Ideas for fixing minimum wage.

[danielpalos]

Labor needs to be able to afford our First World economy.

Back when I was in the disaster response game, we would have these conventions from time to time where you’d go and share ideas and techniques blah blah blah. The group from the Bay Area had an advertising slogan about their official response posture; “The First 72 Are On You” meaning that you needed to have a 3 day supply of food, water, medicine, clothing… The reason given was that the Bay Area is so expensive that few first responders can afford to live there, the land is so expensive that storing enough supplies for 200,000 people is not cost effective (and would probably be over-run well before by homeless), and that if they did pre-position them, nobody would be there to effectively dispense the goodies.

Would we have this problem if Persons could simply apply for unemployment compensation for merely being unemployed in our at-will employment States?

View attachment 231008

oh, look; no valid arguments from the Right Wing. Only memes and other forms of fallacies.

View attachment 231107

that is how seriously i take the right wing, in the abortion threads, too.

 

[dblack]

That increasing the minimum wage leads to unemployment. Amazon raised their minimum wage earlier this year. No such massive layoffs ensued. Several states and municipalities have followed suit as well as preceded the actions by Amazon. No massive layoffs ensued. In fact, unemployment is very low right now.

Huh?? Amazon raised the wages themselves. Clearly they thought it was viable. We're talking about laws that forces business to raise wages, even when it's not.

So that is the idiotic assumptions you are making.

My assumption is that raising labor costs for business will have an impact of some kind. It will cause layoffs, cause price increases, or lower profits. Likely some mix of three. It's inevitable.

So, if you're denying this assumption, why not raise minimum wage more and more? Why not raise it 'till we're all in tall cotton? Is it because you know that I'm right, and you know that raising the minimum wage significantly would, in fact, cause significant unemployment and inflation?

 

[candycorn]

That increasing the minimum wage leads to unemployment. Amazon raised their minimum wage earlier this year. No such massive layoffs ensued. Several states and municipalities have followed suit as well as preceded the actions by Amazon. No massive layoffs ensued. In fact, unemployment is very low right now.

Huh?? Amazon raised the wages themselves. Clearly they thought it was viable. We're talking about laws that forces business to raise wages, even when it's not.

Amazon did, several states did, several cities did. No massive lay offs.
The argument that raising the MW leads to layoffs was proven false over and over.

So that is the idiotic assumptions you are making.

My assumption is that raising labor costs for business will have an impact of some kind. It will cause layoffs, cause price increases, or lower profits. Likely some mix of three. It's inevitable.

So, if you're denying this assumption, why not raise minimum wage more and more? Why not raise it 'till we're all in tall cotton? Is it because you know that I'm right, and you know that raising the minimum wage significantly would, in fact, cause significant unemployment and inflation?

Your assumption was proven wrong; by several entities.

 

[dblack]

Amazon did, several states did, several cities did. No massive lay offs.
The argument that raising the MW leads to layoffs was proven false over and over.

Businesses raising wages voluntarily has nothing to do with minimum wage laws.

Your assumption was proven wrong; by several entities.

Then why limit your aspirations? If you really believe that, why only $15/hr? Are you just cruel? Why not $20/hr? Why not more?

I haven't yet found a mw advocate who will answer this question honestly. Clearly you have some reason for not raising minimum wage to very high levels. Is it a secret?

 

[candycorn]

Amazon did, several states did, several cities did. No massive lay offs.
The argument that raising the MW leads to layoffs was proven false over and over.

Businesses raising wages voluntarily has nothing to do with minimum wage laws.

Again, several state and municipal governments have raised their minimum wage in their jurisdiction. No massive layoffs.

Seattle approves $15/hr minimum wage.

Missouri did it in November.

Your assumption was proven wrong; by several entities.

Then why limit your aspirations? If you really believe that, why only $15/hr? Are you just cruel? Why not $20/hr? Why not more?

I haven't yet found a mw advocate who will answer this question honestly. Clearly you have some reason for not raising minimum wage to very high levels. Is it a secret?

Raising it 30% or so to $10 per hour is a healthy increase.

Seldom do most workers get a 30% raise.

