MW advocates - what are the downsides of minimum wage?

Minimum wage was never supposed to be a "living wage." It was supposed to be for kids under 18 during summer.

As government got bigger and bigger and more expensive, it has increased costs on businesses, driven some out of the US, and forced wages DOWN.

Want lower end wages to RISE?

CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING.


Nobody was bitching about minimum wage before W's 8 year Bible Thumping Socialist PORKFEST.... followed by QUEER-O.
Thats also a dumb argument. Welfare wasnt meant to be for anyone other than whites but that too changed with time. The facts are that people with families are working shitty jobs for low wages. The MW should be something that gives people with a work ethic a reason to not be on welfare.


So how does rasing minimum wage help?
They can afford to live without using welfare.


They would have to raise welfare, because they are still making minimum wage. What part of that can't you comprehend?


.
Please elaborate on how you came to that conclusion.


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.
 
Thats also a dumb argument. Welfare wasnt meant to be for anyone other than whites but that too changed with time. The facts are that people with families are working shitty jobs for low wages. The MW should be something that gives people with a work ethic a reason to not be on welfare.


So how does rasing minimum wage help?
They can afford to live without using welfare.


They would have to raise welfare, because they are still making minimum wage. What part of that can't you comprehend?


.
Please elaborate on how you came to that conclusion.


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.
They didnt change welfare due to raising MW. Please elaborate on how you are connecting the two.
 
If MW were raised to $11 an hour , welfare use would drop by at least 15% by most studies



Did a CERTIFIED CLIMATE "Scientist" do that "study?"


I mean I'm a very conservative guy. The ONLY reason I support a minimum wage law and increasing that to an actual value that is worth something is because it is obvious that doing so will save tax payers money. I'm actually a small government person.

I don't care if businesses make or lose money, that's their problem. And the same, I don't care if a person can afford to raise 4 children on what McDonalds pays. That is THEIR problem. All I care about is the equilibrium that saves the government the most money.

I even grant you that the assholes in charge would more likely just find somewhere else to spend the money rather than saying "oh okay our expenses are less now" but we have to try.
 
E]


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.


That is correct dummy, as the minimum wage has decreased in value over the years, the threshold for being on welfare has also risen to match inflation. If the MW had also been keeping up with inflation we would see roughly the same number of full time workers on welfare as we did 40 years ago.

Logic isn't yall's strong suit.
 
So how does rasing minimum wage help?
They can afford to live without using welfare.


They would have to raise welfare, because they are still making minimum wage. What part of that can't you comprehend?


.
Please elaborate on how you came to that conclusion.


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.
They didnt change welfare due to raising MW. Please elaborate on how you are connecting the two.

The MW hasn't actually risen in about 40 years. don't let them tell you that lie.
 
Minimum wage question comes down first and foremost to the question of : IS IT FAIR?

I think about $10-11 national minimum wage is fair and from there individual states with high cost of living can go up to ~$15.

Less than that is exploitative to the workers and more than that is not fair to the employers and customers that have to absorb the cost.

THAT is how you begin sane discussion
 
They can afford to live without using welfare.


They would have to raise welfare, because they are still making minimum wage. What part of that can't you comprehend?


.
Please elaborate on how you came to that conclusion.


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.
They didnt change welfare due to raising MW. Please elaborate on how you are connecting the two.

The MW hasn't actually risen in about 40 years. don't let them tell you that lie.
I was going to let him and then burst his bubble. As you can see he cant figure out how to answer the question I just put to him.
 
Minimum wage was never supposed to be a "living wage." It was supposed to be for kids under 18 during summer.

As government got bigger and bigger and more expensive, it has increased costs on businesses, driven some out of the US, and forced wages DOWN.

Want lower end wages to RISE?

CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING.


Nobody was bitching about minimum wage before W's 8 year Bible Thumping Socialist PORKFEST.... followed by QUEER-O.
Thats also a dumb argument. Welfare wasnt meant to be for anyone other than whites but that too changed with time. The facts are that people with families are working shitty jobs for low wages. The MW should be something that gives people with a work ethic a reason to not be on welfare.


So how does rasing minimum wage help?


If MW were raised to $11 an hour , welfare use would drop by at least 15% by most studies. That's a pretty good savings of tax dollars.

I'd like to see a link to any study that claims the 15% drop, does it look at the big picture or just the people who get the pay raise? I did a little checking on this, and there are studies that support the conclusion that raising the M-Wage does cut welfare spending, for those who find themselves above the cutoff point for receiving certain benefits. Which is true enough, but there are other studies that say as a result of the increase in the M-Wage you also have people that have their hours cut or even lose their jobs, or young people entering the workforce that can't find a job. So those people get more benefits and that outweighs the people who get less.

