Expectations of Minimum Wage

[Toddsterpatriot]

Can you translate that into English?

ToddsterPatriot, you apparently do not understand much of my posts. I apologize for some of my posts grammatical errors or missing words. Your request that I rewrite post #31, is fully justified.

I did try to explain how our federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power and the modifications of that minimum rate has affected USA's jobs' rates. Some of what I wrote was:
“Due to the economic concept of “wage differentials”, to the extent of the federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power and its legal enforcement in the USA, it also to some extent bolsters all other than USA's minimum wage rate”;

“You prefer to appear ignorant but you're well aware of federal minimum wage's boosts to all USA wages. It doesn't affect all wages and wage scales equally. It's effect's greater for lower, and lesser for higher wages. Its effect is proportionally inverse to the difference between the minimum's and the job's wage rates”.

I regret if this is all beyond your ability to comprehend. If you do not understand these paragraphs, I can do no more for you. Respectfully, Supposn

“Due to the economic concept of “wage differentials”, to the extent of the federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power and its legal enforcement in the USA, it also to some extent bolsters all other than USA's minimum wage rate”;

If only you could post some proof.

“You prefer to appear ignorant

And that's your territory, eh?

If you do not understand these paragraphs,

I understand your weak arguments and I reject them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

]
OldSoul, due to the economic concept of “wage differentials”, to the extent of the federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power and its legal enforcement in the USA, it also to some extent bolsters all other than USA's minimum wage rate. I would suppose that every nation capable of enforcing something similar to the U.S. Federal minimum wage, has such a similar law, or regulation, or some other organized rules that serve a purpose similar to our minimum wage rate.
The alternative is a race to the bottom and great extents of poverty within their nation. The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose.

The federal minimum wage rate is a minimum rate. It does not prevent a state for increasing that minimum within their own jurisdiction; it does prohibit a state from irresponsibly reducing that minimum within their jurisdiction and thus undermining our nation's economy.

Employers are not required to hire or retain any particular employees and generally they do no manage their enterprises in an altruistic manner. They do hire or fire, and they do increase particular employees wages.
The minimum rate does not regulate labor rates; its a minimum rate.

The U.S. Congress and our presidents agreed that unskilled workers are most vulnerable to being exploited, mistreated, and underpaid. Furthermore, due to the concept of wage differentials, minimum wage employees substandard conditions to some extent affect all employees conditions. I'm a proponent for increasing the federal minimum rate by 12.5% annually until the rate achieves purchasing power 25% greater than that of February 1968. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually increased when necessary to retain that same newly achieved purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn

The alternative is a race to the bottom and great extents of poverty within their nation. The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose.

Race to the bottom? If we eliminate the $7.25 Federal minimum wage, all wage rates above that will suddenly
be reduced for some reason? Employers are somehow bound to pay multiples of $7.25 now, because of a wage earned by the bottom 2% of workers?

 

[Supposn]

...The alternative is a race to the bottom and great extents of poverty within their nation. The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose. ...

... Race to the bottom? If we eliminate the $7.25 Federal minimum wage, all wage rates above that will suddenly be reduced for some reason? Employers are somehow bound to pay multiples of $7.25 now, because of a wage earned by the bottom 2% of workers?

ToddsterPatriot, not “suddenly”, but yes, that's true. You do understand it and only pretend to be ignorant.

Regarding the comment of multiples of $7.25, are you quoting someone else, or is that your concept? I stated that the differences between the minimum and a job's rate approximately vary proportionally. Who said they'd vary in precise increments of the federal minimum wage rate?

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...The alternative is a race to the bottom and great extents of poverty within their nation. The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose. ...

... Race to the bottom? If we eliminate the $7.25 Federal minimum wage, all wage rates above that will suddenly be reduced for some reason? Employers are somehow bound to pay multiples of $7.25 now, because of a wage earned by the bottom 2% of workers?

ToddsterPatriot, not “suddenly”, but yes, that's true. You do understand it and only pretend to be ignorant.