I’ve said it numerous times. I haven’t yet found someone on the board who cannot read English. Perhaps you’re the first.

 

[danielpalos]

...solving simple poverty via market friendly means.

 

[dblack]

Again, several state and municipal governments have raised their minimum wage in their jurisdiction. No massive layoffs. ....

Then why limit your aspirations? If you really believe that, why only $15/hr? Are you just cruel? Why not $20/hr? Why not more?

I haven't yet found a mw advocate who will answer this question honestly. Clearly you have some reason for not raising minimum wage to very high levels. Is it a secret?

Raising it 30% or so to $10 per hour is a healthy increase.

Seldom do most workers get a 30% raise.

I’ve said it numerous times. I haven’t yet found someone on the board who cannot read English. Perhaps you’re the first.

Why can't you just answer the question? Is it that painful? If there are no downsides to raising MW, why not raise it to the point that we're all rich?

 

[blastoff]

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?

Didn’t know the minimum wage was broken. Must have missed a memo.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

Didn’t know the minimum wage was broken. Must have missed a memo.

social services cost the equivalent to fourteen dollars an hour. a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage makes economic sense.

 

[candycorn]

Again, several state and municipal governments have raised their minimum wage in their jurisdiction. No massive layoffs. ....

Then why limit your aspirations? If you really believe that, why only $15/hr? Are you just cruel? Why not $20/hr? Why not more?

I haven't yet found a mw advocate who will answer this question honestly. Clearly you have some reason for not raising minimum wage to very high levels. Is it a secret?

Raising it 30% or so to $10 per hour is a healthy increase.

Seldom do most workers get a 30% raise.

I’ve said it numerous times. I haven’t yet found someone on the board who cannot read English. Perhaps you’re the first.

Why can't you just answer the question? Is it that painful? If there are no downsides to raising MW, why not raise it to the point that we're all rich?

I don’t recall making the argument that there are no downsides.

 

[dblack]

Again, several state and municipal governments have raised their minimum wage in their jurisdiction. No massive layoffs. ....

Then why limit your aspirations? If you really believe that, why only $15/hr? Are you just cruel? Why not $20/hr? Why not more?

I haven't yet found a mw advocate who will answer this question honestly. Clearly you have some reason for not raising minimum wage to very high levels. Is it a secret?

Raising it 30% or so to $10 per hour is a healthy increase.

Seldom do most workers get a 30% raise.

I’ve said it numerous times. I haven’t yet found someone on the board who cannot read English. Perhaps you’re the first.

Why can't you just answer the question? Is it that painful? If there are no downsides to raising MW, why not raise it to the point that we're all rich?

I don’t recall making the argument that there are no downsides.

Then what are they?!?!? Why the evasion?

 

[hadit]

I'll take 15 I only make 10.

Labor needs to be able to afford our First World economy.

Back when I was in the disaster response game, we would have these conventions from time to time where you’d go and share ideas and techniques blah blah blah. The group from the Bay Area had an advertising slogan about their official response posture; “The First 72 Are On You” meaning that you needed to have a 3 day supply of food, water, medicine, clothing… The reason given was that the Bay Area is so expensive that few first responders can afford to live there, the land is so expensive that storing enough supplies for 200,000 people is not cost effective (and would probably be over-run well before by homeless), and that if they did pre-position them, nobody would be there to effectively dispense the goodies.

Would we have this problem if Persons could simply apply for unemployment compensation for merely being unemployed in our at-will employment States?

View attachment 231008

oh, look; no valid arguments from the Right Wing. Only memes and other forms of fallacies.

That's what you cause when you continue spouting meaningless phrases after they have been destroyed meant times as if they are significant. IOW, why give you substance when all you have is no valid argument?

 

[hadit]

I'll take 15 I only make 10.

Labor needs to be able to afford our First World economy.

Back when I was in the disaster response game, we would have these conventions from time to time where you’d go and share ideas and techniques blah blah blah. The group from the Bay Area had an advertising slogan about their official response posture; “The First 72 Are On You” meaning that you needed to have a 3 day supply of food, water, medicine, clothing… The reason given was that the Bay Area is so expensive that few first responders can afford to live there, the land is so expensive that storing enough supplies for 200,000 people is not cost effective (and would probably be over-run well before by homeless), and that if they did pre-position them, nobody would be there to effectively dispense the goodies.

