What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Simple.

No independent restaurant startup would ever be able to compete. The rate of failure for restaurant startups is already 9 out of 10.

special pleading much? that applies to all startups, not just the restaurant sector.

If, a person can Only make it on the back of cheap labor, do they really have a worthwhile product?

If, a person can Only make it on the back of cheap labor, do they really have a worthwhile product?

If Daniel isn't satisfied with the wages offered, let's shut down that business and give their employees $0?
Very smart, comrade.

nothing but red herrings to look tough? diversion is usually considered a fallacy.

You don't want to put some employers out of business?

 

[danielpalos]

Small business and corporations have seen their wealth increase $13 trillion in the last eight years

Almost none of that wealth went to increase wages

Employee compensation is up from $7.787 trillion in 2009 to $9.693 trillion last year.

Wages and salaries are up from $6.251 trillion to $7.855 trillion over the same period.

http://www.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cf...=1&904=2000&903=58&906=a&905=2016&910=x&911=0

Employee compensation to whom?

From 2009-14, CEO compensation rose 54.3%, while private-sector production/non-supervisory workers rose 0.0%.

Top CEOs Make 300 Times More than Typical Workers: Pay Growth Surpasses Stock Gains and Wage Growth of Top 0.1 Percent

Employee compensation to whom?

Employees.

http://www.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cf...=1&904=2000&903=58&906=a&905=2016&910=x&911=0

Which employees? From 2009-14, CEO compensation rose 54.3%, while private-sector production/non-supervisory workers rose 0.0%.

http://www.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cf...=1&904=2009&903=58&906=a&905=2016&910=x&911=0

Go to personal income and outlays. Table 2.1
From 2009-2014, employee compensation rose from $7.787 trillion to $9.693 trillion.

Here is what I am quibbling about: From 2009-14, CEO compensation rose 54.3%

 

[danielpalos]

More people would spend more money, causing stores and restaurants to hire more people...

More tax money would go into local, state, and federal programs, so schools and infrastructure would improve.

More people would spend more money, causing stores and restaurants to hire more people...

Fewer stores and restaurants would open.
Stores and restaurants would hire fewer people. People and businesses would have less money to spend.
More tax money would go to welfare and unemployment.

why would fewer stores open or demand decrease, with an increase in spending due to a minimum wage increase?

do the laws of demand and supply stop working, whenever the right gets involved?

why would fewer stores open or demand decrease

If you increase the expenses related to open a store, fewer stores will open.
Raise the expenses of current stores and they will raise prices which will decrease demand for their products.

do the laws of demand and supply stop working, whenever the right gets involved?

No, but the left fails to understand those laws of supply and demand.

9 out of 10 startups fail anyway. under capitalization is one major reason.

if all you have to make money is cheap labor, how good of a Capitalist can you be.

9 out of 10 startups fail anyway. under capitalization is one major reason.

Raise expenses, that'll help with capitalization.

if all you have to make money is cheap labor, how good of a Capitalist can you be.

I agree, lets outlaw all jobs under $10 an hour. That'll help the low skilled workers employed by bad capitalists.

If you don't plan for expenses you are planning to fail. Why not do it yourself?

 

[danielpalos]

Simple.

No independent restaurant startup would ever be able to compete. The rate of failure for restaurant startups is already 9 out of 10.

special pleading much? that applies to all startups, not just the restaurant sector.

If, a person can Only make it on the back of cheap labor, do they really have a worthwhile product?

If, a person can Only make it on the back of cheap labor, do they really have a worthwhile product?

If Daniel isn't satisfied with the wages offered, let's shut down that business and give their employees $0?
Very smart, comrade.

nothing but red herrings to look tough? diversion is usually considered a fallacy.

You don't want to put some employers out of business?

not enough "corporate raiding" in it for you? capitalism has a natural, rate of unemployment.

 

[Skull Pilot]

and since 97% of workers already make more than the federal MW it seems silly to raise it drastically

It seems silly to raise it at all.

Scrap that, it seems silly for the corporate government to play wage control at all.

