$15 minimum wage would destroy 1.4 Million jobs

[danielpalos]

50 grand in today's america doesn't even sniff middle class anywhere. Wages are woefully behind the cost of living increases. The gap continues to grow no end in sight.

Wages are woefully behind the cost of living increases.

Link?

From 1979 to 2018, net productivity rose 69.6 percent, while the hourly pay of typical workers essentially stagnated—increasing only 11.6 percent over 39 years (after adjusting for inflation). This means that although Americans are working more productively than ever, the fruits of their labors have primarily accrued to those at the top and to corporate profits, especially in recent years.

The Productivity–Pay Gap

The huge gap between rising incomes at the top and stagnating pay for the rest of us shows that workers are no longer benefiting from their rising productivity. Before 1979, worker pay and productivity grew in tandem. But since 1979, productivity has grown eight times faster than typical worker...

www.epi.org

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You think non-workers collect less welfare than workers?

I may have discovered why you're unemployable. You're a moron.

lol. Nobody takes right wingers seriously about economics.

Higher paid labor creates more in demand and generates more in tax revenue; the multiplier effect does the heavy lifting.

Real earnings for workers while they remained employed would increase by $64 billion,

Real earnings for workers while they were jobless would decrease by $20 billion,

Total real family income would decrease by $9 billion...moron.

 

[Blues Man]

50 grand in today's america doesn't even sniff middle class anywhere. Wages are woefully behind the cost of living increases. The gap continues to grow no end in sight.

Wages are woefully behind the cost of living increases.

Link?

From 1979 to 2018, net productivity rose 69.6 percent, while the hourly pay of typical workers essentially stagnated—increasing only 11.6 percent over 39 years (after adjusting for inflation). This means that although Americans are working more productively than ever, the fruits of their labors have primarily accrued to those at the top and to corporate profits, especially in recent years.

The Productivity–Pay Gap

The huge gap between rising incomes at the top and stagnating pay for the rest of us shows that workers are no longer benefiting from their rising productivity. Before 1979, worker pay and productivity grew in tandem. But since 1979, productivity has grown eight times faster than typical worker...

www.epi.org

And you can't figure out why?

Technology improved by leaps and bounds in that time frame.

We replaced highly skilled labor with automated processes that a low skilled worker can oversee.

 

[danielpalos]

You really need a link to see that wages are rising at a pittance? Take off the red white and blue blinders and see the real america.

Right wingers prefer to "hate on the Poor".

From 1978 to 2018, CEO compensation grew by 1,007.5% (940.3% under the options-realized measure), far outstripping S&P stock market growth (706.7%) and the wage growth of very high earners (339.2%). In contrast, wages for the typical worker grew by just 11.9%.

CEO compensation has grown 940% since 1978: Typical worker compensation has risen only 12% during that time

The latest report in EPI’s annual series analyzing current and long-term trends in CEO compensation.

www.epi.org

 

[danielpalos]

And that's why states and cities should be free to set their own MW where it makes sense for them, instead of having the federal government force fit everyone into one level.

Hadit, to the extent of its purchasing power and enforcement, the federal minimum wage rate reduces incidences and extents of poverty in our nation. That it’s purpose and justification.
That federal rate passed by our Congress and signed off on by our president is a minimum rate limiting the extent a state’s wage rates can undermine the minimum wage rates of other states in our nation.

Employees and their dependents within states of governments having lesser consideration for their citizens, (i.e. states of lower applicable minimum wage rates), are proportional to their wages, the greatest beneficiaries of the federal minimum wage rate. Respectfully, Supposn*

Some states have lower costs of living than others. Should they not be allowed to set their MW to the level that works best for them, then other states and cities can set theirs higher if they wish?

Fifteen dollars an hour is a national minimum. Blue State minimum wage rates should be around twenty dollars an hour.

 

[danielpalos]

to the extent of its purchasing power and enforcement, the federal minimum wage rate reduces incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

To the extent that it reduces employment and raises prices, the federal minimum wage rate increases incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of economics and the multiplier effect. Higher paid labor simply creates more in demand and generates more in tax revenue.

 

[Blues Man]

You really need a link to see that wages are rising at a pittance? Take off the red white and blue blinders and see the real america.