Regarding the comment of multiples of $7.25, are you quoting someone else, or is that your concept? I stated that the differences between the minimum and a job's rate approximately vary proportionally. Who said they'd vary in precise increments of the federal minimum wage rate?

Respectfully, Supposn

ToddsterPatriot, not “suddenly”, but yes, that's true.

Prove it.

Who said they'd vary in precise increments of the federal minimum wage rate?​

Who said anything about precise increments?

Now, back to your failure to provide proof for your silly claims.

If the current Federal Minimum wage of $7.25 was repealed tomorrow,
how much would the wages of someone making $21/hr, for instance, change?

​

 

[Supposn]

... If the current Federal Minimum wage of $7.25 was repealed tomorrow,

how much would the wages of someone making $21/hr, for instance, change?​

ToddsterPatriot, proportional to their job's rate of pay, less than an $8 per hour, and more than a $50 per hour employee's change of wage rate.

You expect or pretend to expect that economic concepts could be as precisely predicted as we expect of physical laboratory experiments and demonstrations? Even much of what we believe to know of the physical sciences are based upon statistical analysis of more “fuzzy” rather than precisely aligned data.

But you intend to continue to pretending your ignorance until I should begin to suspect you're not pretending? Respectfully, Supposn


​

[

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

... If the current Federal Minimum wage of $7.25 was repealed tomorrow,

how much would the wages of someone making $21/hr, for instance, change?​

ToddsterPatriot, proportional to their job's rate of pay, less than an $8 per hour, and more than a $50 per hour employee's change of wage rate.

You expect or pretend to expect that economic concepts could be as precisely predicted as we expect of physical laboratory experiments and demonstrations? Even much of what we believe to know of the physical sciences are based upon statistical analysis of more “fuzzy” rather than precisely aligned data.

But you intend to continue to pretending your ignorance until I should begin to suspect you're not pretending? Respectfully, Supposn


​

[

You expect or pretend to expect that economic concepts could be as precisely predicted as we expect of physical laboratory experiments and demonstrations?

I expect if you make a claim, that you show proof.

Prove that a mandated minimum wage that only the bottom 2% receive impacts the wages of everyone else.
So far, your proof consists of....the economic concept of “wage differentials”

But you intend to continue to pretending your ignorance

The only ignorance on display here belongs to you.

 

[oldsoul]

]
OldSoul, due to the economic concept of “wage differentials”, to the extent of the federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power and its legal enforcement in the USA, it also to some extent bolsters all other than USA's minimum wage rate. I would suppose that every nation capable of enforcing something similar to the U.S. Federal minimum wage, has such a similar law, or regulation, or some other organized rules that serve a purpose similar to our minimum wage rate.
The alternative is a race to the bottom and great extents of poverty within their nation. The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose.

The federal minimum wage rate is a minimum rate. It does not prevent a state for increasing that minimum within their own jurisdiction; it does prohibit a state from irresponsibly reducing that minimum within their jurisdiction and thus undermining our nation's economy.

Employers are not required to hire or retain any particular employees and generally they do no manage their enterprises in an altruistic manner. They do hire or fire, and they do increase particular employees wages.
The minimum rate does not regulate labor rates; its a minimum rate.

The U.S. Congress and our presidents agreed that unskilled workers are most vulnerable to being exploited, mistreated, and underpaid. Furthermore, due to the concept of wage differentials, minimum wage employees substandard conditions to some extent affect all employees conditions. I'm a proponent for increasing the federal minimum rate by 12.5% annually until the rate achieves purchasing power 25% greater than that of February 1968. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually increased when necessary to retain that same newly achieved purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn

Ok, lots to unpack here.

due to the economic concept of “wage differentials”, to the extent of the federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power and its legal enforcement in the USA, it also to some extent bolsters all other than USA's minimum wage rate. I would suppose that every nation capable of enforcing something similar to the U.S. Federal minimum wage, has such a similar law, or regulation, or some other organized rules that serve a purpose similar to our minimum wage rate.

