Analyzing A Practical Minimum Wage

[Roadrunner]

Seriously guys, this minimum wage stuff really shines a light on 'stupid'. Beat on another drum.

No one gives a crap about poor people, until you're poor.

When you are poor, you up your skills set.

 

[Roadrunner]

I am single, live nicely on HALF of that each month.

Possible. But you are not the average American worker. Maybe your rent is a lot cheaper, maybe you have other advantages that we don't know about. The figures presented there are for a national average.

Minimum wage should not be set to allow someone the ability to afford average rent.

Also, minimum wage is not intended to allow someone to subsist all by themselves. Spouses, teens, and those working second jobs do not need a high minimum wage.

It doesn't say average rent. It says average rent for a studio or one bedroom apartment.

Who says that teens don't need a living wage. I was on my own from the age of 16. Are you saying age discrimination, or gender discrimination should play a role in rates of pay? And maybe the person wouldn't need the second job in the first place, if they were paid a living wage at their primary job.

Maybe if they had marketable skills, they would make a living wage at their primary job.

 

[asterism]

I am single, live nicely on HALF of that each month.

Possible. But you are not the average American worker. Maybe your rent is a lot cheaper, maybe you have other advantages that we don't know about. The figures presented there are for a national average.

Minimum wage should not be set to allow someone the ability to afford average rent.

Also, minimum wage is not intended to allow someone to subsist all by themselves. Spouses, teens, and those working second jobs do not need a high minimum wage.

It doesn't say average rent. It says average rent for a studio or one bedroom apartment.

False. It says, "According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the median asking price for an unfurnished rental unit was $1,277 in the first-quarter of 2012. That amount is below what one might have to spend even for the most basic, small studio apartment in New York City, but enough to secure a large 3-bedroom apartment in a mid-western town."

Who says that teens don't need a living wage. I was on my own from the age of 16. Are you saying age discrimination, or gender discrimination should play a role in rates of pay? And maybe the person wouldn't need the second job in the first place, if they were paid a living wage at their primary job.

Not all teens need a living wage. Mine certainly don't. Not all spouses getting a second job need a living wage, one of my employees takes seasonal jobs at Christmas and in the summer and she makes $50K with company-paid health insurance working for us.

The problem with mandating that all jobs must pay a living wage is that it there are too many jobs that don't provide enough value to the business to justify that pay. Those jobs cease to exist when the minimum wage exceeds the value. That doesn't help those at the bottom at all.

 

[asterism]

Maybe. As I've said repeatedly. The issue you're whining about is solved indisputably by prohibiting employers from hiring people on public assistance. It, effectively, achieves what you're after - it prevents employers from paying people less than they could make on public assistance. But it preserves the liberty of people who want to work for less. What is wrong with that?

What is wrong with that, is that it doesn't bring new customers into my store. It also means that instead of hiring people who actually need a job, I will have to hirate people who don't really care and don't need the money. Or hire illegal immigrants maybe.

What??? How does minimum wage bring new customers into your store? And for that matter, why should we pass laws to bring new customers into your store??

Not just my store, but all small businesses. Market liquidity. More money in the pockets of workers means more spending.

Which comes back to my question. What makes you think people will just spend more money because you tell them to? Will you? Will you spend fifty percent more on fast food? Or will you cut back because you can't afford it? That's the calculus you nitwits can't seem to comprehend. Wages are decided by consumers. WE decide how much burger flipping is worth - and we've decided "not much". You can pass a law that decrees it to be worth more, but it won't change how much people really value it. They'll buy less. Because they just don't think it's worth much. YOU don't think it's worth much (though I'm sure you won't admit it). If you did, you'd pay more. But you don't. Your whole point of view is based on bullshit.

Are you being deliberately dense now or what? I have already explained all of this to you, with simple pictures that even a 4th grader could understand. Prices will not increase. Spending will increase though because people will now be able to afford many of the things they were forced to go without. The working class saves very little of their money. Our economy is driven by the consumer spending of the working class. The economy is in the crapper right now because fewer and fewer workers are able to even afford basic necessities, much less discretionary spending on things like going to a movie, or even just going for a Sunday drive. That lack of spending is absolutely killing small business, and driving people to places like WalMart where they can stretch every last penny. Instead of going to local grocers to get some nice fresh meats and produce once or twice a week, workers are now taking their foodstamps down to WalMart once a month to buy cases of ramen.

