, he didn't offer to help pay off the debt and liabilities that remained.
Only due to less effective public policies by design? Coincidence or conspiracy. There is no reason to subsidize capitalists with cheap labor in our first world economy.The anti-competitive aspect of minimum wage laws is conveniently ignored. They prevent poor people from competing for jobs with what is often the only advantage they possess - the willingness and ability to work for less. This is by design.
Black codes were worse. And, there would be no perceived need for statutory minimum wages if persons had more bargaining power as individuals.No refuting me? I can prove the minimum wage laws across the globe was started to keep negroes and China men from stealing the white man's job
Nobody really believes in free market capitalism when it really matters.“In 1925, a minimum-wage law was passed in the Canadian province of British Columbia, with the intent and effect of pricing Japanese immigrants out of jobs in the lumbering industry.
A Harvard professor of that era referred approvingly to Australia’s minimum wage law as a means to “protect the white Australian’s standard of living from the invidious competition of the colored races, particularly of the Chinese” who were willing to work for less.
Unequal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States was worse. Would black codes have ever occurred to anyone if labor could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in any at-will employment State?In 1966, Milton Friedman wrote an op-ed for Newsweek entitled "Minimum Wage Rates." In it, he argued "that the minimum-wage law is the most anti-Negro law on our statute books." He was, of course, referring to the then-present era, after the far more explicitly racist laws from the slavery and segregation eras of United States history had already been done away with. But his observation about the racist effects of minimum wage laws can be traced back to the nineteenth century, and they continue to have a disproportionately deleterious effect on African-Americans into the present day.
The earliest of such laws were regulations passed in regards to the railroad industry. At the end of the nineteenth century, as Dr. Walter Williams points out, "On some railroads — most notably in the South — blacks were 85–90 percent of the firemen, 27 percent of the brakemen, and 12 percent of the switchmen."1
Unequal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States was worse. Would black codes have ever occurred to anyone if labor could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in any at-will employment State?In 1966, Milton Friedman wrote an op-ed for Newsweek entitled "Minimum Wage Rates." In it, he argued "that the minimum-wage law is the most anti-Negro law on our statute books." He was, of course, referring to the then-present era, after the far more explicitly racist laws from the slavery and segregation eras of United States history had already been done away with. But his observation about the racist effects of minimum wage laws can be traced back to the nineteenth century, and they continue to have a disproportionately deleterious effect on African-Americans into the present day.
The earliest of such laws were regulations passed in regards to the railroad industry. At the end of the nineteenth century, as Dr. Walter Williams points out, "On some railroads — most notably in the South — blacks were 85–90 percent of the firemen, 27 percent of the brakemen, and 12 percent of the switchmen."1
An actual Right to Work in alleged right to work States!And they FINALLY state the truth.The anti-competitive aspect of minimum wage laws is conveniently ignored. They prevent poor people from competing for jobs with what is often the only advantage they possess - the willingness and ability to work for less. This is by design.
They want the poor to compete for LOWER WAGES.
And tell me, speaking for all those opposed to the minimum wage...
Just How Low Will You GO?
$5
$2
How little can you get away with paying a starving person so they can eat?
How about lunch and a place to stay?
That's what they did to the coal miners?
That really is what you want isn't it?
Slave Labor without to problems of being a Slave Owner.
Why do you hate and complain about taxes for social services which help subsidize cheap labor for Capitalists?And tell me, speaking for all those opposed to the minimum wage...
Just How Low Will You GO?
Why do you hate poor, unskilled workers?
I want equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.You twisted fuck. You want them to go without job instead? If they can't make as much as you think is "minimal" - fuck 'em. They can't work.And they FINALLY state the truth.The anti-competitive aspect of minimum wage laws is conveniently ignored. They prevent poor people from competing for jobs with what is often the only advantage they possess - the willingness and ability to work for less. This is by design.
They want the poor to compete for LOWER WAGES.
And tell me, speaking for all those opposed to the minimum wage...
Just How Low Will You GO?
$5
$2
How little can you get away with paying a starving person so they can eat?
How about lunch and a place to stay?
That's what they did to the coal miners?
That really is what you want isn't it?
Slave Labor without to problems of being a Slave Owner.
It's none of your FUCKING business how much someone else make. Piss off.
Only due to less effective public policies by design? Coincidence or conspiracy. There is no reason to subsidize capitalists with cheap labor in our first world economy.The anti-competitive aspect of minimum wage laws is conveniently ignored. They prevent poor people from competing for jobs with what is often the only advantage they possess - the willingness and ability to work for less. This is by design.
I want equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.You twisted fuck. You want them to go without job instead? If they can't make as much as you think is "minimal" - fuck 'em. They can't work.And they FINALLY state the truth.The anti-competitive aspect of minimum wage laws is conveniently ignored. They prevent poor people from competing for jobs with what is often the only advantage they possess - the willingness and ability to work for less. This is by design.
They want the poor to compete for LOWER WAGES.
And tell me, speaking for all those opposed to the minimum wage...
Just How Low Will You GO?
$5
$2
How little can you get away with paying a starving person so they can eat?
How about lunch and a place to stay?
That's what they did to the coal miners?
That really is what you want isn't it?
Slave Labor without to problems of being a Slave Owner.
It's none of your FUCKING business how much someone else make. Piss off.
Why do you hate and complain about taxes for social services which help subsidize cheap labor for Capitalists?And tell me, speaking for all those opposed to the minimum wage...
Just How Low Will You GO?
Why do you hate poor, unskilled workers?