Not sure how this has anything to do with my post, but ok.

The alternative is a race to the bottom and great extents of poverty within their nation.

Any evidence of that? I have evidence to the contrary:
My apologies, the image is not copying correctly. The link should work though.
https://ourworldindata.org/exports/...f7b5b41b33b410ab569dc6cd148ef_v10_850x600.svg

Looks to me like the GDP of the US has been on a pretty steady trend upward, doesn't look as if minimum wage laws have had any effect at all.

The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose.

Interesting, however, you seem to contradict that here:

The U.S. Congress and our presidents agreed that unskilled workers are most vulnerable to being exploited, mistreated, and underpaid.

If not for compassion, what was the motivation to "protect" those most vulnerable?

The minimum rate does not regulate labor rates; its a minimum rate.

Do I really need to point out the contradiction within that very statement?

While your argument seems, on the face of it, to be accurate, and even compelling, when one actually looks at the data, it completely falls apart.

 

[Supposn]

The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose.

Interesting, however, you seem to contradict that here:

The U.S. Congress and our presidents agreed that unskilled workers are most vulnerable to being exploited, mistreated, and underpaid.

If not for compassion, what was the motivation to "protect" those most vulnerable?...

OldSoul, you post of compassion as being contrary to to the U.S. Constitution? Our Declaration of Independence refers to some consideration for the opinions of others. The U.S. Constitution is certainly concerned with our nation’s “general welfare”. Among the duties of the U.S. Congress is to promote the general welfare. Promoting our national economy is promoting the general welfare.

USA’s living standards are germane to the general welfare. A median wage rate of poor purchasing power indicates lesser national living standards. If the incomesof the lowest third of USA’s income earners’ population is insufficient, it’s unlikely, (if not impossible) to have as sufficient median wage rate. If the federal minimum wage rate is insufficient and there’s not a general shortage of unskilled or poorly skilled labor, or our nation is blessed with extremely little proportion of unskilled or lesser skilled labor, then a poor economy is conceivable and is likely; otherwise, our nation’s economy is poorer than otherwise if the insufficient purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is
OldSoul, you post of compassion as being contrary to to the U.S. Constitution? Our Declaration of Independence refers to some consideration for the opinions of others. The U.S. Constitution is certainly concerned with our nation’s “general welfare”. Among the duties of the U.S. Congress is to promote the general welfare. Promoting our national economy is promoting the general welfare.

USA’s living standards are germane to the general welfare. A median wage rate of poor purchasing power indicates lesser national living standards. If the lowest third of USA’s middle earners’ incomes are insufficient, it’s unlikely, (if not impossible) to have as sufficient median wage rate. If the federal minimum wage rate is insufficient and there’s not a general shortage of unskilled or poorly skilled labor, or our nation is blessed with extremely little proportion of unskilled or lesser skilled labor, then a less poor economy is conceivable; otherwise, our nation’s economy is poorer due to the less sufficient purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate..

This is all based upon the concept that a nation’s economic policies should strive for the highest median living standards that are sustainable. Proponents of societies’ composed of fewer wealthy elitists supported by the poor masses, are conceivers of different economic goals.

I’m typing this in a public library and I’m under time restraints. When I return to my city of residence, I’ll be able, (if necessary) to post more clearly.

Respectfully, Supposn.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The justification of the minimum wage rate is not compassion. It promotes our nation's general welfare which is an economic purpose.

Interesting, however, you seem to contradict that here:

The U.S. Congress and our presidents agreed that unskilled workers are most vulnerable to being exploited, mistreated, and underpaid.

If not for compassion, what was the motivation to "protect" those most vulnerable?...

OldSoul, you post of compassion as being contrary to to the U.S. Constitution? Our Declaration of Independence refers to some consideration for the opinions of others. The U.S. Constitution is certainly concerned with our nation’s “general welfare”. Among the duties of the U.S. Congress is to promote the general welfare. Promoting our national economy is promoting the general welfare.