I don't think you an back up your claims with any data, but go ahead and try. Give us some sales numbers of grocery products purchased with food stamps at WalMart.

 

[asterism]

What??? How does minimum wage bring new customers into your store? And for that matter, why should we pass laws to bring new customers into your store??

Not just my store, but all small businesses. Market liquidity. More money in the pockets of workers means more spending.

Which comes back to my question. What makes you think people will just spend more money because you tell them to? Will you? Will you spend fifty percent more on fast food? Or will you cut back because you can't afford it? That's the calculus you nitwits can't seem to comprehend. Wages are decided by consumers. WE decide how much burger flipping is worth - and we've decided "not much". You can pass a law that decrees it to be worth more, but it won't change how much people really value it. They'll buy less. Because they just don't think it's worth much. YOU don't think it's worth much (though I'm sure you won't admit it). If you did, you'd pay more. But you don't. Your whole point of view is based on bullshit.

Are you being deliberately dense now or what? I have already explained all of this to you, with simple pictures that even a 4th grader could understand. Prices will not increase. Spending will increase though because people will now be able to afford many of the things they were forced to go without. The working class saves very little of their money. Our economy is driven by the consumer spending of the working class. The economy is in the crapper right now because fewer and fewer workers are able to even afford basic necessities, much less discretionary spending on things like going to a movie, or even just going for a Sunday drive. That lack of spending is absolutely killing small business, and driving people to places like WalMart where they can stretch every last penny. Instead of going to local grocers to get some nice fresh meats and produce once or twice a week, workers are now taking their foodstamps down to WalMart once a month to buy cases of ramen.

Nonsense. Even with an extreme increase in the minimum wage, only a small percentage of people will have more money to spend - if they can keep their jobs.

You fail to understand how wages are set. They're based on how much consumers value the labor being performed. That won't change simply because Congress decrees it to. You still won't face the question I've asked you - because it lays bare the idiocy of your position. People won't spend more because government tells them to.

You're right. People will spend more because they can, not because the government told them to. And I have already answered your question, as nonsensical as it is. A min wage hike will not drive up prices. That's the part you can't seem to wrap your head around, despite all the historical data which supports my position.

I have been a small business owner. I know exactly how wages are set. I will pay the absolute minimum that I can for maximum job performance. So you can either pay a portion of my labor costs through welfare subsidies and social programs, or you can tell me that I have to pay my own labor expenses. Someone is going to pay. Either the business owner or the taxpayer.

Doubling the min wage would effect a very large number of workers, not just a small percentage. Not to mention the overall boost to the economy and the positive economic effect even for those above that mark.

How much do you think it would cost and where would the money come from in your opinion?

 

[Roadrunner]

I am single, live nicely on HALF of that each month.

Possible. But you are not the average American worker. Maybe your rent is a lot cheaper, maybe you have other advantages that we don't know about. The figures presented there are for a national average.

Minimum wage should not be set to allow someone the ability to afford average rent.

Also, minimum wage is not intended to allow someone to subsist all by themselves. Spouses, teens, and those working second jobs do not need a high minimum wage.

It doesn't say average rent. It says average rent for a studio or one bedroom apartment.

False. It says, "According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the median asking price for an unfurnished rental unit was $1,277 in the first-quarter of 2012. That amount is below what one might have to spend even for the most basic, small studio apartment in New York City, but enough to secure a large 3-bedroom apartment in a mid-western town."

Who says that teens don't need a living wage. I was on my own from the age of 16. Are you saying age discrimination, or gender discrimination should play a role in rates of pay? And maybe the person wouldn't need the second job in the first place, if they were paid a living wage at their primary job.

Not all teens need a living wage. Mine certainly don't. Not all spouses getting a second job need a living wage, one of my employees takes seasonal jobs at Christmas and in the summer and she makes $50K with company-paid health insurance working for us.

The problem with mandating that all jobs must pay a living wage is that it there are too many jobs that don't provide enough value to the business to justify that pay. Those jobs cease to exist when the minimum wage exceeds the value. That doesn't help those at the bottom at all.

Those at the bottom want to be freed from the tyranny of work.

 

[Roadrunner]

Not just my store, but all small businesses. Market liquidity. More money in the pockets of workers means more spending.

