MW advocates - what are the downsides of minimum wage?

[Lesh]

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

Fine. We won't make it $200/hr.

How about $15 or $12

 

[candycorn]

I say to $10.00 per hour over 3 years or so.

$12 would put it were it was (adjusted for inflation) FIFTY years ago

The important thing is to do it incrementally in my view.

 

[rightwinger]

When the recession hit workers took the cuts immediately to pay and benefits. They were told....too bad

Now that we are in a strong recovery, all we hear is......not too fast

 

[rightwinger]

I say to $10.00 per hour over 3 years or so.

$12 would put it were it was (adjusted for inflation) FIFTY years ago

The important thing is to do it incrementally in my view.

Got to strike while the economy is strong
Wait a few years and there will be another recession and workers will lose their increases

 

[Asclepias]

Employers have sat on their wallets the last decade

Time to pay up

Are you a business person?

I am an American

Business has capitalized on low wages for a decade. We just gave them a tax cut. Time to pay up

That's a no.
Businesses are not run on a whim.They are run on forethought and planning.
They are a money making enterprise for the owners. IF they can't plan ahead they fail.
If they can't forecast their costs and adjust their practices and expenditures correctly they pull back.
Yu would know this if you were a business person and not just a taker.

They have been planning on paying substandard wages for a decade

Time to start paying up

Get ready to pay more for everything. Time to pay up.

Are you talking about like what would happen if illegals were stopped like in Alabama and Georgia when they made laws against illegals?

 

[hadit]

And if you're a poor, badly educated kid who's never learned or had the inclination to think beyond next week, much less next decade?

Sure, smart people will invest in their future, but not everyone has been taught how to do that or why it's important.

Not sure what your point is. Earlier you were defending the Type A go-getter now you seem to be worried about those who are not the Type A go-getter.

To answer you question, we've always had poor, badly eduacated kids who never learned or had the inclination (or learned later in life like I did); a raise in the minimum wage would be good for them, don't you think? It would also be good for our economy since A) ours is a service/consumer economy and B) there will be more money flowing into those areas if there is more disposable income for the consumers.

And if you do it slow enough and keep it low enough that the market can adjust, the problems can be kept to a minimum. What I'm hearing, though, is that so many think we can increase it by 50-100% almost overnight with no negative effects. They don't seem to account for the ripple effect.

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

 

[danielpalos]

Not sure what your point is. Earlier you were defending the Type A go-getter now you seem to be worried about those who are not the Type A go-getter.

To answer you question, we've always had poor, badly eduacated kids who never learned or had the inclination (or learned later in life like I did); a raise in the minimum wage would be good for them, don't you think? It would also be good for our economy since A) ours is a service/consumer economy and B) there will be more money flowing into those areas if there is more disposable income for the consumers.

And if you do it slow enough and keep it low enough that the market can adjust, the problems can be kept to a minimum. What I'm hearing, though, is that so many think we can increase it by 50-100% almost overnight with no negative effects. They don't seem to account for the ripple effect.

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

FDR's brand of socialism kept us out of the worst of the recession. Thank goodness for left wingers.

 

[hadit]

And if you do it slow enough and keep it low enough that the market can adjust, the problems can be kept to a minimum. What I'm hearing, though, is that so many think we can increase it by 50-100% almost overnight with no negative effects. They don't seem to account for the ripple effect.

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

FDR's brand of socialism kept us out of the worst of the recession. Thank goodness for left wingers.

You're admitting that socialism keeps economies stick in low gear?

 

[danielpalos]

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

FDR's brand of socialism kept us out of the worst of the recession. Thank goodness for left wingers.

You're admitting that socialism keeps economies stick in low gear?

Only if you "trade on news instead of charts".

 

[rightwinger]

Not sure what your point is. Earlier you were defending the Type A go-getter now you seem to be worried about those who are not the Type A go-getter.

To answer you question, we've always had poor, badly eduacated kids who never learned or had the inclination (or learned later in life like I did); a raise in the minimum wage would be good for them, don't you think? It would also be good for our economy since A) ours is a service/consumer economy and B) there will be more money flowing into those areas if there is more disposable income for the consumers.

