Ideas for fixing minimum wage.

[dblack]

But at the very least I would expect a full time job to feed, clothe and house the worker.

Why should every job pay the amount that you think you need? Why can't other people take jobs that don't pay that much?

Its a race to the bottom. why do we need a minimum wage ? Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could.

So don't work for scumbag employers. Or do you think government should ensure you can get a job (that pays what you want) as well?

 

[DOTR]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

I assume that, as a liberal, what is unsaid here is "federal minimum wage". States can mandate a minimum wage..but its subject to market forces therefore you MUST have it imposed federally where you can hide the damage it causes while transferring money to cover the destruction of capital.

I am always going to say this...why dont you chip in for minimum wage? Nobody would object if you went into mcdonalds and paid all the workers a little extra.

 

[Toronado3800]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

I assume that, as a liberal, what is unsaid here is "federal minimum wage". States can mandate a minimum wage..but its subject to market forces therefore you MUST have it imposed federally where you can hide the damage it causes while transferring money to cover the destruction of capital.

I am always going to say this...why dont you chip in for minimum wage? Nobody would object if you went into mcdonalds and paid all the workers a little extra.

If you wanna be snarky,

I do chip in for minimum wage. You do to. we all build things for billionaires and farmers all the time.

 

[Slyhunter]

Dear Tornado Person:

No intelligent person wants to significantly increase the minimum wage. Notice that when the Democrats had control of both house and the White House in Obama's first term, NOTHING was done on the minimum wage.

The minimum wage ITSELF is an economic abomination. The price of EVERYTHING should be determined by the marketplace and everyone's right of contract. If I am willing to sweep floors for $5/hr, and there is an employer who desires to employ me at that rate to sweep his floors, WHAT RIGHT DOES GOVERNMENT HAVE TO STEP IN AND SAY WE CANNOT ENTER INTO THIS CONTRACT?

Seriously. How does Government get the right to do this?

There is a natural minimum wage in every place at all times. If I tried to hire a fast food worker in NYC for $8/hr, I would get no takers. $10, probably not. But there is a wage at which I could get the workers I want, and they would be willing to work for that wage. The numbers would be less in Keokuk, Iowa.

Democrats like to point to local Minimum Wage laws that are. harmless, to "prove" that increasing the minimum wage doesn't harm anyone. But they choose locations where the natural minimum wage is already far above the legal minimum wage, so that the local law is actually irrelevant. But look at what's happening in Seattle. Hours are being cut, business near the city limits are closing due to competition, people are losing their jobs.

And remember that the people who are hurt by this are the people at the bottom of the economic totem pole - the ones who can least afford the hit. People with no HS diploma, single parents working part time to make ends meet. And so on.

Any time the Government (or any supervening force) steps in and imposes a price (wage) that is higher than the natural minimum, three things occur: (1) the consumers of that commodity use less of it (i.e., hours and headcount are cut), (b) the consumers seek alternatives (automation, self-service), and (3) a black market is formed by people who will skirt the law for their own benefit.

Every minimum wage increase will reduce the chances of high school kids getting part time and summer jobs. At $15/hr, there are a LOT of retired people, working mothers, and others who had given up work, who will come out of the woodwork. And what employer would prefer a pimply high school kid to a retired grandmother?

If someone is willing to work for a cot and some slop you think he should be allowed to do so. Someone so desperate to survive he's willing to become someone else's slave.
I say, HELL NO! Not in America.

 

[Slyhunter]

I remember reading a book where we animated the dead and they work for free and the damage it caused society having to compete for jobs in such an environment.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

But at the very least I would expect a full time job to feed, clothe and house the worker.

Why should every job pay the amount that you think you need? Why can't other people take jobs that don't pay that much?

Its a race to the bottom. why do we need a minimum wage ? Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could.

So don't work for scumbag employers. Or do you think government should ensure you can get a job (that pays what you want) as well?

Its up to you what you do for a living. Government should ensure that "scumbag employers" dont take the piss.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But at the very least I would expect a full time job to feed, clothe and house the worker.

Why should every job pay the amount that you think you need? Why can't other people take jobs that don't pay that much?

Its a race to the bottom. why do we need a minimum wage ? Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could.

Something like 97% of US workers make more than the minimum wage.
Are all of them going to get cut to $2/hour if the minimum wage is repealed?

 

[dblack]

The tech community has this really arrogant concept of the "useless class" that they use to characterize people who will be replaced by computers and automation. I don't buy it.