USA’s living standards are germane to the general welfare. A median wage rate of poor purchasing power indicates lesser national living standards. If the incomesof the lowest third of USA’s income earners’ population is insufficient, it’s unlikely, (if not impossible) to have as sufficient median wage rate. If the federal minimum wage rate is insufficient and there’s not a general shortage of unskilled or poorly skilled labor, or our nation is blessed with extremely little proportion of unskilled or lesser skilled labor, then a poor economy is conceivable and is likely; otherwise, our nation’s economy is poorer than otherwise if the insufficient purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is
OldSoul, you post of compassion as being contrary to to the U.S. Constitution? Our Declaration of Independence refers to some consideration for the opinions of others. The U.S. Constitution is certainly concerned with our nation’s “general welfare”. Among the duties of the U.S. Congress is to promote the general welfare. Promoting our national economy is promoting the general welfare.

USA’s living standards are germane to the general welfare. A median wage rate of poor purchasing power indicates lesser national living standards. If the lowest third of USA’s middle earners’ incomes are insufficient, it’s unlikely, (if not impossible) to have as sufficient median wage rate. If the federal minimum wage rate is insufficient and there’s not a general shortage of unskilled or poorly skilled labor, or our nation is blessed with extremely little proportion of unskilled or lesser skilled labor, then a less poor economy is conceivable; otherwise, our nation’s economy is poorer due to the less sufficient purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate..

This is all based upon the concept that a nation’s economic policies should strive for the highest median living standards that are sustainable. Proponents of societies’ composed of fewer wealthy elitists supported by the poor masses, are conceivers of different economic goals.

I’m typing this in a public library and I’m under time restraints. When I return to my city of residence, I’ll be able, (if necessary) to post more clearly.

Respectfully, Supposn.

USA’s living standards are germane to the general welfare. A median wage rate of poor purchasing power indicates lesser national living standards.

You could double the minimum wage and the median wouldn't move a cent.

 

[Wyatt earp]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm sure this thread has been done to death, but I have never followed any as of yet. I think it boils down to one simple question. Are minimum wage jobs meant to support and raise families, to be the primary income for families? Does it make sense for someone working at McDonald's for 30 hrs a week, if they can get those hours, to say hey, I think I'll have three kids? I know many Republicans make the erroneous statement that it is just high school kids getting their first jobs. Many, many adults work minimum wage jobs, and many adults are not able to move up to better jobs. This doesn't change anything however, because if you are an adult, I would hope you would not try to start a family on a minimum wage job. Why do Democrats think that adults who work minimum wage jobs should have kids they can't afford? I have a strong hunch that the attempt to make every single job in America a bread winning family supporting job is a folly. Does it make sense that every job should guarantee the ability to raise a family? I think it makes more sense for people to wait to have kids until if or when they can afford them. Is that a radical idea?

minimum wage jobs are not maximum wage jobs. why does the right wing have any problem with a minimum wage.

 

[Care4all]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

Where do you get that kind of silly opinion from bear??

Maybe some southern states used that as an excuse to not hire blacks, because those 'colored people' should be working for 'free', kind of sh*t, but the federal minimum wage was NOT created for that purpose...

 

[Supposn]

ToddsterPatriot and OldSoul, a median wage rate of poor purchasing power indicates lesser national living standard. If the income rates of the lowest third of USA’s income earners’ population are insufficient, it’s unlikely for USA's median wage rate to be comparatively sufficient.

The median wage rate could conceivably be greater only if USA' s population of lowest third income earners are extremely more represented by those earning the highest wage rates within their segment of income earners, and extremely few earners within their population's income bracket are earners of lesser wage rates.

Unfortunately within each population segment of income brackets, the segments' population of income earners are distributed in the opposite manner; the lower wage rate earners are more, and the higher wage rate earners within their income brackets are less represented. Due to this being the cases, if the federal mineral wage rate's insufficient, the median wage rate's also comparatively insufficient.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Wyatt earp]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

Where do you get that kind of silly opinion from bear??