I agree. It doesn't matter what the MW is IMO because employment is a ladder not a bed you're not supposed to stay at the bottom rung your entire life

yes, it matters. the cost of social services is about fourteen dollars an hour. a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage competes favorably with the cost of social services. it is about privatizing costs and not socializing costs; only the right wing, never gets it.

Social services have nothing to do with the market value for the labor required to do a specific job.

it has to do with a profit motive. the rich simply get richer faster by making the poor work harder for less.

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Employee compensation is up from $7.787 trillion in 2009 to $9.693 trillion last year.

Wages and salaries are up from $6.251 trillion to $7.855 trillion over the same period.

http://www.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cf...=1&904=2000&903=58&906=a&905=2016&910=x&911=0

Employee compensation to whom?

From 2009-14, CEO compensation rose 54.3%, while private-sector production/non-supervisory workers rose 0.0%.

Top CEOs Make 300 Times More than Typical Workers: Pay Growth Surpasses Stock Gains and Wage Growth of Top 0.1 Percent

Employee compensation to whom?

Employees.

http://www.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cf...=1&904=2000&903=58&906=a&905=2016&910=x&911=0

Which employees? From 2009-14, CEO compensation rose 54.3%, while private-sector production/non-supervisory workers rose 0.0%.

http://www.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cf...=1&904=2009&903=58&906=a&905=2016&910=x&911=0

Go to personal income and outlays. Table 2.1
From 2009-2014, employee compensation rose from $7.787 trillion to $9.693 trillion.

Here is what I am quibbling about: From 2009-14, CEO compensation rose 54.3%

So what?

 

[Wyatt earp]

There's a rather simple answer to this.

Person A makes $9.50 an hour. Person B makes $14 an hour. Person C makes $25 an hour.

Person A Gross Pay = $380
Person B Gross Pay = $560
Person C Gross Pay = $1000.

Person A will get a $4.50/hour raise, persons B&C will get a $0.00/hour raise while prices double. So more people will be making minimum wage than ever. Nearly 50% of the population actually. I barely know anyone who makes more than $14 an hour...

yes prices will go up by the exact amount of the wage increase and no net benefit will be possible. Everybody earning the minimum wage will kill incentive to improve your skills.


Minimum wage more pure libsocialist ignorance:
1) makes it illegal to employ people not worth minimum wage
2) raise prices for poor people who often shop where minimum wage folks work
3) speeds up automation and replacement of minimum wage jobs
4) teaches people that you get ahead with govt violence rather than being worth more
5) raises prices, reduces demand, and thus reduces employment
6) makes American workers even less competitive with foreign workers
7) makes a huge % of work force minimum age workers with no incentive to improve their skills.

No, they won't. The right wing just has stale propaganda and rhetoric, that is easily disproved, every time it comes up.

Prove it

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

More people would spend more money, causing stores and restaurants to hire more people...

Fewer stores and restaurants would open.
Stores and restaurants would hire fewer people. People and businesses would have less money to spend.
More tax money would go to welfare and unemployment.

why would fewer stores open or demand decrease, with an increase in spending due to a minimum wage increase?

do the laws of demand and supply stop working, whenever the right gets involved?

why would fewer stores open or demand decrease

If you increase the expenses related to open a store, fewer stores will open.
Raise the expenses of current stores and they will raise prices which will decrease demand for their products.

do the laws of demand and supply stop working, whenever the right gets involved?

No, but the left fails to understand those laws of supply and demand.

9 out of 10 startups fail anyway. under capitalization is one major reason.

if all you have to make money is cheap labor, how good of a Capitalist can you be.

9 out of 10 startups fail anyway. under capitalization is one major reason.

Raise expenses, that'll help with capitalization.

if all you have to make money is cheap labor, how good of a Capitalist can you be.

I agree, lets outlaw all jobs under $10 an hour. That'll help the low skilled workers employed by bad capitalists.

If you don't plan for expenses you are planning to fail. Why not do it yourself?

And if you force them to fail....you're helping employees how exactly?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Simple.