And if you do it slow enough and keep it low enough that the market can adjust, the problems can be kept to a minimum. What I'm hearing, though, is that so many think we can increase it by 50-100% almost overnight with no negative effects. They don't seem to account for the ripple effect.

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

I agree
Republicans did everything they could to stall the economy

 

[danielpalos]

all the right wing has is, Nothing but Repeal instead of Better solutions at lower Cost.

 

[Mac1958]

Hopefully, someone will step up here, and clear the air.

Since the question is being posed on a political message board, you're going to get the standard partisan intellectual dishonesty. Wingers are afraid to give an inch and admit that their ideas aren't perfect (none are, obviously), so you'll get a lot of bullshit, spin and deflection. And probably some insults. We've already seen it claimed that there are "no" downsides. Holy crap. There ya go.

There are obvious downsides to a minimum wage, and the top three are almost certainly (1) increased cost pressure on employers, (2) decreased ability of employers to hire more people as a result, and (c) an artificial increase in the perceived value of labor. There's already more than enough people who think they're worth far more than they are, and this only exacerbates that fantasy.

I agree that, in a perfect world, there would be no need for a minimum wage. I'm not at all fond of the three downsides listed above. But in reality, some people are simply better equipped to function effectively in a free market/capitalist system than others. And those who are less equipped, vote. So we might try to consider a stronger safety net (and this would be included) as social insurance against electoral revolution. (I stole that line, by the way, from another poster)

That's just reality. It's a price that we pay for living in such a prosperous country, and it's far better than massive electoral victories for those who have no understanding of, or appreciation for, the dynamic value of capitalism. Give some, get some.
.

I actually thought of a fourth potential downside. I'd call it "wage dominoes". An employer wouldn't just be increasing the wages on the bottom end; they'd also have to increase wages on hourly employees who were above the bottom end as well, with some proportionality.

Again, in a perfect world I'd prefer not to have to do it, as explained above. But I don't think we have a choice overall.
.

 

[rightwinger]

Hopefully, someone will step up here, and clear the air.

Since the question is being posed on a political message board, you're going to get the standard partisan intellectual dishonesty. Wingers are afraid to give an inch and admit that their ideas aren't perfect (none are, obviously), so you'll get a lot of bullshit, spin and deflection. And probably some insults. We've already seen it claimed that there are "no" downsides. Holy crap. There ya go.

There are obvious downsides to a minimum wage, and the top three are almost certainly (1) increased cost pressure on employers, (2) decreased ability of employers to hire more people as a result, and (c) an artificial increase in the perceived value of labor. There's already more than enough people who think they're worth far more than they are, and this only exacerbates that fantasy.

I agree that, in a perfect world, there would be no need for a minimum wage. I'm not at all fond of the three downsides listed above. But in reality, some people are simply better equipped to function effectively in a free market/capitalist system than others. And those who are less equipped, vote. So we might try to consider a stronger safety net (and this would be included) as social insurance against electoral revolution. (I stole that line, by the way, from another poster)

That's just reality. It's a price that we pay for living in such a prosperous country, and it's far better than massive electoral victories for those who have no understanding of, or appreciation for, the dynamic value of capitalism. Give some, get some.
.

I actually thought of a fourth potential downside. I'd call it "wage dominoes". An employer wouldn't just be increasing the wages on the bottom end; they'd also have to increase wages on hourly employees who were above the bottom end as well, with some proportionality.

Again, in a perfect world I'd prefer not to have to do it, as explained above. But I don't think we have a choice overall.
.

Wage increases to other than executives are long overdue

The recession is over

 

[dblack]

I actually thought of a fourth potential downside. I'd call it "wage dominoes". An employer wouldn't just be increasing the wages on the bottom end; they'd also have to increase wages on hourly employees who were above the bottom end as well, with some proportionality.

Again, in a perfect world I'd prefer not to have to do it, as explained above. But I don't think we have a choice overall.
.