Maybe some southern states used that as an excuse to not hire blacks, because those 'colored people' should be working for 'free', kind of sh*t, but the federal minimum wage was NOT created for that purpose...

Silly opinion?

Haven't vou ever read a history book in your life?

It was not even in the US, that was the reason for the minimum wage laws the world over ..


God why do I have to educate you liberals on here all the time.

 

[danielpalos]

...how much tax revenue do we need to raise?

 

[Wyatt earp]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

Where do you get that kind of silly opinion from bear??

Maybe some southern states used that as an excuse to not hire blacks, because those 'colored people' should be working for 'free', kind of sh*t, but the federal minimum wage was NOT created for that purpose...

Silly opinion?

Haven't vou ever read a history book in your life?

It was not even in the US, that was the reason for the minimum wage laws the world over ..


God why do I have to educate you liberals on here all the time.

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws | Chris Calton

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws

• 

160 COMMENTS
TAGS Big GovernmentU.S. History

• LEA ESTO EN ESPAÑOL

04/16/2017Chris Calton
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

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, unable to block railroad companies from hiring the non-unionized black workers, called for regulations preventing the employment of blacks. In 1909, a compromise was offered: a minimum wage, which was to be imposed equally on all races.

To the pro-minimum wage advocate, this may superficially seem like an anti-racist policy. During this time, with racism still rampant throughout the United States, blacks were only able to enjoy such high levels of employment by accepting lower wages than their white counterparts. These wage-gaps at the time genuinely were the product of racist sentiment.

But this new wage rule, of course, did not eliminate the racism of nineteenth-century employers. Instead, it displaced their racism at the expense of black workers.

 

[danielpalos]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

Where do you get that kind of silly opinion from bear??

Maybe some southern states used that as an excuse to not hire blacks, because those 'colored people' should be working for 'free', kind of sh*t, but the federal minimum wage was NOT created for that purpose...

Silly opinion?

Haven't vou ever read a history book in your life?

It was not even in the US, that was the reason for the minimum wage laws the world over ..


God why do I have to educate you liberals on here all the time.

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws | Chris Calton

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws

• 

160 COMMENTS
TAGS Big GovernmentU.S. History

• LEA ESTO EN ESPAÑOL

04/16/2017Chris Calton
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

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, unable to block railroad companies from hiring the non-unionized black workers, called for regulations preventing the employment of blacks. In 1909, a compromise was offered: a minimum wage, which was to be imposed equally on all races.

To the pro-minimum wage advocate, this may superficially seem like an anti-racist policy. During this time, with racism still rampant throughout the United States, blacks were only able to enjoy such high levels of employment by accepting lower wages than their white counterparts. These wage-gaps at the time genuinely were the product of racist sentiment.

But this new wage rule, of course, did not eliminate the racism of nineteenth-century employers. Instead, it displaced their racism at the expense of black workers.

black codes were worse.

 

[Wyatt earp]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

Where do you get that kind of silly opinion from bear??

Maybe some southern states used that as an excuse to not hire blacks, because those 'colored people' should be working for 'free', kind of sh*t, but the federal minimum wage was NOT created for that purpose...

Silly opinion?

Haven't vou ever read a history book in your life?

It was not even in the US, that was the reason for the minimum wage laws the world over ..


God why do I have to educate you liberals on here all the time.

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws | Chris Calton

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws

• 

160 COMMENTS
TAGS Big GovernmentU.S. History

• LEA ESTO EN ESPAÑOL

04/16/2017Chris Calton
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

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, unable to block railroad companies from hiring the non-unionized black workers, called for regulations preventing the employment of blacks. In 1909, a compromise was offered: a minimum wage, which was to be imposed equally on all races.

