Buoyed by Protests, Obama Embraces $10 Minimum Wage

[idb]

In the past, raising the minimum wage had no adverse effects on job opportunities for unskilled workers for two main reasons. The first was the economic conditions of the period when wages were raised, and the second is the raise in cost was comparatively minimal to the operational costs they incurred. I think it self-evident to say our current economic conditions are a bit unsavory, however the ability to pay a spiked wage increase depends totally on the income of the company. I can guarantee you that small business, who are already struggling in these turbulent times and employ low-wage workers will need to compensate in some form, either by terminating positions or lowering hours. It is common sense that when operational costs increase, businesses will be forced to either raise prices or trim fat.

This brings us to the other point, which is that with a raise in cost of operation will come a raise in price of the goods or services. Just as in taxes or cost of raw materials, the buck is passed to the consumer.

Furthermore, in the past minimum wages have been raised modestly and not spiked by almost three dollars an hour as suggested by the President. Think about it and do the math, three dollars more an hour for every employee you have for every hour they work. By the end of the fiscal quarter, the raise in costs will be quite staggering. Whether the profit is there to pay, and whether the jobs are needed to keep is a different story. When it comes to that, however, it is best decided by those in the environment and not those in Washington. Perhaps it should be the workers of McDonalds negotiating a fair wage with their corporate leaders based on their job description and the corporation's profits?

McDonalds is an unfortunate example.
After all they rely on their wage bill being subsidised by the federal government.
McDonalds don't seem to be struggling too much.

They're not, and that's the point. It should be the responsibility of the employees to demand fair wages and not of politicians.

They're not what?
Not using the government to subsidise their wage bill?

 

[uhkilleez]

McDonalds is an unfortunate example.
After all they rely on their wage bill being subsidised by the federal government.
McDonalds don't seem to be struggling too much.

They're not, and that's the point. It should be the responsibility of the employees to demand fair wages and not of politicians.

They're not what?
Not using the government to subsidise their wage bill?

My apologies, I thought it would be interpreted that I meant they're not struggling. The fact they are subsidizing their wage bill is just yet another way our government discourages competition and coddles the major corporations who pay campaign contributions, and also yet another way the working class are milked to make the rich richer.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What will the minimum wage have to be for a 29 hour a week worker with no health insurance?

 

[uhkilleez]

What will the minimum wage have to be for a 29 hour a week worker with no health insurance?

Pretty much nothing when you finish paying for Obamacare.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Why not 50 dollars an hour? I mean, if we're going to arbitrarily make such decisions, shouldn't go for a real boost?

Since minimum wage increases do not affect employment or prices, shouldn't we go for a economic recovery style M wage increase?

C'mon, Shallow and crew. Fucking dazzling me with your economic understanding.

 

[Old Rocks]

Just a blog, but matchs the figures I have seen elsewhere.

40% Of US Workers Now Earn Less Than 1968 Minimum Wage | Zero Hedge

Are American workers paid enough? That is a topic that is endlessly debated all across this great land of ours. Unfortunately, what pretty much everyone can agree on is that American workers are not making as much as they used to after you account for inflation. Back in 1968, the minimum wage in the United States was $1.60 an hour. That sounds very small, but after you account for inflation a very different picture emerges. Using the inflation calculator that the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides, $1.60 in 1968 is equivalent to $10.74 today.

And of course the official government inflation numbers have been heavily manipulated to make inflation look much lower than it actually is, so the number for today should actually be substantially higher than $10.74, but for purposes of this article we will use $10.74. If you were to work a full-time job at $10.74 an hour for a full year (with two weeks off for vacation), you would make about $21,480 for the year.

That isn't a lot of money, but according to the Social Security Administration, 40.28% of all workers make less than $20,000 a year in America today. So that means that more than 40 percent of all U.S. workers actually make less than what a full-time minimum wage worker made back in 1968. That is how far we have fallen.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why not 50 dollars an hour? I mean, if we're going to arbitrarily make such decisions, shouldn't go for a real boost?

Since minimum wage increases do not affect employment or prices, shouldn't we go for a economic recovery style M wage increase?

C'mon, Shallow and crew. Fucking dazzling me with your economic understanding.

They have no answer. The best answer I got was "$12/hr just seems right to me". Yes, seriously, that was her answer.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Why not 50 dollars an hour? I mean, if we're going to arbitrarily make such decisions, shouldn't go for a real boost?

Since minimum wage increases do not affect employment or prices, shouldn't we go for a economic recovery style M wage increase?

C'mon, Shallow and crew. Fucking dazzling me with your economic understanding.