 

[DOTR]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

I assume that, as a liberal, what is unsaid here is "federal minimum wage". States can mandate a minimum wage..but its subject to market forces therefore you MUST have it imposed federally where you can hide the damage it causes while transferring money to cover the destruction of capital.

I am always going to say this...why dont you chip in for minimum wage? Nobody would object if you went into mcdonalds and paid all the workers a little extra.

If you wanna be snarky,

I do chip in for minimum wage. You do to. we all build things for billionaires and farmers all the time.

Then you wont be needing a law. Excuse me..a "federal" law.

 

[Slyhunter]

Guarantee every American a Government job at the minimum wage. If employers want to compete against the Government they'll need better jobs that pay better compensation.

You thought we had a bad immigration problem before.

 

[Toronado3800]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

I assume that, as a liberal, what is unsaid here is "federal minimum wage". States can mandate a minimum wage..but its subject to market forces therefore you MUST have it imposed federally where you can hide the damage it causes while transferring money to cover the destruction of capital.

I am always going to say this...why dont you chip in for minimum wage? Nobody would object if you went into mcdonalds and paid all the workers a little extra.

If you wanna be snarky,

I do chip in for minimum wage. You do to. we all build things for billionaires and farmers all the time.

Then you wont be needing a law. Excuse me..a "federal" law.

Yeah, I want a Federal law or mandate all 50 states need to meet this minimum or whatever. We're all in it together. On a side note, I'm tired of Missouri and Virginia and all the little cities around here out competing each other in attempts to give tax breaks to billionaires.

I shall not hide that just like Abraham Lincoln I'm not much of a states rights guy. That ship has sailed IMO.

 

[Andylusion]

The minimu wage should be set at a level where the state does not need to subsidise the wages of those in work. Corporate welfare should not come out of taxpayers pockets.

First off, if you subsidize the employee.... that isn't corporate welfare. The corporate was never obligated for anything, whether the tax payer is stupid enough to subsidize a someone or not.

Again, as has been proven MILLIONS OF TIMES.... if you raise the minimum wage, people lose jobs.

Walmart had an average of 330 people employed per store in 2006, when the minimum wage was $5.25.
By 2010, when the minimum wage was raised to $7.25, the average number of employees per store was down to 280.

50 less employed per store, is thousands on thousands of people unemployed. Those unemployed were collecting far more benefits, than they were when they were employed.

Which is better? Partial welfare while they are at least working a job? Or full welfare, with them unemployed?

No one is subsidizing Walmart. You are just flat out wrong.

What you are parroting is the corporate mantra. They will never pay a decent wage if the taxpayer chips in to help. every time the mnimum wage is raised we hear the same stuff. But here is the thing. You have a minimum wage that has been raised in the past. And yet you have record employment.

So how does that work ?

No, that's just a fact. Everything I said, was documented fact.

They do pay a decent wage.

I've worked mom&pop shops, and I've worked at large corporations.

If these companies are so terrible, let's ban them, and see how much better off you are at tiny shops.

Tiny companies not only pay minimum wage, but they also have almost no benefits whatsoever.

The last company I applied to work for, openly said they no longer provided any health insurance at all. This was after Obama Care was passed. Before that, everyone offered health insurance.

And not just health insurance either. I had a friend who worked for Walmart. She got into Walmarts tuition reimbursement program, and ended up getting a degree in civil engineering, while working at Walmart.

If she had been working at some small business, she could not have done any of that.

You people do not know what you are talking about.

Your anecdotal testimony does not trump my point. You have record employment despite having a minimum wage.

I would agree that Walmart are not all bad. They trade in the UK and I have friends that work for them. They do some good things but not many.

We had your argument in the UK. Minimum wage would cause unemployment. This didnt happen.

Zero hours contracts and the gig economy are the other things we have imported from the US. These are ticking bombs as folk are unable t save for pensions or get credit,buy houses and so on.

So the kid who works on zero hours and is financially not viable will eventually turn to the state to support him when he cant work.

Meanwhile his parasite employers count their billions. It is so very wrong.

Actually it does trump your point completely.

You claim businesses are not paying enough, and yet all the businesses you cite, pay on average, better wages than the alternatives.

We had your argument in the UK. Minimum wage would cause unemployment. This didnt happen.

Your unemployment rate is comparable to the US unemployment rate, because your real minimum wage isn't that much different than ours.

The only minimum wage that is higher, would be for those over the age of 25, which is about $10/hour. But most people over the age of 25 are already earning more than $10/hour.
I was earning $10/hr when I was 20. That's with zero education, and zero skills.

By age 25, everyone should be earning $10/hour or close to it. That simply is not an impressive minimum wage.