To the pro-minimum wage advocate, this may superficially seem like an anti-racist policy. During this time, with racism still rampant throughout the United States, blacks were only able to enjoy such high levels of employment by accepting lower wages than their white counterparts. These wage-gaps at the time genuinely were the product of racist sentiment.

But this new wage rule, of course, did not eliminate the racism of nineteenth-century employers. Instead, it displaced their racism at the expense of black workers.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2013/09/17/why-racists-love-the-minimum-wage-laws/amp/

Why racists love the minimum wage laws
By Thomas Sowell

September 17, 2013 | 8:35pm

Fast food workers to protest the minimum wage in New York.Carlo Allegri/Reuters
A survey of American economists found that 90 percent of them regarded minimum-wage laws as increasing the rate of unemployment among low-skilled workers.

Inexperience is often the problem: Only about 2 percent of Americans over the age of 24 earned the minimum wage.

Advocates of minimum-wage laws usually base their support of such laws on their estimate of how much a worker “needs” in order to have “a living wage” — or on some other criterion that pays little or no attention to the worker’s skill level, experience or general productivity. So it’s hardly surprising that minimum-wage laws set wages that price many a young worker out of a job.

 

[danielpalos]

To answer the Title of this thread, minimum wage was suppose to be a minimum living wage, that a family could live on, when it was first created.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.


----------------------------------

My State just went to $11 an hour, Jan 1st, 2020 it is to go to $12 an hour....

No it wasnt, It was to keep the Black man from working.

Where do you get that kind of silly opinion from bear??

Maybe some southern states used that as an excuse to not hire blacks, because those 'colored people' should be working for 'free', kind of sh*t, but the federal minimum wage was NOT created for that purpose...

Silly opinion?

Haven't vou ever read a history book in your life?

It was not even in the US, that was the reason for the minimum wage laws the world over ..


God why do I have to educate you liberals on here all the time.

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws | Chris Calton

The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws

• 

160 COMMENTS
TAGS Big GovernmentU.S. History

• LEA ESTO EN ESPAÑOL

04/16/2017Chris Calton
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

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, unable to block railroad companies from hiring the non-unionized black workers, called for regulations preventing the employment of blacks. In 1909, a compromise was offered: a minimum wage, which was to be imposed equally on all races.

To the pro-minimum wage advocate, this may superficially seem like an anti-racist policy. During this time, with racism still rampant throughout the United States, blacks were only able to enjoy such high levels of employment by accepting lower wages than their white counterparts. These wage-gaps at the time genuinely were the product of racist sentiment.

But this new wage rule, of course, did not eliminate the racism of nineteenth-century employers. Instead, it displaced their racism at the expense of black workers.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2013/09/17/why-racists-love-the-minimum-wage-laws/amp/

Why racists love the minimum wage laws
By Thomas Sowell

September 17, 2013 | 8:35pm

Fast food workers to protest the minimum wage in New York.Carlo Allegri/Reuters
A survey of American economists found that 90 percent of them regarded minimum-wage laws as increasing the rate of unemployment among low-skilled workers.

Inexperience is often the problem: Only about 2 percent of Americans over the age of 24 earned the minimum wage.

Advocates of minimum-wage laws usually base their support of such laws on their estimate of how much a worker “needs” in order to have “a living wage” — or on some other criterion that pays little or no attention to the worker’s skill level, experience or general productivity. So it’s hardly surprising that minimum-wage laws set wages that price many a young worker out of a job.

They are lousy Americans if they don't believe in our declaration of independence.

 

[dblack]

ToddsterPatriot, to the extent that there's a scarcity of available or potentially available labor to fill any particular existing or anticipated job opening, it is that scarcity which will primarily the market rate for that job's labor; (we're assuming an effectively enforced federal minimum rate that's less than that what would (in absence of the enforced minimum rate), then be less than the market rate for a scarcely available employee). Other than such cases, every USA wage is to some extent bolstered by the extent of the enforced minimum rate's purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn

Can you translate that into English?

That would spoil all the fun!