General Assembly overrides Hogan's veto of minimum wage increase (Baltimore: 2015, how much)
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.
Correct. That's literally the point. The fear there will be a massive relocation of jobs makes zero sense because the vast majority of low wage jobs aren't movable. That's proven time and time again as minimum wage increases take effect and full employment remains intact. Yes, some employers will pick low wage jurisdictions over Maryland, but that's always been the case - whether these movable, low-skill jobs go to West Virginia or China. And Maryland is fine with that for obvious reasons.
"This doesn't affect me and my upper-middle class or above suburban lifestyle" isn't an obvious reason. Get outside the bubble and see how the other 1/2 lives. Large parts of your state are just like WV, and those low skill jobs are a needed addition in our community......your neighbors out west.........poor people that liberals like you pretend to care about.
$10 an hour jobs are better than people dropping out of the workforce entirely because the jobs are relocated or replaced by automation (see historically low employment rates, then ask "why.") These jobs also keep families from moving away and further crashing our region into desperation. Our housing prices are rock bottom to account for the economic reality of lower paying jobs, that's how the market works.
We will see job loses because of this bill. The call center in Frostburg that pays $10 an hour to a few hundred people will likely be among the major ones, and it will really hurt working families up here.........not that you understand. The arrogance of thinking that any job paying under $15 an hour isn't worthy of being present in our state is mind numbing to me......
I'm sorry I don't sugar coat things. If the call center fires half of its workforce because it's unprofitable when paying their employees a living wage then that's the way the cookie crumbles. If the options are 150 jobs @ $15 v. 300 jobs @ $10+$5 in government welfare so the workforce doesn't starve to death then every good conservative agrees with me that the former is the correct option. There are thousands of unfilled jobs in the state and welfare's purpose isn't (or at least shouldn't be) to enable companies to take advantage of cheap, subsidized labor. Maryland is better than that. It can afford to choose quality of jobs over quantity of jobs.
$10/hour jobs don't help welfare households, they create welfare households.
Whether they do or not... they're out there.
What is it that has these particular jobs, the current crop of "no and low skill" jobs, paying $10/hr?
Statistic or Trope ?:
... that those applicants with enough of whatever qualities the employers require (skill, personality,etc)...
who AREN'T already earning that $10 rate (or more)... don't bring or aren't able to bring enough to the table
to be judged worth even the currently mandated $7/hr MW rate.
Some employers will cite supply:demand basis and others will also cite P/L factors
but they'll still only advance up the line to $10/hr perhaps 10-20% of the applicants who were hired.
As an employment issue the lack of training, advancement paths, cohesive work schedules and such still matter
far more that making adjustments to the MW rates at the bottom. These stability measures and some to improve
the patterns of household economic practices would help stretch their income more.
Whatever the specific dollar amount paid into their household, and however efficiently managed,...
there is still an unarguable amount needed in order to maintain it as a solvent household.
The cash value of that btw starts at about $40,000 per year (in DC closer to $60K).
Can everyone agree that "household" in these contexts is NOT expected to mean singles?
If so, then any effort made to organize the people into sharing units would improve things immediately.
($60,000 ÷ $10/hr = 6000 hours clocked In turn that = THREE full time household members)
But any advocacy that doesn't also (first?) deal with the oversupply of perpetual MW adults available,
which allows employers to justify the supply:demand or P/L arguments we've promoted into being...
is missing the boat or not seeing the big picture or one of those other pithy sayings.
We have a choice: Stop repeating the same mistakes or Not.
And we better do it before we lose even more of the declining no/low skilled jobs.
Last edited by MrRational; 03-30-2019 at 12:54 PM..
This argument is always a red herring. First, wages have always increased over time. Not as fast as they should, but they increase. To have wages frozen while inflation continues is illogical. You end up with people like this: Working Full Time And Homeless
Homelessness is a separate problem and has to do with a shortage of housing units. More units = lower prices on average. Few available units means that the price goes up. That is very simple supply and demand. It's no coincidence that areas which have loose zoning and building codes have adequate housing and low housing prices while areas on the opposite end of the spectrum, which have restrictive zoning (unless you grease the right palms) and restrictive rent control laws always end up with a housing crisis. Liberals tend to confuse cause and effect. Houses don't just magically crop up. If builders are unable to build either because of restrictive government regulation or because costs/wages are too high or because it's just plain too risky to do so in a certain area then they're not going to build.
With employment the reality is that an employee HAS TO produce an economic value commensurate with what they are being paid, plus taxes, plus overhead, or there is no justification to have that employee. Businesses will either seek better quality workers or they're automate sooner than they otherwise would, or they'll simply not do business in that area since there is no profit to be made for the RISK that the owner/investor is taking. Funny how risk and the livelihood of owners/investors never seems to get factored into left wing calculations.