What is more interesting, is that people under the age of 25, or people in apprenticeships, have a much lower minimum wage. $5.40 an hour, is not a high minimum wage.

So it doesn't surprise me that you have very little negative consequences. It is the very people who have the lower minimum wage, that are most likely to be earning minimum wage.

Now if you bumped your minimum wage up to say.... £12/hour ($15.50 USD), and then you had little to no negative consequence.... ok then you would have compelling evidence that I would consider. In fact, if you imposed a £12/hour minimum wage across all ages, across all of the UK, and you did not have a recession.... I would change my mind on the minimum wage. That would be clear evidence to me.

But guarantee you won't do that. It would destroy the UK economy.

In fact, I think your minimum wage, actually encourages people to work in some ways.

The 25 and younger group, is the primary group that ends up unemployed in most countries.
By have a minimum wage that is lower for that specific groups, you actually cause employers to demand that group. Everyone that gets older (I wager) is less desirable to employers. Thus employers are specifically looking for younger workers, the very group most likely to be unemployed.

By having a minimum wage, that is lower for the group of people most likely to be unemployed, you directly encourage employment of that group.

But if you have all of these exemptions from the minimum wage, then it almost doesn't exist.

 

[Andylusion]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

I assume that, as a liberal, what is unsaid here is "federal minimum wage". States can mandate a minimum wage..but its subject to market forces therefore you MUST have it imposed federally where you can hide the damage it causes while transferring money to cover the destruction of capital.

I am always going to say this...why dont you chip in for minimum wage? Nobody would object if you went into mcdonalds and paid all the workers a little extra.

If you wanna be snarky,

I do chip in for minimum wage. You do to. we all build things for billionaires and farmers all the time.

Then you wont be needing a law. Excuse me..a "federal" law.

Yeah, I want a Federal law or mandate all 50 states need to meet this minimum or whatever. We're all in it together. On a side note, I'm tired of Missouri and Virginia and all the little cities around here out competing each other in attempts to give tax breaks to billionaires.

I shall not hide that just like Abraham Lincoln I'm not much of a states rights guy. That ship has sailed IMO.

This is what bothers me about your argument. If my city, and the people of my city, decide they want to give a tax break to a company....

What business is that of yours? Do I come and shove my hand up your butt hole, and interfere in your life?
Who told you, that what we do with our city, is any of your business? Didn't your parents teach you, like mine taught me, to mind your own business?

There is only one person you need to worry about. YOU. You and your city. If you have a problem with the city YOU live in, then YOU need to go to YOUR city hall meetings, and voice your opinions. Here's the kicker about Democracy. People have the right to make decisions that you don't like, and it's none of your business.

And by the way.... you say you don't like states rights. So we can impose our views on you? Federally mandated religion? Purity laws?

States rights, is what prevents the Federal government from turning into a tyranny. And while you may support Federal power when it is used for a purpose you agree with, just remember you don't know who will wield that power in the future.

It is always hilarious to me to see left-wing people complain about Trump using Executive Privileged. But executive privilege expanded under Obama.... and not one left-winger anywhere complained about it.

You expand the power of the Feds over the States for all the things you want.... but some day it will be used for things you don't.

 

[Andylusion]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

I assume that, as a liberal, what is unsaid here is "federal minimum wage". States can mandate a minimum wage..but its subject to market forces therefore you MUST have it imposed federally where you can hide the damage it causes while transferring money to cover the destruction of capital.

I am always going to say this...why dont you chip in for minimum wage? Nobody would object if you went into mcdonalds and paid all the workers a little extra.

If you wanna be snarky,

I do chip in for minimum wage. You do to. we all build things for billionaires and farmers all the time.

Right. But when you go to McDonalds, you can pay $20 for the big mac. You can just pay $20, and say keep the change to the cashier.

Why don't you do that? Do you not care about how little she's earning?

See the rest of us, see that as a fair wages for fair work. Pressing a picture button on a screen, and giving change, is not a job worth $20 an hour.

I don't want to pay more money for that. And if the cost is too high, I'll stop going there. I've said this before, I don't go to Chipotle anymore, because the cost is too high. Before the minimum wage went up, you could get a burrito for $5. That was good deal. Now it's almost $8 for a burrito.

If enough people start believing the cost isn't worth the labor, then the store closes and all those people are unemployed.

But if you want to pay more for everything, knock yourself out. You can pay more money on your own, without harming the rest of us.

 

[Andylusion]

The minimu wage should be set at a level where the state does not need to subsidise the wages of those in work. Corporate welfare should not come out of taxpayers pockets.