Right wingers prefer to "hate on the Poor".

From 1978 to 2018, CEO compensation grew by 1,007.5% (940.3% under the options-realized measure), far outstripping S&P stock market growth (706.7%) and the wage growth of very high earners (339.2%). In contrast, wages for the typical worker grew by just 11.9%.

CEO compensation has grown 940% since 1978: Typical worker compensation has risen only 12% during that time

The latest report in EPI’s annual series analyzing current and long-term trends in CEO compensation.

www.epi.org

Most people do not work for companies with high paid CEOs so it really doesn''t matter what they get paid.

What Jeff Bezos makes has never had any effect on my income

 

[danielpalos]

there has never been an instance where the MW was raised as much or as quickly.

so you are assumiong facts not in evidence and the CBO disagrees with you as their forecast is 1.4 million jobs lost

We already know right winges don't care about the Poor.

Imagine the poor unemployed CEOs.

From 1978 to 2018, CEO compensation grew by 1,007.5% (940.3% under the options-realized measure), far outstripping S&P stock market growth (706.7%) and the wage growth of very high earners (339.2%). In contrast, wages for the typical worker grew by just 11.9%.

 

[Blues Man]

there has never been an instance where the MW was raised as much or as quickly.

so you are assumiong facts not in evidence and the CBO disagrees with you as their forecast is 1.4 million jobs lost

We already know right winges don't care about the Poor.

Imagine the poor unemployed CEOs.

From 1978 to 2018, CEO compensation grew by 1,007.5% (940.3% under the options-realized measure), far outstripping S&P stock market growth (706.7%) and the wage growth of very high earners (339.2%). In contrast, wages for the typical worker grew by just 11.9%.

We really don't have poor people.

Poor people don't have cell phones and aren't 100 lbs overweight.

And like I said most people don't work for companies with high paid CEOs so what Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk get paid has absolutely no effect on the incomes of the vast majority of people.

 

[danielpalos]

The PPP was a one time thing and won't be repeated.

New funds totaling more than $284 billion have been assigned to the Paycheck Protection Program, as part of the $900 billion COVID-19 relief package passed in December 2020.

Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) | Infographic | Payroll Protection

The payroll protection program is part of a $2 trillion dollar aid package unveiled in the CARES act. See how it helps businesses.

www.paycor.com

.

 

[Blues Man]

The PPP was a one time thing and won't be repeated.

New funds totaling more than $284 billion have been assigned to the Paycheck Protection Program, as part of the $900 billion COVID-19 relief package passed in December 2020.

Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) | Infographic | Payroll Protection

The payroll protection program is part of a $2 trillion dollar aid package unveiled in the CARES act. See how it helps businesses.

www.paycor.com

.

Yeah a one time thing.

It's never going to happen again. And the only reason businesses need that money is because the government shut them down.

 

[danielpalos]

Yeah we should start another world war to get that full employment again. Funny how you don't seem to know what happened when the war ended and the job losses that went along with it

Right wingers are even more clueless regarding tax cut economics and your alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror, which only increase the Cost of "Big Government nanny-Statism" while not even trying to achieve full employment.

 

[Blues Man]

Yeah we should start another world war to get that full employment again. Funny how you don't seem to know what happened when the war ended and the job losses that went along with it

Right wingers are even more clueless regarding tax cut economics and your alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror, which only increase the Cost of "Big Government nanny-Statism" while not even trying to achieve full employment.

Their not my wars on drugs or crimes.

I have been for legalizing all drugs for decades.

Your problem is you think everyone who disagrees with you is "right wing". You are a 2 dimensional thinker

 

[danielpalos]

It has do do with your obvious math disability.

So...

Given you obvious math disability your claims are obviously well, just wrong.

A person making , say, $10/hour gets an increase over several years to $15 per hour
What do you think that person does with the extra money?
That's right, he spends it. On groceries, washing machines, cars,...
Republicans with their tax cuts make these same claims then proceed to cut taxes for the 1%.

Increased spending at the bottom increases economic activity which increases hiring and decreases unemployment.
Every tax cut since Bush in 01 has made this claim.
If returning $40 at the endo of the year is supposed to increase economic activity imagine what increasing the paycheck by 50% will do.

Your theory is so flawed. First of all increasing the wage will get employers to hire less people, invest in automation such as many fast food places have already done with more to come, and it will create a domino effect.

When the domino effect does a complete circle, everything else costs more money. The additional wage the MW worker now has won't buy them anymore than they have today. Food will go up, dining will be a little more expensive, rent will likely increase, gasoline will have to go up. Everything increases.

The only two things that is really accomplished is that government gets more money via payroll taxes, and it will cause inflation. All you have to do is look what's happening between blue and red states. You do better in life making $15.00 an hour in a red state than you do $20.00 an hour in a blue state. The costs of living are different.

And you show a complete ignorance of actual economics.

A business operates with the minimum level of staffing required to run the business.
Cutting employees cuts the business' ability to function.
Increasing pay increases the competence of employees as less competent employees are replaced by better employees interested in the better wage.
This increases the business' performance.
Increasing the wages at the lower level increases economic activity, the basis of every tax cut Republicans have ever supported.
By increasing that economic activity at the lowest level we increase hiring at that level which reduces unemployment
Which, in turn, reduces government spending
The business owner may, in the short term, experience lower profits but, over the longer term, their businesses will grow because of increased demand.

This really is just basic economics and, unlike Truman, you don't need two hands to figure it out.

When someone who is doing a 7.25 an hour job and that person artificially get a raise to 15 an hour his skills haven't improved so in reality there is no better employee to take his job because all entry level people will have their pay artificially raised for no reason.

And you don't know shit about running a business.

You can't run with the bare minimum because you have to cover sick time, vacation time etc and ideally you don't want to incur overtimes costs when you do that so a business actually runs with a small surplus of labor.

and saying that a guy who does nothing but push a broom has to be paid 15 an hour is not going to result in more broom pushing jobs it fact just the opposite will be true.

No one, unless they change jobs is getting a raise from 7.25 to 15 an hour.
The increase according to those with the power to enact will occur over several year.
YOU are making the same argument made in 2006 and you know what happened?
11 straight years of record economic growth.

So, obviously you're lying and trying to distract from the ACTUAL proposals and the HISTORIC FACT that minimum wage increases over the last 25 years have consistently resulted in economic expansion well beyond what was present before the increases.

LOL...... There is not a single example where increasing the minimum wage did not result in job loss. Not one.

Economic expansion might in fact happen, while still leaving thousands or millions to be unemployed.

California is a perfect example. Seattle is another example. Rich get richer, and the poor end up homeless.

You confuse inequality with disemployment due to a higher wage. And, higher paid labor also generate more tax revenue to help out with the homeless.

 

[danielpalos]

Then why didn't I starve? When I declined the job that paid too little, I got a higher paying job.

Why didn't your utterly stupid claim, result in me starving?

Why complain about taxes, right wingers. Just get a better job that pays more so taxes are not a problem. See how easy it can be using your advice.

 

[Blues Man]

It has do do with your obvious math disability.

So...

Given you obvious math disability your claims are obviously well, just wrong.

A person making , say, $10/hour gets an increase over several years to $15 per hour
What do you think that person does with the extra money?
That's right, he spends it. On groceries, washing machines, cars,...
Republicans with their tax cuts make these same claims then proceed to cut taxes for the 1%.

Increased spending at the bottom increases economic activity which increases hiring and decreases unemployment.
Every tax cut since Bush in 01 has made this claim.
If returning $40 at the endo of the year is supposed to increase economic activity imagine what increasing the paycheck by 50% will do.

Your theory is so flawed. First of all increasing the wage will get employers to hire less people, invest in automation such as many fast food places have already done with more to come, and it will create a domino effect.

When the domino effect does a complete circle, everything else costs more money. The additional wage the MW worker now has won't buy them anymore than they have today. Food will go up, dining will be a little more expensive, rent will likely increase, gasoline will have to go up. Everything increases.

The only two things that is really accomplished is that government gets more money via payroll taxes, and it will cause inflation. All you have to do is look what's happening between blue and red states. You do better in life making $15.00 an hour in a red state than you do $20.00 an hour in a blue state. The costs of living are different.