They have no answer. The best answer I got was "$12/hr just seems right to me". Yes, seriously, that was her answer.

So they think a minimum wage increase is a positive idea both emotionally and economically, but they can not explain why. Seriously, can anyone explain why $10 is a better number than 50 since M wage doesn't impact employment or prices?

Anyone?

 

[The Rabbi]

Why not 50 dollars an hour? I mean, if we're going to arbitrarily make such decisions, shouldn't go for a real boost?

Since minimum wage increases do not affect employment or prices, shouldn't we go for a economic recovery style M wage increase?

C'mon, Shallow and crew. Fucking dazzling me with your economic understanding.

They have no answer. The best answer I got was "$12/hr just seems right to me". Yes, seriously, that was her answer.

So they think a minimum wage increase is a positive idea both emotionally and economically, but they can not explain why. Seriously, can anyone explain why $10 is a better number than 50 since M wage doesn't impact employment or prices?

Anyone?

Well $50 is absurd. I dont know why, but it is absurd. That seems to be the only response on the topic I've seen.
But yes, if raising the min wage is a free lunch then why not go all out?
But the truth is the reason that $50/hr is absurd is the same reason 10/hr is absurd. And its the same reason 3/hr is absurd.
When you let gov't dictate prices you short circuit normal market mechanisms leading to distortions. This is exactly what is happening with the Fed and QE-whatever we're on now.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah yes, let's stop short circuiting the economic process and go back to the wonderful economic times we were enjoying in November, December of 2008, and January of 2009. Now that was a real wonderful GOP economy!

 

[Old Rocks]

What will the minimum wage have to be for a 29 hour a week worker with no health insurance?

Your problem, not mine.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Ah yes, let's stop short circuiting the economic process and go back to the wonderful economic times we were enjoying in November, December of 2008, and January of 2009. Now that was a real wonderful GOP economy!

So what you're saying is, you have absolutely no answer to why 10 is better than 50. Partisan hackery is the best you could muster. I'd head back over to the Goebbel's Warming threads, Rocks.

 

[dblack]

10.10 for burger flippers that need to survive!!!!

10.10 for store stockers

10.10 for baggers!

Help people that are trying survive!

Or, better yet, force someone else to do it!

 

[deltex1]

Buoyed by Protests, Obama Embraces $10 Minimum Wage

What prompted President Obama to up the ante on the minimum wage? In January 2013, in his State of the Union address, he proposed raising the minimum wage from the current $7.25 to $9 an hour. Then last week he announced that he supports hiking it to $10.10 an hour.

It is unlikely that his change of heart was the result of key economic advisers persuading him that a bigger wage boost was needed to reduce poverty and stimulate the economy. Both of those things are true, and surely entered into his thinking, but the major impetus was political. He was responding to the growing protest movement, public opinion polls and election outcomes that reflect widespread sentiment that people who work full time shouldn't be mired in poverty. It is a heartening reminder that democracy - the messy mix of forces that typically pits organized people versus organized money - still can work.

Buoyed by Protests, Obama Embraces $10 Minimum Wage

I agree with him...$10 an hour is about all he's worth.

 

[dblack]

Why not 50 dollars an hour? I mean, if we're going to arbitrarily make such decisions, shouldn't go for a real boost?

Since minimum wage increases do not affect employment or prices, shouldn't we go for a economic recovery style M wage increase?

C'mon, Shallow and crew. Fucking dazzling me with your economic understanding.

It's funny. I remember when my son was ten years old and asked me why the government didn't just give everyone money so no one would be poor. Except, when I explained it to him, he got it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ah yes, let's stop short circuiting the economic process and go back to the wonderful economic times we were enjoying in November, December of 2008, and January of 2009. Now that was a real wonderful GOP economy!

You're such a fucking dunce. Which party controlled Congress for 2years prior to 07?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What will the minimum wage have to be for a 29 hour a week worker with no health insurance?

Your problem, not mine.

Dems, if you like your Senate majority and political power, you can keep it. Period.*

















* Nah. You guys are so fucked it's going to make the 2010 Shellacking look mild

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ah yes, let's stop short circuiting the economic process and go back to the wonderful economic times we were enjoying in November, December of 2008, and January of 2009. Now that was a real wonderful GOP economy!

You're such a fucking dunce. Which party controlled Congress for 2years prior to 07?

Um, global warming?

 

[Avatar4321]

Why wouldn't he embrace it? He's doing everything he can to destroy this economy. What we need is more unemployment, clearly.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Why 10.10 and not 12.52?