I don't even think I'd go that far. I think folks on the minimum wage should expect to have to live with other people and have a pretty tight budget. Nothing wrong with renting a room in your buddy's place.

Now I also hope if I ever find myself groveling my way back to McDonalds and taking back ANY job they can offer me I can prove my worth and run the place or at least get raises in a month then eventually find something better, and the same for most other people there.

I think most youngsters would expect to rough it. We all probably did it. But now we do it with government subsidies protecting the profits of the corporations.

So you are wrong. And you keep saying wrong things, but it doesn't make them right. No one is subsidizing or protecting the profits of the corporations.
You are just spouting disproved talking points of socialists, which have destroyed every country they have ever controlled.

 

[Andylusion]

You have a minimum wage that has been raised in the past. And yet you have record employment.

So how does that work ?

We've raised it before, so why not raise it to $100/hour?

What could go wrong?

Fair and reasonable is the thing.

$100/hour isn't fair and reasonable?

For what ?

For minimum wage work.

Come back when you want to talk to adults.

Come back when you want to talk with reality, and facts.

 

[Andylusion]

But at the very least I would expect a full time job to feed, clothe and house the worker.

Why should every job pay the amount that you think you need? Why can't other people take jobs that don't pay that much?

Its a race to the bottom. why do we need a minimum wage ? Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could.

Tommy, stop being an idiot.

Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could

There is no minimum wage in Norway, and most nordic countries.
Do employers pay nothing, because they can?

Germany up until 2015, had no minimum wage. Was every employer paying nothing because they can?

By your idiotic logic, no one anywhere would ever earn more than the minimum wage. My employer is not required to pay me more than $8.30/hour. Yet I earn almost double that. How did that happen Tommy?

You are so full of absolute crap. Dumbest Brit I've ever met.

 

[dblack]

I think it's fair to point out the downward pressure on wages caused by the welfare state. People on assistance only need to make up the difference. And they can use their ability to work for less to compete more effectively in the job market. It's a real problem. The people it really screws are the low-skilled workers who aren't on the dole.

So, to remedy the damage the welfare state does to the job market, we try to force employers to pay what they would have had to pay if not for the welfare. But that approach is fundamentally flawed because the law doesn't actually force them to pay their employees more. They can always opt to not pay them anything - lay them off.

It's not hard to understand how this works. If a business allocates $60/hr for its total labor costs, and currently employs six people at $10/hr, what will happen if a minimum wage law "forces" the business to pay employees $15/hr? Their total labor costs have jumped 50%. The business plan will have to change. They'll need to raise prices, reduce profits, or lay off the lowest performing employees. It would likely be a mix of the three. So in that scenario, it's likely one employee would be let go, and the others expected to work a bit harder for their 'raise'.

 

[dblack]

But at the very least I would expect a full time job to feed, clothe and house the worker.

Why should every job pay the amount that you think you need? Why can't other people take jobs that don't pay that much?

Its a race to the bottom. why do we need a minimum wage ? Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could.

Tommy, stop being an idiot.

Because scumbag emplyers would pay nothing if they could

There is no minimum wage in Norway, and most nordic countries.
Do employers pay nothing, because they can?

Germany up until 2015, had no minimum wage. Was every employer paying nothing because they can?

By your idiotic logic, no one anywhere would ever earn more than the minimum wage. My employer is not required to pay me more than $8.30/hour. Yet I earn almost double that. How did that happen Tommy?

You are so full of absolute crap. Dumbest Brit I've ever met.

It's same mindset that tells us people would wallow in their own feces and die without government mandates to do otherwise.

 

[Oddball]

I think it's fair to point out the downward pressure on wages caused by the welfare state. People on assistance only need to make up the difference. And they can use their ability to work for less to compete more effectively in the job market. It's a real problem. The people it really screws are the low-skilled workers who aren't on the dole.

So, to remedy the damage the welfare state does to the job market, we try to force employers to pay what they would have had to pay if not for the welfare. But that approach is fundamentally flawed because the law doesn't actually force them to pay their employees more. They can always opt to not pay them anything - lay them off.

It's not hard to understand how this works. If a business allocates $60/hr for its total labor costs, and currently employs six people at $10/hr, what will happen if a minimum wage law "forces" the business to pay employees $15/hr? Their total labor costs have jumped 50%. The business plan will have to change. They'll need to raise prices, reduce profits, or lay off the lowest performing employees. It would likely be a mix of the three. So in that scenario, it's likely one employee would be let go, and the others expected to work a bit harder for their 'raise'.

IOW, TANSTAFL.