Which comes back to my question. What makes you think people will just spend more money because you tell them to? Will you? Will you spend fifty percent more on fast food? Or will you cut back because you can't afford it? That's the calculus you nitwits can't seem to comprehend. Wages are decided by consumers. WE decide how much burger flipping is worth - and we've decided "not much". You can pass a law that decrees it to be worth more, but it won't change how much people really value it. They'll buy less. Because they just don't think it's worth much. YOU don't think it's worth much (though I'm sure you won't admit it). If you did, you'd pay more. But you don't. Your whole point of view is based on bullshit.

Are you being deliberately dense now or what? I have already explained all of this to you, with simple pictures that even a 4th grader could understand. Prices will not increase. Spending will increase though because people will now be able to afford many of the things they were forced to go without. The working class saves very little of their money. Our economy is driven by the consumer spending of the working class. The economy is in the crapper right now because fewer and fewer workers are able to even afford basic necessities, much less discretionary spending on things like going to a movie, or even just going for a Sunday drive. That lack of spending is absolutely killing small business, and driving people to places like WalMart where they can stretch every last penny. Instead of going to local grocers to get some nice fresh meats and produce once or twice a week, workers are now taking their foodstamps down to WalMart once a month to buy cases of ramen.

Nonsense. Even with an extreme increase in the minimum wage, only a small percentage of people will have more money to spend - if they can keep their jobs.

You fail to understand how wages are set. They're based on how much consumers value the labor being performed. That won't change simply because Congress decrees it to. You still won't face the question I've asked you - because it lays bare the idiocy of your position. People won't spend more because government tells them to.

You're right. People will spend more because they can, not because the government told them to. And I have already answered your question, as nonsensical as it is. A min wage hike will not drive up prices. That's the part you can't seem to wrap your head around, despite all the historical data which supports my position.

I have been a small business owner. I know exactly how wages are set. I will pay the absolute minimum that I can for maximum job performance. So you can either pay a portion of my labor costs through welfare subsidies and social programs, or you can tell me that I have to pay my own labor expenses. Someone is going to pay. Either the business owner or the taxpayer.

Doubling the min wage would effect a very large number of workers, not just a small percentage. Not to mention the overall boost to the economy and the positive economic effect even for those above that mark.

How much do you think it would cost and where would the money come from in your opinion?

The money comes from Obama's "stash".

 

[asterism]

Minimum wage should not be set to allow someone the ability to afford average rent.

Also, minimum wage is not intended to allow someone to subsist all by themselves. Spouses, teens, and those working second jobs do not need a high minimum wage.

Sociopath rant......

Sociopath? That's interesting. I've noticed a trend when disagreeing with someone who can't back up his claims, he tends to accuse the opposing party of a mental illness.

You make a huge profit off of lower paid workers, you just outsource them so you can claim something different. How much do the people cleaning your offices make? How much do your landscapers make? How much do the maintenance workers make?

It's not $49K plus benefits that's for sure, but since you pay vendors for those tasks you get to think you are somehow better.

 

[asterism]

Doubling the min wage would effect a very large number of workers, not just a small percentage. Not to mention the overall boost to the economy and the positive economic effect even for those above that mark.

Doubling the minimum wage would be catastrophic and drive a large chunk of our economy into the underground. Which is exactly why it won't happen.

How do you figure? The underground economy is driven by a lack of money, not a surplus of it. Right now you have people out there killing eachother in the streets hustling crack and heroin, stolen goods, because real jobs don't pay enough to live on.

If they don't make enough to live, where do they get the money for drugs?

I don't think you have thought this one through.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Not this shit again.....do you honestly think you're bringing something new to this board?
Same old tired shit from the left.

Pay for the working class of the United States of America is 'tired shit from the left.'

Sociopath: A person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Seems to fit you well.....[/QUOT
noun
NORTH AMERICAN

1. 1.
   a vagrant.
   • 
     
2. 2.
   a person who devotes a great deal of time to a specified activity.
   "a ski bum"
   synonyms: enthusiast, fan, aficionado, lover, freak, nut, buff, fanatic, addict
   "a ski bum"

verb

1. 1.
   travel, with no particular purpose or destination.
   "he bummed around Florida for a few months"
   synonyms: loaf, lounge, idle, wander, drift, meander, dawdle; More
   
2. 2.
   get by asking or begging.
   "they tried to bum money off us"
   synonyms: beg, borrow; More

adjective

1. 1.
   of poor quality; bad or wrong.
   "not one bum note was played"
   synonyms: crummy, rotten, pathetic, lousy, pitiful; More

Choose languageAfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitianHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalayMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianNepaliNorwegianPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSwahiliSwedishTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduVietnameseWelshYiddishYorubaZulu

Not this shit again.....do you honestly think you're bringing something new to this board?
Same old tired shit from the left.