Would we have this problem if Persons could simply apply for unemployment compensation for merely being unemployed in our at-will employment States?

Translation: you want to be paid for not working. That's your bottom line and what your otherwise meaningless phrases really mean.

capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment. it is natural.

That's nothing more than your excuse to avoid the responsibility of providing for yourself. Yes, there will always be the unemployed, but here's the secret, so pay careful attention:

Are you disabled and CAN'T work? Legitimate claim and you deserve assistance. There are programs to help you.

Were you laid off through no fault of your own and can't find work for a while? Legitimate claim and you deserve TEMPORARY access to the unemployment insurance your employer has been paying all this time. That's what it's there for. That, and NOT for those who didn't work at all.

Are you a single parent working as much as you can while trying to raise your children? Legitimate claim and you deserve TEMPORARY assistance, but don't expect to have more children and stick the taxpayers for all the bills.

If you DON'T fit into one of those categories, don't expect the taxpayers to pick up the tab for your life. Choosing not to work does not put you in the ranks of the "natural rate of unemployment". Did you notice the word I capitalized in the points above? TEMPORARY. That means we're willing to help you get back on your feet, but we're not willing to carry you when you can walk on your own. This is what it boils down to: you don't want to work a job and you want the taxpayers to pay your bills WHEN YOU ARE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF. You cloak that desire in vague, gassy terms, but at its heart, that's what it is. Stop it. Stop pretending. Stop repeating your failed, meaningless phrases. Just stop it.

 

[dblack]

Again, several state and municipal governments have raised their minimum wage in their jurisdiction. No massive layoffs. ....

Then why limit your aspirations? If you really believe that, why only $15/hr? Are you just cruel? Why not $20/hr? Why not more?

I haven't yet found a mw advocate who will answer this question honestly. Clearly you have some reason for not raising minimum wage to very high levels. Is it a secret?

Raising it 30% or so to $10 per hour is a healthy increase.

Seldom do most workers get a 30% raise.

I’ve said it numerous times. I haven’t yet found someone on the board who cannot read English. Perhaps you’re the first.

Why can't you just answer the question? Is it that painful? If there are no downsides to raising MW, why not raise it to the point that we're all rich?

I don’t recall making the argument that there are no downsides.

Then what are they?!?!? Why the evasion?

*cricket party*!!

 

[hadit]

That increasing the minimum wage leads to unemployment. Amazon raised their minimum wage earlier this year. No such massive layoffs ensued. Several states and municipalities have followed suit as well as preceded the actions by Amazon. No massive layoffs ensued. In fact, unemployment is very low right now.

Huh?? Amazon raised the wages themselves. Clearly they thought it was viable. We're talking about laws that forces business to raise wages, even when it's not.

So that is the idiotic assumptions you are making.

My assumption is that raising labor costs for business will have an impact of some kind. It will cause layoffs, cause price increases, or lower profits. Likely some mix of three. It's inevitable.

So, if you're denying this assumption, why not raise minimum wage more and more? Why not raise it 'till we're all in tall cotton? Is it because you know that I'm right, and you know that raising the minimum wage significantly would, in fact, cause significant unemployment and inflation?

That is the correct motorcycle. If there was no ill effect from raising the MW, we could simply raise it to $100/hr and eliminate poverty. The truth is, a MW works only as long as it's kept low enough and raised by small enough increments that it doesn't really matter.

 

[hadit]

That increasing the minimum wage leads to unemployment. Amazon raised their minimum wage earlier this year. No such massive layoffs ensued. Several states and municipalities have followed suit as well as preceded the actions by Amazon. No massive layoffs ensued. In fact, unemployment is very low right now.

Huh?? Amazon raised the wages themselves. Clearly they thought it was viable. We're talking about laws that forces business to raise wages, even when it's not.

Amazon did, several states did, several cities did. No massive lay offs.
The argument that raising the MW leads to layoffs was proven false over and over.

So that is the idiotic assumptions you are making.

