Poll: Solid majority (71%) of Americans support Obama’s increase of the minimum wage

[Katzndogz]

Prices always go up because expenses go up. When expenses go up the business owner cuts costs or raises prices. Prices can only be raised so high before people think start thinking that the price charged isn't worth what they have to pay.

There are two kinds of expenses, fixed and controllable. The electric bill is fixed, the rent is fixed. Labor is controllable. When an employer has to cut costs to maintain stable prices, labor is the first cost to be cut. It's not the line employees, the ones who really make the money that keeps the company going. They will get a raise. It's the staff employees that lose their jobs. The salesman won't get fired, the janitor will. The chef in a high end restaurant will keep his job, but the dishwasher will lose his.

If you look at cities that have high minimum wages, San Francisco, Santa Fe, Santa Monica, they rely on illegal labor. They get along by hiring mexicans who just crossed the border. And, yes, they have a very high turnover because at that skill level, turnover doesn't matter. If anyone says that a high minimum wage is necessary to reduce employee turnover they are simply lying to you.

This is the way it works in real life. When I opened the dog grooming shop I started looking for someone to mop floors and clean cages part time. A woman came in and applied for the job. She called the day before her start date and told me that she had accepted another job. It also paid minimum wage but it was full time and I was only offering part time. Then California raised the minimum wage to $8.00 an hour. The prospective employee called me back to say that the increase was too much for the other job to pay and the offer was withdrawn. Was my offer still open? Sorry but $8.00 an hour is too much for me to pay to have someone come in and mop floors and clean cages. The woman was left as she was, unemployed.

I solved my problem by hiring someone by the day. $20.00 a day, if you show up and mop and wipe up vomit and shit, you get $20.00. If you don't show up, someone else will show up. Someone could come in and work very very hard and make $10.00 an hour by doing the job in two hours. They could be lazy sluff off and do the job in four hours in which case they made $5.00 an hour. I didn't have to raise prices and I got the job done. Did turnover matter? Not a bit.

 

[Seawytch]

Raising the minimum wage will result in higher unemployment. It always has and always will.

Bovine feces.

Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?

 

[candycorn]

Whatever happened to the days when people got a raise because they earned it?

If I have to pay 10 bucks an hour for a kid to come in and sweep the floors, I'll do it myself and the kid won't get a part time job from me because sweeping the floor is NOT a $10 an hour job.

Is it a $4 an hour job?
Is it a $5 an hour job?
Is it a $6 an hour job?

What is the breaking point?

 

[Samson]

How many people will be grateful for losing their jobs because of it?

It's not exactly a coincidence that we upped the minimum wage and we are not at significantly higher unemployment. Im not saying it was all caused by the minimum wage in and of itself, but it was definitely a factor.

When you artificially increase the cost of labor, you get less of it.

Indeed, and this was probably why the % support was not HIGHER than 71%.


Using popular opinion to supporting a higher minimum wage is like using popular opinion to support so many other social welfare positions; very easy. It takes almost no intellectual power to agree that more money, more clean water, more education, etc., is a good thing.

Introduce a cost vs benefit discussion about any of these subjects and the stupid begin to wet their pants, and tearfully begin to bleet about dead children.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Whatever happened to the days when people got a raise because they earned it?

If I have to pay 10 bucks an hour for a kid to come in and sweep the floors, I'll do it myself and the kid won't get a part time job from me because sweeping the floor is NOT a $10 an hour job.

Is it a $4 an hour job?
Is it a $5 an hour job?
Is it a $6 an hour job?

What is the breaking point?

5 an hour I can live with.

It's pushing a broom for Christ's sake do you expect to be able to pay all your bills by pushing a broom?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Raising the minimum wage will result in higher unemployment. It always has and always will.

Bovine feces.

Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?

From your link;

But, probably the most important channel of adjustment is through reductions in
labor turnover, which yield significant cost savings to employers.

Doubling his workers salaries provided similar cost savings to Henry Ford. Obviously there are corporate benefits to paying decent wages. Too bad the current boardroom inhabitants skipped that class when they were doing their MBA's.

 

[Katzndogz]

Raising the minimum wage will result in higher unemployment. It always has and always will.

Bovine feces.

Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?

From your link;

But, probably the most important channel of adjustment is through reductions in
labor turnover, which yield significant cost savings to employers.

Doubling his workers salaries provided similar cost savings to Henry Ford. Obviously there are corporate benefits to paying decent wages. Too bad the current boardroom inhabitants skipped that class when they were doing their MBA's.

Whose salaries did he double? The guys working on the assembly line, or the guy cleaning the equipment?

In minimum wage jobs, turnover doesn't matter. It has no bearing whatsoever on the profit of the company. It only affects the expenses.

 

[Samson]

Raising the minimum wage will result in higher unemployment. It always has and always will.

Bovine feces.

Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?

Interesting report, thanks;

Why do you think the first paragraph of the executive summary uses a qualifier?