Pay for the working class of the United States of America is 'tired shit from the left.'

Sociopath: A person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Seems to fit you well.....

bum1
[buhm] Spell Syllables

• Synonyms
• Word Origin

noun
1.
a person who avoids work and sponges on others; loafer; idler.
2.
a tramp, hobo, or derelict.
3.
Informal. an enthusiast of a specific sport or recreational activity,especially one who gives it priority over work, family life, etc.:
a ski bum; a tennis bum.
4.
Informal. an incompetent person.
5.
a drunken orgy; debauch.
verb (used with object), bummed, bumming.
6.
Informal. to borrow without expectation of returning; get for nothing;cadge:
He's always bumming cigarettes from me.
7.
Slang. to ruin or spoil:
The weather bummed our whole weekend.
verb (used without object), bummed, bumming.
8.
to sponge on others for a living; lead an idle or dissolute life.
9.
to live as a hobo.
adjective, bummer, bummest. Slang.
10.
of poor, wretched, or miserable quality; worthless.
11.
disappointing; unpleasant.
12.
erroneous or ill-advised; misleading:
That tip on the stock market was a bum steer.
13.
lame:
a bum leg.
Verb phrases
14.
bum around, Informal. to travel, wander, or spend one's timeaimlessly:
We bummed around for a couple of hours after work.
Idioms
15.
bum (someone) out, Slang. to disappoint, upset, or annoy:
It really bummed me out that she could have helped and didn't.
16.
on the bum, Informal.

1. living or traveling as or in a manner suggesting that of a hobo ortramp.
2. in a state of disrepair or disorder:
   The oven is on the bum again.

And there you are....

 

[oldfart]

On this page, we will itemize a sample budget for a single person in order to analyze what a fair standard would be for a minimum-wage worker. It is our position that a person working eight hours a day, five days a week, at any job, should be able to support themselves to a minimum basic standard of living. This practical wage is necessary in order to elevate the class of working poor to contributing members of society. Working for anything less than what is needed to subsist on independently, is nothing short of slavery.

All figures are based on national averages, for a Federal standard.


RENT ------------------------------$1000
BASIC UTILITIES --------------$200
ADVANCED UTILITIES ------$150
FOOD ------------------------------$300
NON-FOOD GROCERY -----$50
CLOTHING -----------------------$75
TRANSPORTATION ----------$500
HEALTHCARE -----------------$350
MISCELLANEOUS -----------$400
------------------------------------------------------
Average Basic Monthly Expenses $3,025

A full-time job at 40 hours per week is 173.2 hours per month calculating 4.33 weeks in each month. To find a reasonable minimum wage, we divide the average basic monthly expenses figure, by the number of hours worked. For the average American worker to support themselves without government assistance or by borrowing beyond their means, that worker must earn...

$17.47 per hour

Of course, that figure must be after all taxes and contributions are taken, or that anyone earning that amount must be exempt from all such garnishments and liability. A person who cannot even afford to pay their own way, cannot afford to pay taxes. Forcing them to pay taxes that will jeopardize their basic standard of living, is unsound economics and in the long run will only force other taxpayers to subsidize those workers, in turn jeopardizing their own living standard, in a perpetual cycle that we see happening today as more workers descend into deep poverty.

If $17.47 per hour seems unreasonable to you, or just downright impossible, consider a few more facts. There was a time when a grocery clerk, or a department store salesperson could actually support themselves on what they earned. That is not so today.

Using data by the U.S. BLS, the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not. Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker. -Source

Based on consumption growth since 1968, the minimum wage today would have to be $25.05 to represent the same share of the country's total consumption. Based on national income growth, the minimum wage should be $22.08. Based on personal income growth, it should be $21.16. -Source

After adjusting for inflation, minimum wage workers today are paid about 26 percent less than they were in 1974.

At the top 1 percent of the American income distribution, average incomes rose 194 percent between 1974 and 2011. Had U.S. minimum wages risen at the same pace as U.S. maximum wages, the minimum wage would now be $26.96 an hour. -Source



Here is a detailed description of how we arrived at our sample budget figures:

Read more: Analyzing a Practical Minimum Wage Minimum Wage Workers Union of America

There is a lot of flack about where the budget figures come from, so I would propose an alternative. When a taxpayer has to make a personal financial statement (Form 433) to the IRS as part of the process to get an Offer In Compromise or other collections relief, there is an amount allowed for personal living expenses in determining how much money is left over to pay against tax liabilities. These figures are based on government data and are the same used in Bankruptcy Court as a starting point in evaluating Chap 13 plans. They are updated monthly and available through the IRS website (look under "Collections Standards"). I think it is safe to say that these standards are not overly generous.