Those who deem risk to be too high won't invest at all which will simply allow poverty to maintain and fester. Poverty, by the way, is the default condition of humanity while it takes effort, work, and ingenuity to improve and develop. Liberals tend to confuse cause and effect here too. The left tends to think that wealthy and leisure are default conditions while a few "unlucky" persons are condemned to poverty via some magical system of oppression. The reality is that it's all about contribution and effort.
I'll also point out that a lot of people are poor, not so much due to their wages, but because of poor lifestyle decisions and poor financial habits while those who escape poverty consistently make the positive day-to-day financial decisions (like, "I'm not going to buy this $7 pack of cigarettes, or this $3 coffee every day, or these $400 shoes, or maintain this $500/mo. lease payment etc. etc. because I can invest that money instead"). Those who save are then able to invest in productive assets. It's no difficult to fathom.
I'm sorry I don't sugar coat things. If the call center fires half of its workforce because it's unprofitable when paying their employees a living wage then that's the way the cookie crumbles. If the options are 150 jobs @ $15 v. 300 jobs @ $10+$5 in government welfare so the workforce doesn't starve to death then every good conservative agrees with me that the former is the correct option. There are thousands of unfilled jobs in the state and welfare's purpose isn't (or at least shouldn't be) to enable companies to take advantage of cheap, subsidized labor. Maryland is better than that. It can afford to choose quality of jobs over quantity of jobs.
No conservative worth his salt would agree that a government mandated wage of $15 an hour should be set in all of the communities that make up our state, let alone allow that premise to be the starting point for a debate about economics or public assistance.
Starting from the premise of what most conservatives actually think, that wages should be set based on supply and demand in the work force, I see a Annapolis bill that likely cost my community, you know the one where you can rent a entire house in a decent neighborhood for $700 or so, 100-200 decent jobs right off the bat as call centers relocate, and service jobs are automated more quickly.
Two adults making $10 an hour would make about 40k per year. Give 8-9k of that for rent (or mortgage in my case, yes my loan is that small) at about $700 per month, and you have the average Allegany County household median income.
Yup, Buff, that's us. That's my community. Those $10 an hour jobs are now gone, and with WV and PA full of empty factories and commercial buildings, that is where those jobs will go. So, I guess you will either be paying more to people who are now without jobs in welfare, or watch our area continue to depopulate, which will mean more $$$ from your community to repair our roads, keep our schools open, etc. etc. etc. because of a shrinking tax base.
I have learned to accept ignorance about my community. I tolerate apathy from most downstaters. I will never allow this kind of condescension and outright disdain for me, my community, and my neighbors to go without a reply. We have a right to live here, and the arrogance that you would rather pass laws that actively kill our community rather than simply leaving us alone, or helping us (again, liberal, what say you about helping your neighbors in need?) gets really old.
Unions always support an increase in the minimum wage because they will maintain the differential in the union wage and the minimum. A higher minimum results in a higher union wage. The Democrat party gets the union vote.
Also, a high minimum wage will tend to reduce the availability of employment of last resort and less opportunity for people who simply are not worth the minimum wage.
No conservative worth his salt would agree that a government mandated wage of $15 an hour should be set in all of the communities that make up our state, let alone allow that premise to be the starting point for a debate about economics or public assistance.
Starting from the premise of what most conservatives actually think, that wages should be set based on supply and demand in the work force, I see a Annapolis bill that likely cost my community, you know the one where you can rent a entire house in a decent neighborhood for $700 or so, 100-200 decent jobs right off the bat as call centers relocate, and service jobs are automated more quickly.
Two adults making $10 an hour would make about 40k per year. Give 8-9k of that for rent (or mortgage in my case, yes my loan is that small) at about $700 per month, and you have the average Allegany County household median income.
Yup, Buff, that's us. That's my community. Those $10 an hour jobs are now gone, and with WV and PA full of empty factories and commercial buildings, that is where those jobs will go. So, I guess you will either be paying more to people who are now without jobs in welfare, or watch our area continue to depopulate, which will mean more $$$ from your community to repair our roads, keep our schools open, etc. etc. etc. because of a shrinking tax base.
I have learned to accept ignorance about my community. I tolerate apathy from most downstaters. I will never allow this kind of condescension and outright disdain for me, my community, and my neighbors to go without a reply. We have a right to live here, and the arrogance that you would rather pass laws that actively kill our community rather than simply leaving us alone, or helping us (again, liberal, what say you about helping your neighbors in need?) gets really old.
I understand your emotion on the subject, but it seems to be clouding basic logic. The status quo of having the working poor take substandard pay (and the government stepping in with generational welfare, at this point) has clearly not worked. