Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nope, there is the other option in that you don't require that minimum wage job to live. This would be the most common case given the numbers the CBO came up with.
You keep implying that everyone working minimum wage must take that pay or else be homeless, but the fact is you have no idea what percentage of min wage workers are in that situation. You're just making things up as you go along.
Another example of lots of hand waving and arguing to avoid needing to actually back up what you say.
Let's ask Storm Eagle again... hey Storm Eagle, what percentage of min wage workers come from families under the poverty line? Surely it must be 100% to believe that manure you're shoveling, so is that the correct number?
You stated that 19% of 31 billion workers would be families below the poverty line. I stated you do know that is 5890000000 people which is a huge amount and you just avoided what I said. Where did that website even get the 31 billion number they did not even show that they just said it was an estimate.
You stated that 19% of 31 billion workers would be families below the poverty line. I stated you do know that is 5890000000 people which is a huge amount and you just avoided what I said. Where did that website even get the 31 billion number they did not even show that they just said it was an estimate.
No. There aren't 31 billion people on the planet, please, think a minute and re-read what was posted:
" Just 19 percent of the $31 billion would accrue to families with earnings below the poverty threshold, whereas 29 percent would accrue to families earning more than three times the poverty threshold, CBO estimates."
19% of the money would go to families with earnings below poverty. 81% goes to families above poverty.
29% would go to families earning 3 X the poverty level (in other words, the minimum wage earner is not the main breadwinner of the family)
No. There aren't 31 billion people on the planet, please, think a minute and re-read what was posted:
" Just 19 percent of the $31 billion would accrue to families with earnings below the poverty threshold, whereas 29 percent would accrue to families earning more than three times the poverty threshold, CBO estimates."
19% of the money would go to families with earnings below poverty. 81% goes to families above poverty.
29% would go to families earning 3 X the poverty level (in other words, the minimum wage earner is not the main breadwinner of the family)
Your right I read that wrong but anyway it is not like it is really evidence I mean everything they put there is an estimate which means they are guessing the real numbers. They never show any evidence how they got 19 percent or 29 percent or link to any study or economist that proves this it is just an opinion piece. How many of these people are adults having to live with their parents because they can not afford to move out and are counted as families? Nor do they show what the poverty threshold is to them.
it's not other people's problem is you lack enough skills to make a real living. why not make it $50 an hour, or $500, since you claim that it will "have no effect". What $15 an hour WILL do is cause loss of millions of jobs (to automation and illegals).
Right because getting more skills will just make better jobs appear for you and if everyone did that everyone can work a better job.
Right because getting more skills will just make better jobs appear for you and if everyone did that everyone can work a better job.
Sigh.... If people spent half the effort working that you do making excuses, nobody would be poor.
Look, here's how it works: First job is typically minimum wage, and you learn basic job skills. Second job pays a bit better, and you learn more advanced job skills. Third job, more money and more skills. So on and so forth. This is the way it has worked for the past 50+ years for 95%+ of the job force. Is there a small percentage who gets stuck on job #1? Yes, but that isn't the fault of those who did it the right way. Nor should we totally jack up the economy and punish those who succeeded because a few didn't.
Your right I read that wrong but anyway it is not like it is really evidence I mean everything they put there is an estimate which means they are guessing the real numbers. They never show any evidence how they got 19 percent or 29 percent or link to any study or economist that proves this it is just an opinion piece.
Ah okay, you are attempting to prove your point by:
1. Refusing to provide proof of any claim you make
2. Dismissing any proof others provide
So let's ask again, Storm Eagle must have more data and analytical skills at his fingertips than the Congressional Budget Office since he dismisses their analysis that does have a link to underlying data as a useless opinion piece.
Hey Storm Eagle, what percentage of min wage workers come from families under the poverty line?
How many of these people are adults having to live with their parents because they can not afford to move out and are counted as families?
Bingo! They are indeed counted as families.
It is taking pages and pages of threads but you're slowly wrapping your head around this. Most of the people in minimum wage jobs aren't living alone as single earners, and that is why your continued bleating about how min wage workers would be homeless if they didn't have the job is false.
Is the goal of our society to have a roof over head and food in belly or is your campaign for higher minimum wage based on the goal of every person being able to live alone as a single person household regardless of job level?
That would only be true if both sides have equal power in the decision they do not.
Relative "power" in a labor rate negotiation is a factor that is impounded into the market rate. Sometimes employers have the power, and sometimes employees have the power. But whatever middle ground they come to will be "market rate."
Quote:
The employer has all the power it is a take the wage or I will find someone else to do it.
If the employer is operating in a market where there is an overabundance of labor that is qualified to do the job in question, then that is what will happen. Unless the offered rate is too low. if the offered rate is so low that no one will take it, then the employer has to up the amount of the offer. See how simple basic econ is?
Quote:
There is nothing "fair" about that situation.
Everything about it is fair. It is one of the most inherently "fair things" there is.
Quote:
So are workers in third world countries working at market rates when they work for pennies a day?
Of course. Why would you believe any differently?
Quote:
I know what supply and demand is.
Based on your posts, I would say it is pretty clear that you don't understand how they work.
Quote:
How are you gonna get demand if you are paying people so little that is the question I would ask you?
We have a Federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour in this country. Based on your posts, you believe this to be incredibly low. If it is in fact too low, how is there any demand in this country?
You must have missed the question that I asked previously, so here it is again:
Quote:
Simple question: are you paid market rate for your labor? Why or why not?
Agreements cannot be upheld if they're illegal. I can't offer to sell a human being to you, even though me, you, and the person being sold are fine with it. I can't offer somebody a $5 an hour wage even though both parties are OK with it.
Is there something in my posts that makes you believe that I am advocating illegal activity? Do you really believe that advocating for a market labor rate is somehow akin to selling someone into slavery? Really?
Quote:
Were it not for MW, employers would be paying people EVEN LESS than what they're making now.
For some jobs in some markets, absolutely. As it should be.
Is there something in my posts that makes you believe that I am advocating illegal activity? Do you really believe that advocating for a market labor rate is somehow akin to selling someone into slavery? Really?
No. But you're advocating that market rates prevail. Regardless of whether or not it's smoking, clearly immoral stuff, or payments, these things are still dictated by what's allowed by law. The hard laws of the market aren't the only thing to consider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
For some jobs in some markets, absolutely. As it should be.
Well, some of us ARE pushing to up the MW. If the US doesn't have better standards, we can start comparing ourselves to 3rd world countries. So much for the great US of A.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