No independent restaurant startup would ever be able to compete. The rate of failure for restaurant startups is already 9 out of 10.

special pleading much? that applies to all startups, not just the restaurant sector.

If, a person can Only make it on the back of cheap labor, do they really have a worthwhile product?

If, a person can Only make it on the back of cheap labor, do they really have a worthwhile product?

If Daniel isn't satisfied with the wages offered, let's shut down that business and give their employees $0?
Very smart, comrade.

nothing but red herrings to look tough? diversion is usually considered a fallacy.

You don't want to put some employers out of business?

not enough "corporate raiding" in it for you? capitalism has a natural, rate of unemployment.

Let's raise that rate for low skilled employees. Right?

 

[Oldstyle]

Funny how you Progressives are always talking about how you're "here" for the Middle Class...yet all of your policies to help the poor end up with the Middle Class footing the bill.

I am trying to get it from the one percent.

And how is that attempt working out for you?

You can SAY that progressive policies are designed to "get" money from the 1% but in reality they never do so the Middle Class ends up footing the bill for new entitlements for the poor. Face reality, Daniel...the rich are taught from childhood how to protect wealth from being taken by the government. You think you can pass legislation that will outsmart them? Sorry to break this to you but my money is on their being MUCH smarter than you are!

 

[Oldstyle]

More people would spend more money, causing stores and restaurants to hire more people...

More tax money would go into local, state, and federal programs, so schools and infrastructure would improve.

Wow, I'm constantly amazed at the people here who have absolutely no clue how an economy functions! You want a large increase in the minimum wage? OK, fine...raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and lets step back and take a common sense look at what would happen. First of all a raise that large at the bottom of the wage scale would have to cause a corresponding increase in the wages of throughout the wage scale. Does anyone here think that someone with years of experience and far more job skills then an entry level worker is going to be content getting paid the same as someone who just started? Obviously not...correct? So you have to raise everyone's wage. Since labor costs are generally the largest expense of any company...it's common sense that prices will have to be raised to pay for these across the board pay raises...correct? So the cost of everything you purchase...all the services you need...would have to increase...correct?

So if I came to you and said...Hey, I'm going to give you a ten dollar an hour wage...but I'm going to increase your rent...increase the cost of your lunch...increase the cost of that plumber you call to fix your leaky pipe...increase the cost of your internet service provider...increase the cost of EVERYTHING you purchase...would you still be thrilled with your wage "increase"? Come on people...THINK!

Increasing the cost of labor will lead to capital seeking gains from efficiency.

Henry Ford did not have a problem doubling autoworker wages, not minimum wages.

Inflation happens, only the right wing complains when it actually is due to the least wealthy having more money to spend.

Henry Ford doubled wages and cut hours from 9 to 8 a day because he found he couldn't keep good workers on his new fangled assembly line for the old rate due to the boredom and stress of repeating the same task over and over again at high speed. The assembly line concept improved production so dramatically that Ford could afford to double workers pay and still make a large profit. That was a business decision made by Ford that made sense on the bottom line. Do you really feel that increasing minimum wage across the board will have the same affect? You might want to note that Ford tried increasing wages to counter the Great Depression and it was an utter failure.

 

[danielpalos]

It seems silly to raise it at all.

Scrap that, it seems silly for the corporate government to play wage control at all.

I agree. It doesn't matter what the MW is IMO because employment is a ladder not a bed you're not supposed to stay at the bottom rung your entire life

yes, it matters. the cost of social services is about fourteen dollars an hour. a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage competes favorably with the cost of social services. it is about privatizing costs and not socializing costs; only the right wing, never gets it.

Social services have nothing to do with the market value for the labor required to do a specific job.

it has to do with a profit motive. the rich simply get richer faster by making the poor work harder for less.

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I agree. It doesn't matter what the MW is IMO because employment is a ladder not a bed you're not supposed to stay at the bottom rung your entire life

yes, it matters. the cost of social services is about fourteen dollars an hour. a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage competes favorably with the cost of social services. it is about privatizing costs and not socializing costs; only the right wing, never gets it.