My assumption is that raising labor costs for business will have an impact of some kind. It will cause layoffs, cause price increases, or lower profits. Likely some mix of three. It's inevitable.

So, if you're denying this assumption, why not raise minimum wage more and more? Why not raise it 'till we're all in tall cotton? Is it because you know that I'm right, and you know that raising the minimum wage significantly would, in fact, cause significant unemployment and inflation?

Your assumption was proven wrong; by several entities.

It is a matter of degree. Raise the MW by a little and the impact is relatively small. A few jobs go away, some get replaced by automation, a few more minority teenagers can't break into the job market. Jack it overnight from 2-3% of workers getting MW to almost half and you cause big problems.

 

[danielpalos]

Labor needs to be able to afford our First World economy.

Back when I was in the disaster response game, we would have these conventions from time to time where you’d go and share ideas and techniques blah blah blah. The group from the Bay Area had an advertising slogan about their official response posture; “The First 72 Are On You” meaning that you needed to have a 3 day supply of food, water, medicine, clothing… The reason given was that the Bay Area is so expensive that few first responders can afford to live there, the land is so expensive that storing enough supplies for 200,000 people is not cost effective (and would probably be over-run well before by homeless), and that if they did pre-position them, nobody would be there to effectively dispense the goodies.

Would we have this problem if Persons could simply apply for unemployment compensation for merely being unemployed in our at-will employment States?

View attachment 231008

oh, look; no valid arguments from the Right Wing. Only memes and other forms of fallacies.

That's what you cause when you continue spouting meaningless phrases after they have been destroyed meant times as if they are significant. IOW, why give you substance when all you have is no valid argument?

let's solve simple poverty via market friendly means.

 

[danielpalos]

Labor needs to be able to afford our First World economy.

Back when I was in the disaster response game, we would have these conventions from time to time where you’d go and share ideas and techniques blah blah blah. The group from the Bay Area had an advertising slogan about their official response posture; “The First 72 Are On You” meaning that you needed to have a 3 day supply of food, water, medicine, clothing… The reason given was that the Bay Area is so expensive that few first responders can afford to live there, the land is so expensive that storing enough supplies for 200,000 people is not cost effective (and would probably be over-run well before by homeless), and that if they did pre-position them, nobody would be there to effectively dispense the goodies.

Would we have this problem if Persons could simply apply for unemployment compensation for merely being unemployed in our at-will employment States?

Translation: you want to be paid for not working. That's your bottom line and what your otherwise meaningless phrases really mean.

capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment. it is natural.

That's nothing more than your excuse to avoid the responsibility of providing for yourself. Yes, there will always be the unemployed, but here's the secret, so pay careful attention:

Are you disabled and CAN'T work? Legitimate claim and you deserve assistance. There are programs to help you.

Were you laid off through no fault of your own and can't find work for a while? Legitimate claim and you deserve TEMPORARY access to the unemployment insurance your employer has been paying all this time. That's what it's there for. That, and NOT for those who didn't work at all.

Are you a single parent working as much as you can while trying to raise your children? Legitimate claim and you deserve TEMPORARY assistance, but don't expect to have more children and stick the taxpayers for all the bills.

If you DON'T fit into one of those categories, don't expect the taxpayers to pick up the tab for your life. Choosing not to work does not put you in the ranks of the "natural rate of unemployment". Did you notice the word I capitalized in the points above? TEMPORARY. That means we're willing to help you get back on your feet, but we're not willing to carry you when you can walk on your own. This is what it boils down to: you don't want to work a job and you want the taxpayers to pay your bills WHEN YOU ARE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF. You cloak that desire in vague, gassy terms, but at its heart, that's what it is. Stop it. Stop pretending. Stop repeating your failed, meaningless phrases. Just stop it.

how does what You advocate help solve our homeless problem?

 

[LilOlLady]

Deport cheap illegal labor. But I will pay more for lettuce. But I will have more money to pay more for lettuce.

 

[danielpalos]

Deport cheap illegal labor. But I will pay more for lettuce. But I will have more money to pay more for lettuce.

only lousy capitalists lose money on border policy. we have a Commerce Clause.