Some costs are national (food & clothing, out of pocket medical) and some vary by region (automobile operating expenses) or county (housing & utilities). Results also depend on age and family size.

For your proverbial single person, the total cost in Hinds County Mississippi would be $2,634 per month, consisting of:
$583 for food, clothing, and personal expenses (national standard)
$60 for out-of-pocket health care expenses (national standard)
$1,130 for housing and utilities (county standard)
$517 for owning one car (national standard)
$244 for operating one car (regional standard)

For comparison, the same person residing in Boston using public transportation instead of owning a car would require $3,833.

A family of four living in Mississippi with two cars would require $4,804 per month and the same family in Boston using public transit would require $5,418.

Again, these are the default figures you would be allowed without proof in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy or in a IRS collections negotiation.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

How does he justify a HS dropout deserving $3,025 after taxes?

exactly!! Guaranteeing a nice living wage would be guaranteeing that an ever growing percent of the population would not make a sufficient contribution to society with their work. Its a formula for the sovietization of our country but liberals lack the IQ to understand it. In fact, most liberals have not even heard of the Soviet Union let alone know why it failed. Amazingly, we are in the position that Germany was in in the 1930's. Our liberals are as stupid as the German's were then when they voted for Hitler and the communists. Sadly, such liberal ignorance is typical in human history thus leaving saintly Republicans as the last best hope for freedom on earth.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Ride the fucken bus and dont spend 400 for miscellaneous bullshit and you'll save 900 bucks a month.

That was already factored in to the analysis.

Riding the bus wont run you 500 a month. And what the hell are you buying thats "miscellaneous" that costs you 400 a month? Let me guess...weed.

This isn't MY budget. These are national figures and recommended economic practices. Miscellaneous costs can be any number of things from a traffic ticket to a fender bender to a flooded out apartment to school supplies.

Where do single people pay $1,000 a month rent?

My GF is only paying $750 mortgage for a 3 BR house in a very nice suburb of a major city.

I live outside of NYC. A one bedroom in a complex runs a little over $1000 usually. The absolute cheapest dirt-hole you will find is $750. But places like that have problems such as no parking, high crime, real slum living.

A min wage worker cannot get a mortgage.

From the source:

RENT- $1,000

It is very difficult to find an accurate national average cost for a rental apartment. Local market values have a very wide range, and rental units are not uniform. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the median asking price for an unfurnished rental unit was $1,277 in the first-quarter of 2012. That amount is below what one might have to spend even for the most basic, small studio apartment in New York City, but enough to secure a large 3-bedroom apartment in a mid-western town. We must assume, however, that the minimum-wage worker will most likely be living where work is available which is more often in regions where rent is much higher. For the purposes of our analyses, we have generalized to come up with a figure that is below the national average, in order to establish a minimum standard of living. $1000 is what one might expect to pay for a one-bedroom apartment in the suburbs of a major metropolitan area.

Read more: Analyzing a Practical Minimum Wage Minimum Wage Workers Union of America

 

[Jackinthebox]

Where is it written that one 40 hour a week job is supposed to pay all your expenses?

It should certainly be enough to pay your basic living expenses. Especially if you are, say, trying to go to college at the same time in order to get a better job. The US is the single most overworked nation in western society.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Where is it written that one 40 hour a week job is supposed to pay all your expenses?

Notice this guy makes no mention of training, education or skills set that would allow your to EARN your keep.

How does he justify a HS dropout deserving $3,025 after taxes?

The vast majority of min wage workers have a HS diploma at the very least.

Besides, where is is written that everyone has to be a rocket scientist to earn their keep? It used to be that working at a grocery store, for example, was a viable career option for a blue collar worker. Especially someone who did not have the aptitude for college booksmarts.

When I entered the job market at 14 years old back int he late 80's, my first job was at a grocery store. At the time, I did actually consider it as a career possibility. I was hired by a manager who had been there since he and my father first got a part time job at the same store when they were going to college at the Culinary Institute of America. The nation's premiere culinary arts school. My father went on to be a renowned chef and restauranteur, but his friend chose to stay on at the supermarket and make a career out of it. The same went for my aunt, who did that same, at the same store. She didn't even bother to enter into management. She was never anything more than a lead cashier, and was earning over $20/hr in UNADJUSTED dollars when I went to work there. She managed to raise a family, buy a house, and go to college just for the hell of it, all on her salary as a grocery store cashier. You will never find anything like that today.