Social services have nothing to do with the market value for the labor required to do a specific job.

it has to do with a profit motive. the rich simply get richer faster by making the poor work harder for less.

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it matters. the cost of social services is about fourteen dollars an hour. a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage competes favorably with the cost of social services. it is about privatizing costs and not socializing costs; only the right wing, never gets it.

Social services have nothing to do with the market value for the labor required to do a specific job.

it has to do with a profit motive. the rich simply get richer faster by making the poor work harder for less.

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Social services have nothing to do with the market value for the labor required to do a specific job.

it has to do with a profit motive. the rich simply get richer faster by making the poor work harder for less.

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

No it is an artificial inflation of pay which will result in a very ral increase in costs across the board as well as the decline of the purchasing power of everyone already making 15 an hour or above

The average hourly wage in almost ever sector is already above 15 an hour so a drastic MW hike would reduce the purchasing power of more people than it would increase
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

 

[danielpalos]

it has to do with a profit motive. the rich simply get richer faster by making the poor work harder for less.

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

No it is an artificial inflation of pay which will result in a very ral increase in costs across the board as well as the decline of the purchasing power of everyone already making 15 an hour or above

The average hourly wage in almost ever sector is already above 15 an hour so a drastic MW hike would reduce the purchasing power of more people than it would increase
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

only in the short run; in the long run, it will "increase the size of the pie" through a positive multiplier effect.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

No it is an artificial inflation of pay which will result in a very ral increase in costs across the board as well as the decline of the purchasing power of everyone already making 15 an hour or above

The average hourly wage in almost ever sector is already above 15 an hour so a drastic MW hike would reduce the purchasing power of more people than it would increase
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

only in the short run; in the long run, it will "increase the size of the pie" through a positive multiplier effect.

No it won't.
Artificially high pay drains the economy. The only multiplier will be the increase in cost for absolutely everything across the board

 

[Wyatt earp]

No it has to do with what the public will pay for a product or service

Tell me do you think the people who produce ultra high end goods pay their people minimum wage?
They don't because in order to get the ultra high price the work must be of the highest quality

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

No it is an artificial inflation of pay which will result in a very ral increase in costs across the board as well as the decline of the purchasing power of everyone already making 15 an hour or above

The average hourly wage in almost ever sector is already above 15 an hour so a drastic MW hike would reduce the purchasing power of more people than it would increase
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

only in the short run; in the long run, it will "increase the size of the pie" through a positive multiplier effect.

So in your world a person today making $15. Would make now $30 an hour?

 

[danielpalos]

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

No it is an artificial inflation of pay which will result in a very ral increase in costs across the board as well as the decline of the purchasing power of everyone already making 15 an hour or above

The average hourly wage in almost ever sector is already above 15 an hour so a drastic MW hike would reduce the purchasing power of more people than it would increase
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

only in the short run; in the long run, it will "increase the size of the pie" through a positive multiplier effect.

No it won't.
Artificially high pay drains the economy. The only multiplier will be the increase in cost for absolutely everything across the board

Yes, it will. That is why no one takes the right wing seriously about economics. Why do CEOs have the highest pay in the world?

A positive multiplier effect grows the "size of the pie".

It really is that simple, except to the fantastical right wing, stuck in pre-WWII Germany for their economic models.

 

[danielpalos]

It has to do with profits. Socializing costs helps corporate profits.

Raining the MW is socializing costs and artificially inflating then to boot

no, it isn't. it is privatizing costs since the People will be spending their own money.

No it is an artificial inflation of pay which will result in a very ral increase in costs across the board as well as the decline of the purchasing power of everyone already making 15 an hour or above

The average hourly wage in almost ever sector is already above 15 an hour so a drastic MW hike would reduce the purchasing power of more people than it would increase
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

only in the short run; in the long run, it will "increase the size of the pie" through a positive multiplier effect.

So in your world a person today making $15. Would make now $30 an hour?

Why would I think that?

Only the fantastical right wing, has nothing but strawman arguments they can easily beat down, "to look tough".