From the link below:


One of the strangest arguments for raising the minimum wage has come from liberals claiming it will cut welfare spending. Many on the left argue that raising the minimum wage will raise earningsand cause workers to qualify for fewer welfare benefits.

It’s a strange argument because most liberals have no problem with welfare spending. They want to increase it dramatically. The argument seems primarily aimed at persuading conservatives to support raising the minimum wage.

Ron Unz and Phyllis Schlafly now support raising the minimum wage for exactly that reason. Indeed, virtually everyone on the right wants to reduce government dependence by expanding economic opportunity. If raising the minimum wage reduces welfare dependence, that‘s a strong argument for raising the minimum wage.

Last week economists shed some empirical light on this question. Joseph Sabia and Thanh Nguyen of San Diego State University released the most comprehensive analysis to date of the effects of minimum-wage increases on welfare caseloads. They examined every minimum wage hike between 1980 and 2014, as well as spending on the largest federal means-tested welfare programs: SNAP (aka food stamps), Medicaid, school lunches, AFDC/TANF, Section 8 housing vouchers, and WIC.

Their conclusion

COMMENTS
Sabia and Nguyen did indeed find that minimum-wage hikes raise some workers’ pay, reducing their eligibility for welfare benefits. But other workers lose (or cannot find) jobs. They qualify for even more welfare benefits than before. On balance these two effects cancel each other out, leaving total spending unchanged.

Minimum Wage Increase -- Welfare Spending Wont' Decrease Because of It | National Review
 
I recall when I was a business owner, California increased its MW by 26.87%. The largest increase over a 60 year period. My SALES jumped noticeably. This means that before the increase, my sales were kept down by not having the increase.

Stands to reason, How are you going to sell anything when thousands of people around you are working for $3.35/hour ? ($7.16 in 2018 dollars) ]

The increase gave MW workers $334 more a month (in 2018 $$)
 
Minimum wage was never supposed to be a "living wage." It was supposed to be for kids under 18 during summer.

As government got bigger and bigger and more expensive, it has increased costs on businesses, driven some out of the US, and forced wages DOWN.

Want lower end wages to RISE?

CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING.


Nobody was bitching about minimum wage before W's 8 year Bible Thumping Socialist PORKFEST.... followed by QUEER-O.
Thats also a dumb argument. Welfare wasnt meant to be for anyone other than whites but that too changed with time. The facts are that people with families are working shitty jobs for low wages. The MW should be something that gives people with a work ethic a reason to not be on welfare.


So how does rasing minimum wage help?


If MW were raised to $11 an hour , welfare use would drop by at least 15% by most studies. That's a pretty good savings of tax dollars.

I'd like to see a link to any study that claims the 15% drop, does it look at the big picture or just the people who get the pay raise? I did a little checking on this, and there are studies that support the conclusion that raising the M-Wage does cut welfare spending, for those who find themselves above the cutoff point for receiving certain benefits. Which is true enough, but there are other studies that say as a result of the increase in the M-Wage you also have people that have their hours cut or even lose their jobs, or young people entering the workforce that can't find a job. So those people get more benefits and that outweighs the people who get less.




There is most certainly some merit to that argument, which of course makes a boom the ideal time to raise the minimum wage. Trump should be pursuing this now.

And again, there has to be some thought to how much to raise it. I mean $11-12 an hour just places it right back where it would be if it had kept up with inflation, and with <3% unemployment companies arent going to be letting go of workers, and those who do get let go because of say a $2 an hour raise which is $80 a week obviously, honestly tough shit for them, they should have made themselves more valuable to their employer.

And if this is truly the path you believe in you have to couple it with not rewarding people who simply choose not to work at all. You can't have both.


ETA I had to delete the link because I can't post links, please don't think I was editing your post in any way.
 
So how does rasing minimum wage help?
They can afford to live without using welfare.


They would have to raise welfare, because they are still making minimum wage. What part of that can't you comprehend?


.
Please elaborate on how you came to that conclusion.


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.
They didnt change welfare due to raising MW. Please elaborate on how you are connecting the two.


Welfare is based on the poverty level, again it doesn't matter where you raise MW up to your still at the poverty level


DUH...
.
 
They can afford to live without using welfare.


They would have to raise welfare, because they are still making minimum wage. What part of that can't you comprehend?


.
Please elaborate on how you came to that conclusion.


Was welfare the same level 20 years ago? No they change it year to year.


.
They didnt change welfare due to raising MW. Please elaborate on how you are connecting the two.