The American worker has lost ground. Stereotypes don't make up for that shortfall.

 

[Jackinthebox]

"And many people who were once career professionals are now stuck in min wage jobs."

That is bullshit, except maybe for professionals now on crack.

Then you are clearly out of touch with reality. The per diem school bus driver who picks up my special needs neighbor for school was laid off as a highly skilled engineer a few years ago. He now earns $9.50/hr. And that is WITH a professional trade license, the CDL-B.

The ticket puncher at my favorite local movie theater, was working for a bank and has some fancy degree in economics.

One of my favorite mall security guards was injured in the line of duty as a police officer. He now makes $8.50/hr.

I could go on. But again, the vast majority of min wage workers are educated. Either they have been laid off from those jobs, or never even were able to break into that market in the first place after spending all that money on a college degree.

 

[Jackinthebox]

How does he justify a HS dropout deserving $3,025 after taxes?

exactly!! Guaranteeing a nice living wage would be guaranteeing that an ever growing percent of the population would not make a sufficient contribution to society with their work. Its a formula for the sovietization of our country but liberals lack the IQ to understand it. In fact, most liberals have not even heard of the Soviet Union let alone know why it failed. Amazingly, we are in the position that Germany was in in the 1930's. Our liberals are as stupid as the German's were then when they voted for Hitler and the communists. Sadly, such liberal ignorance is typical in human history thus leaving saintly Republicans as the last best hope for freedom on earth.

So packing your groceries, serving your food, cleaning your buildings, SAVING YOUR LIVES is not a "sufficient contribution" to society?

The EMT's in my area, starting pay, is the state minimum wage.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Seriously guys, this minimum wage stuff really shines a light on 'stupid'. Beat on another drum.

No one gives a crap about poor people, until you're poor.

When you are poor, you up your skills set.

Like becoming an EMT perhaps? Except that the people you call to save your life, are only making min wage and are dangerously overworked. Don't expect the best treatment.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Not all teens need a living wage. Mine certainly don't. Not all spouses getting a second job need a living wage, one of my employees takes seasonal jobs at Christmas and in the summer and she makes $50K with company-paid health insurance working for us.

The problem with mandating that all jobs must pay a living wage is that it there are too many jobs that don't provide enough value to the business to justify that pay. Those jobs cease to exist when the minimum wage exceeds the value. That doesn't help those at the bottom at all.

It makes no difference if those teens "need" it or not. That vast majority of low wage workers are not teens, but adults trying to support themselves, and perhaps a family.

As I said, I was on my own since I was 16. So by your standard, an employer may discriminate against me based on my age. I might also add here too, that MANY kids who are still living at home, are contributing members to household finances. They are helping pay the rent, not buying video games.

Spouses, same thing. This is not about "needs" for everyone. Heck, I don't "need" the money, so I volunteer at a soup kitchen and my local fire department. Does that mean that all food service workers and firefighters in our country should work for nothing?

You are also incorrect, to a point, in saying that these jobs "cease to exist." As a small business owner, I NEVER hired someone I did not need to fill a position. A job is not charity. If it cost $8 or $20 to hire someone to man the counter, that is what I would pay. I never hired more staff than was needed, and never laid off staff that was necessary to maintain proper customer service.

Now when I say to a point, yes, there may be companies who are operating on such little profit that they might go belly up and close their doors at the next wage increase. But that is inevitable then. A dead man walking so to speak. If your business model relies on government subsidized labor, you are not a capitalist, and you do not have a viable business model. Hell, even slave owners had to pay the basic living expenses of their labor force.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Doubling the min wage would effect a very large number of workers, not just a small percentage. Not to mention the overall boost to the economy and the positive economic effect even for those above that mark.

Doubling the minimum wage would be catastrophic and drive a large chunk of our economy into the underground. Which is exactly why it won't happen.

How do you figure? The underground economy is driven by a lack of money, not a surplus of it. Right now you have people out there killing eachother in the streets hustling crack and heroin, stolen goods, because real jobs don't pay enough to live on.

If they don't make enough to live, where do they get the money for drugs?

I don't think you have thought this one through.

How do you get into the crack game, is that what you are asking me?