The employment effect of the minimum wage is one of the most studied topics in all of economics. This report examines the most recent wave of this research – roughly since 2000 – to determine the best current estimates of the impact of increases in the minimum wage on the employment prospects of low-wage workers. The weight of that evidence points to little or no employment response to modest increases in the minimum wage.

What is "modest?"

The increase in minimum wage Obama proposes would be $1.75. If passed, it would be the largest increase ever. Certainly much less than the $0.70 passed in 2007, '08, and '09 (the last year of any increase).

This report examines the most recent wave of this research – roughly since 2000 –

The data in the CEPR report is relatively narrow: It only covers the economic effect of the '07, '08, '09, $0.70/yr "modest" increases.

These increases migh be considered more "modest" because they were preceeded by only a $0.35 increase in 1997!

 

[Stephanie]

Like everything else Obama does, he picks a number out his ass and throws it out there as what HE THINKS the minumin wage should be.

just like he picked 250,000 as being RICH and should have their taxes raised on them

 

[Katzndogz]

Raising the minimum wage will result in higher unemployment. It always has and always will.

Bovine feces.

Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?

Oh goody, a government report.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Bovine feces.

Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?

From your link;

But, probably the most important channel of adjustment is through reductions in
labor turnover, which yield significant cost savings to employers.

Doubling his workers salaries provided similar cost savings to Henry Ford. Obviously there are corporate benefits to paying decent wages. Too bad the current boardroom inhabitants skipped that class when they were doing their MBA's.

Whose salaries did he double? The guys working on the assembly line, or the guy cleaning the equipment?

In minimum wage jobs, turnover doesn't matter. It has no bearing whatsoever on the profit of the company. It only affects the expenses.

The high turnover cost of retraining assembly line workers outweighed doubling their salaries.

There is a turnover cost in MW jobs too. Incorrectly cleaning a piece of equipment can damage it. Any corporation that ignores these realities in MW jobs is going to suffer the consequences. Simply because someone does janitorial work like cleaning the bathrooms in an office complex does not mean that they are not diligent and knowledgeable about the chemicals and the equipment that they are using.

 

[Samson]

From your link;



Doubling his workers salaries provided similar cost savings to Henry Ford. Obviously there are corporate benefits to paying decent wages. Too bad the current boardroom inhabitants skipped that class when they were doing their MBA's.

Whose salaries did he double? The guys working on the assembly line, or the guy cleaning the equipment?

In minimum wage jobs, turnover doesn't matter. It has no bearing whatsoever on the profit of the company. It only affects the expenses.

The high turnover cost of retraining assembly line workers outweighed doubling their salaries.

There is a turnover cost in MW jobs too. Incorrectly cleaning a piece of equipment can damage it. Any corporation that ignores these realities in MW jobs is going to suffer the consequences. Simply because someone does janitorial work like cleaning the bathrooms in an office complex does not mean that they are not diligent and knowledgeable about the chemicals and the equipment that they are using.

Indeed.

Then to avoid high turn over costs, fewer, more talented janitors will be hired, lowering the possibility of turn over: Rather than pay 2 X janitors $18/hr, pay 1 X janitor $17/hr.

 

[Dragonlady]

Then to avoid high turn over costs, fewer, more talented janitors will be hired, lowering the possibility of turn over: Rather than pay 2 X janitors $18/hr, pay 1 X janitor $17/hr.

Do conservatives post shit like this because they believe it, or do they just want to make the rest of us laugh.

A friend who worked in HR in the 1990's told me that her company had calculated the cost of hiring a new employee at $5,000. Allowing for inflation, this figure would have to be at least $6,000 today. This included the costs of advertising, the time spent reviewing applications, telephoning and interviewing applicants, including partners' time spent on non-billable office matters, and the time spent training the new person as to the firms systems and software. With hiring and training costs running at 10% of salaries, retaining good employees, even at the minimum wage level, would be a very cost effective way of working.

Added to which, a stable workforce is more capable, more efficient, can increase production and quality through experience and initiative, even at a minimum wage level.

As an aside, many of the posters here have nothing but nasty things to say about minimum wage workers. These people are getting up and going to do dirty jobs for little money, and you denigrate them at every turn. Not everybody is smart enough for college, and besides, we need janitors, waiters, movie theatre attendants and popcorn vendors, as much as we need bankers and lawyers. Aren't people who go to work every day deserving of your respect, not to mention a living wage?

Why have all of these government programs to supplement minimum wage incomes, when the obvious solution is to raise the minimum wage? Milton Friedman wanted the free market to determine the minimum wage, saying that the increase in employment under free market economics would improve the wages for the lowest paid workers, but in every country where his free market reforms have been implement, the opposite has happened. Unemployment has increased rather than decreased, and competition for the remaining jobs has suppressed wages to the point that any recession, no matter how mild, and recession brings incredible suffering to the poor because there is no longer any welfare, or assistance for them.

 

[Pogo]

Then to avoid high turn over costs, fewer, more talented janitors will be hired, lowering the possibility of turn over: Rather than pay 2 X janitors $18/hr, pay 1 X janitor $17/hr.