Welfare is based on the poverty level, again it doesn't matter where you raise MW up to your still at the poverty level


DUH...
.
Your claim was that you would have to raise welfare due to MW not poverty level. You still havent explained how raising MW affects welfare? If poverty level is A and welfare equals A, how would raising MW cause A to go up?

How is poverty measured in the United States? - UC Davis Center for Poverty Research

"Both the official and supplemental poverty measures are based on estimates of the level of income needed to cover basic needs. Those who live in households with earnings below those incomes are considered to be in poverty."
 
Last edited:
I mean I'm a very conservative guy. The ONLY reason I support a minimum wage law and increasing that to an actual value that is worth something is because it is obvious that doing so will save tax payers money. I'm actually a small government person.
This is an important part of this, and one that those are against the minimum wage generally avoid.

When a person is working full time and yet still needs government assistance, then the government is clearly subsidizing the employer. I don't see how an honest "small government" person can justify that.

And exactly, this is about finding equilibrium. But we just don't seem to have the capacity to put that much independent thought into it. For both ends, it's all or nothing. Intellectual laziness. As usual.
.
 
I mean I'm a very conservative guy. The ONLY reason I support a minimum wage law and increasing that to an actual value that is worth something is because it is obvious that doing so will save tax payers money. I'm actually a small government person.
This is an important part of this, and one that those are against the minimum wage generally avoid.

When a person is working full time and yet still needs government assistance, then the government is clearly subsidizing the employer. I don't see how an honest "small government" person can justify that.

And exactly, this is about finding equilibrium. But we just don't seem to have the capacity to put that much independent thought into it. For both ends, it's all or nothing. Intellectual laziness. As usual.
.
Well if youre like the OP you just raise the MW to $200/hr and you win your argument.
 
I mean I'm a very conservative guy. The ONLY reason I support a minimum wage law and increasing that to an actual value that is worth something is because it is obvious that doing so will save tax payers money. I'm actually a small government person.
This is an important part of this, and one that those are against the minimum wage generally avoid.

When a person is working full time and yet still needs government assistance, then the government is clearly subsidizing the employer. I don't see how an honest "small government" person can justify that.

And exactly, this is about finding equilibrium. But we just don't seem to have the capacity to put that much independent thought into it. For both ends, it's all or nothing. Intellectual laziness. As usual.
.
Well if youre like the OP you just raise the MW to $200/hr and you win your argument.
And you won't admit there is any potential downside to increasing the minimum wage.

The point of my post.
.
 
I mean I'm a very conservative guy. The ONLY reason I support a minimum wage law and increasing that to an actual value that is worth something is because it is obvious that doing so will save tax payers money. I'm actually a small government person.
This is an important part of this, and one that those are against the minimum wage generally avoid.

When a person is working full time and yet still needs government assistance, then the government is clearly subsidizing the employer. I don't see how an honest "small government" person can justify that.

And exactly, this is about finding equilibrium. But we just don't seem to have the capacity to put that much independent thought into it. For both ends, it's all or nothing. Intellectual laziness. As usual.
.
Well if youre like the OP you just raise the MW to $200/hr and you win your argument.
And you won't admit there is any potential downside to increasing the minimum wage.

The point of my post.
.
I wont admit it because no one has proven to me there is downside. What happens if you raise the MW to a reasonable level?
 
I mean I'm a very conservative guy. The ONLY reason I support a minimum wage law and increasing that to an actual value that is worth something is because it is obvious that doing so will save tax payers money. I'm actually a small government person.
This is an important part of this, and one that those are against the minimum wage generally avoid.

When a person is working full time and yet still needs government assistance, then the government is clearly subsidizing the employer. I don't see how an honest "small government" person can justify that.

And exactly, this is about finding equilibrium. But we just don't seem to have the capacity to put that much independent thought into it. For both ends, it's all or nothing. Intellectual laziness. As usual.
.
Well if youre like the OP you just raise the MW to $200/hr and you win your argument.
And you won't admit there is any potential downside to increasing the minimum wage.

The point of my post.
.
I wont admit it because no one has proven to me there is downside. What happens if you raise the MW to a reasonable level?
You two have your little back-and-forth. I'm not interested. I answered his question in post 112.
.
 
What happens if you raise the MW to a reasonable level?



Burger King moves to CANADA.

Nice going....
Even if that were true whats the downside in that? Another company will take BG's market share and fill in the void.




Another BREATHTAKING example of how little the FAR LEFT cares about private sector jobs in the US.

This guy really believes everyone should get a check, vote Dem, and pay no attention to the deficit.....


Patriotic Americans with brains want JOBS HERE, not in another country....
 

Forum List

Back
Top