Yeah. That's part of what rightwinger mentioned - "the market adjusts". We can artificially raise the price for labor, but that doesn't change its real value. If we pin the price if it at a certain level, other wages and prices adjust accordingly. Over time, the buying power of the wages paid for a given job will be the same.

So, we may have no choice for political reasons, but in the end we're just chasing our tails. We'll end up back where we started and have to do it all over again.

 

[hadit]

And if you do it slow enough and keep it low enough that the market can adjust, the problems can be kept to a minimum. What I'm hearing, though, is that so many think we can increase it by 50-100% almost overnight with no negative effects. They don't seem to account for the ripple effect.

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

I agree
Republicans did everything they could to stall the economy

They gave Obama what he wanted, including a partial temporary government slowdown.

 

[rightwinger]

We have ignored the wage for a decade and then complain when it is time to catch up

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

I agree
Republicans did everything they could to stall the economy

They gave Obama what he wanted, including a partial temporary government slowdown.

That was Ted Cruz

 

[anynameyouwish]

This thread is addressed to supporters of minimum wage laws. Detractors claim that minimum wage causes unemployment and/or inflation. But most supporters will vigorously deny this. Yet they seem to set their sights pretty low when it comes to setting the level of minimum wage. I assume this is because they believe there is some downside to minimum wage, some reason to not raise it to $200/hr, but it seems they never want to talk about what that reason might be. Hopefully, someone will step up here, and clear the air.

Currently our situation is thus;

There is a poverty line
Many people earn MORE than the line
SOME people earn LOTS MORE than the poverty line
and many people earn LESS than the poverty line.

If we adjusted our pay/expense system such that ANYONE working 40 earns would earn at least enough to live on we could still recompense MOST people with much MORE than poverty level wages.

NOTE: I am NOT advocating socialism or equal pay for all.
Just adjusting the system so that capitalism rewards the least of us with livable wages.

 

[hadit]

So raise it, but don't pretend you can set it arbitrarily high with no ill effects.

There were Ill effects on workers when wages were frozen for s decade. Nobody seemed to care

The whole economy was stuck in low gear during Obama's rein. I remember. But go ahead, kill the goose.

I agree
Republicans did everything they could to stall the economy

They gave Obama what he wanted, including a partial temporary government slowdown.

That was Ted Cruz

Takes two to tango, and Reid and Obama rejected bills that would have funded the entire government save one, only one program. That program was more important to them than the rest of the government.

 

[hadit]

This thread is addressed to supporters of minimum wage laws. Detractors claim that minimum wage causes unemployment and/or inflation. But most supporters will vigorously deny this. Yet they seem to set their sights pretty low when it comes to setting the level of minimum wage. I assume this is because they believe there is some downside to minimum wage, some reason to not raise it to $200/hr, but it seems they never want to talk about what that reason might be. Hopefully, someone will step up here, and clear the air.

Currently our situation is thus;

There is a poverty line
Many people earn MORE than the line
SOME people earn LOTS MORE than the poverty line
and many people earn LESS than the poverty line.

If we adjusted our pay/expense system such that ANYONE working 40 earns would earn at least enough to live on we could still recompense MOST people with much MORE than poverty level wages.

NOTE: I am NOT advocating socialism or equal pay for all.
Just adjusting the system so that capitalism rewards the least of us with livable wages.

You're still advocating centralized control and arbitrary setting of wages. Has that ever worked?

 

[danielpalos]

I actually thought of a fourth potential downside. I'd call it "wage dominoes". An employer wouldn't just be increasing the wages on the bottom end; they'd also have to increase wages on hourly employees who were above the bottom end as well, with some proportionality.

Again, in a perfect world I'd prefer not to have to do it, as explained above. But I don't think we have a choice overall.
.

Yeah. That's part of what rightwinger mentioned - "the market adjusts". We can artificially raise the price for labor, but that doesn't change its real value. If we pin the price if it at a certain level, other wages and prices adjust accordingly. Over time, the buying power of the wages paid for a given job will be the same.

So, we may have no choice for political reasons, but in the end we're just chasing our tails. We'll end up back where we started and have to do it all over again.

a simple cost of living adjustment; that is all.