Do conservatives post shit like this because they believe it, or do they just want to make the rest of us laugh.

A friend who worked in HR in the 1990's told me that her company had calculated the cost of hiring a new employee at $5,000. Allowing for inflation, this figure would have to be at least $6,000 today. This included the costs of advertising, the time spent reviewing applications, telephoning and interviewing applicants, including partners' time spent on non-billable office matters, and the time spent training the new person as to the firms systems and software. With hiring and training costs running at 10% of salaries, retaining good employees, even at the minimum wage level, would be a very cost effective way of working.

Added to which, a stable workforce is more capable, more efficient, can increase production and quality through experience and initiative, even at a minimum wage level.

As an aside, many of the posters here have nothing but nasty things to say about minimum wage workers. These people are getting up and going to do dirty jobs for little money, and you denigrate them at every turn. Not everybody is smart enough for college, and besides, we need janitors, waiters, movie theatre attendants and popcorn vendors, as much as we need bankers and lawyers. Aren't people who go to work every day deserving of your respect, not to mention a living wage?

Why have all of these government programs to supplement minimum wage incomes, when the obvious solution is to raise the minimum wage? Milton Friedman wanted the free market to determine the minimum wage, saying that the increase in employment under free market economics would improve the wages for the lowest paid workers, but in every country where his free market reforms have been implement, the opposite has happened. Unemployment has increased rather than decreased, and competition for the remaining jobs has suppressed wages to the point that any recession, no matter how mild, and recession brings incredible suffering to the poor because there is no longer any welfare, or assistance for them.

Apparently what they're saying is:
Price of bread goes up? Unfortunate, but pay it.
Price of utilities goes up? Grumble but pay it.
Price of gas goes up? Bitch about it and pay it.
Price of labor goes up to cope with all of the above? WHOA HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, NO YOU DON'T!

Yeah I like to think it's kind of tragic comedy. "Funny" in a sadistic way.

 

[Samson]

Then to avoid high turn over costs, fewer, more talented janitors will be hired, lowering the possibility of turn over: Rather than pay 2 X janitors $18/hr, pay 1 X janitor $17/hr.

Do conservatives post shit like this because they believe it, or do they just want to make the rest of us laugh.

Added to which, a stable workforce is more capable, more efficient, can increase production and quality through experience and initiative, even at a minimum wage level.

As an aside, many of the posters here have nothing but nasty things to say about minimum wage workers.....

Based on your blithering response, I always assume that mindless giggling is all you're capable of.

I never said anything to denegrate MW workers, I merely point out that if you want ONE quality worker to do the job of two, you will end up with better and more loyal performers that can not only decrease your overall labor cost, but also the costs of employee turnover.

 

[Samson]

Apparently what they're saying is:
Price of bread goes up? Unfortunate, but pay it.
Price of utilities goes up? Grumble but pay it.
Price of gas goes up? Bitch about it and pay it.
Price of labor goes up to cope with all of the above? WHOA HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, NO YOU DON'T!

Yeah I like to think it's kind of tragic comedy. "Funny" in a sadistic way.

Nothing "Apparent" about it, in fact the math is pretty simple:

Hire 2 janitors for $9/hr and pay $18/hr

Hire one janitor for $17/hr, save $1.00 per hour, and get a quality employee who is well paid, and loyal.

If anything is tragic about this, its the astonishing difficulty you have grasping even the simplest logic.

 

[BreezeWood]

... the gov't should be made responsible to institute work-corps programs to insure full employment at a MW that is a sustainable income as an alternative to public employment that is contrary to the labourer's interests and is the basis for a myriad of other problems when Poverty is used as a means to support an economy.

at full employment and a livable wage: one example of the benefit would be a severe downturn in crime which in itself would pay multiple dividends including the costs for the gov't infrastructure programs.

 

[Dragonlady]

When I was learning about economics back in the stone age, I was told that hard goods was the key to economic prosperity and were the basis of our economy. Today we are outsourcing the production of hard goods to Third Worlds Countries, or totalitarian regmines which enforce cruel conditions for the workers in its factories, and where the free market keeps wages and workers under control.

But we need steady wage jobs right here at home too. Not everyone is cut out to be an entrepreneur or a professional. There used to be in North America what my mother would have called "good jobs" for hard working folk. These jobs paid a living wage for a family, had two weeks vacation at the end of July every year, and a gold watch and a pension at age 65. Those jobs are gone, in large part because of advances in robot technology, but also because Third World workers have no unions, no pensions, no health care, and you can hire 20 of them for every North American you hire.

And if they complain, or try to organize a union, they're sent off to camp for a little re-education and enlightenment about how the free market don't allow no union meetings 'round here.

 

[Samson]

... the gov't should be made responsible to institute work-corps programs .......

"Work-corps programs" like the US Army?

 

[Samson]

When I was learning about economics back in the stone age, I......

This explains a lot.