And you show a complete ignorance of actual economics.

A business operates with the minimum level of staffing required to run the business.
Cutting employees cuts the business' ability to function.
Increasing pay increases the competence of employees as less competent employees are replaced by better employees interested in the better wage.
This increases the business' performance.
Increasing the wages at the lower level increases economic activity, the basis of every tax cut Republicans have ever supported.
By increasing that economic activity at the lowest level we increase hiring at that level which reduces unemployment
Which, in turn, reduces government spending
The business owner may, in the short term, experience lower profits but, over the longer term, their businesses will grow because of increased demand.

This really is just basic economics and, unlike Truman, you don't need two hands to figure it out.

When someone who is doing a 7.25 an hour job and that person artificially get a raise to 15 an hour his skills haven't improved so in reality there is no better employee to take his job because all entry level people will have their pay artificially raised for no reason.

And you don't know shit about running a business.

You can't run with the bare minimum because you have to cover sick time, vacation time etc and ideally you don't want to incur overtimes costs when you do that so a business actually runs with a small surplus of labor.

and saying that a guy who does nothing but push a broom has to be paid 15 an hour is not going to result in more broom pushing jobs it fact just the opposite will be true.

No one, unless they change jobs is getting a raise from 7.25 to 15 an hour.
The increase according to those with the power to enact will occur over several year.
YOU are making the same argument made in 2006 and you know what happened?
11 straight years of record economic growth.

So, obviously you're lying and trying to distract from the ACTUAL proposals and the HISTORIC FACT that minimum wage increases over the last 25 years have consistently resulted in economic expansion well beyond what was present before the increases.

LOL...... There is not a single example where increasing the minimum wage did not result in job loss. Not one.

Economic expansion might in fact happen, while still leaving thousands or millions to be unemployed.

California is a perfect example. Seattle is another example. Rich get richer, and the poor end up homeless.

You confuse inequality with disemployment due to a higher wage. And, higher paid labor also generate more tax revenue to help out with the homeless.

When that forced arbitrary higher wage results in 1.4 million people losing their jobs they won't be paying taxes at all

 

[danielpalos]

You still won't answer. I wonder why.

Start a new hobby that can eventually generate some income if you want to work for free.

 

[Blues Man]

Then why didn't I starve? When I declined the job that paid too little, I got a higher paying job.

Why didn't your utterly stupid claim, result in me starving?

Why complain about taxes, right wingers. Just get a better job that pays more so taxes are not a problem. See how easy it can be using your advice.

Why complain about the wage? Just improve your skills so people will pay you more

 

[danielpalos]

Tell me at what price point will my customers buy less than they do now?

At what point will they stop buying my product?

Since everyone who is already making close to 15 an hour now will see their purchasing power drop it is inevitable that I will lose business

Another disingenuous argument? All of your competition (unless they are better managed) are in the same boat as you.

How many more hamburgers can minimum wage labor afford at their new minimum wage versus the previous minimum wage?

Exactly so my competition will also see a reduction in their business.

Which is why the CBO estimates that a 15 an hour minimum wage will cost 1.4 million jobs.

Higher paid labor creates more in demand and generates more in tax revenue. The multiplier will eventually create more job opportunities for the unemployed.

Real earnings for workers while they remained employed would increase by $64 billion,

Real earnings for workers while they were jobless would decrease by $20 billion,

There is no multiplier when 1.4 million jobs are lost and the purchasing power of most people is decreased.

Why should anyone take right wingers seriously about economics?

Real earnings for workers while they remained employed would increase by $64 billion,

 

[danielpalos]

I have no expectations for any one I will pay 7.25 an hour for. And no pay is not always linked to productivity. Do you think if MW is changed to 15 an hour that productivity will go up?

Yes, I do. Someone more motivated may apply for that position versus someone who may feel they are a wage-slave for Capitalist due to unequal protection of the law for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

The more motivated people already have jobs that pay more than minimum wage.

MW is for unskilled, people who can't get a better paying job.

Untrue under Capitalism where greed is good. A higher minimum wage could make it more worthwhile for labor with more talent to understand the economic benefit.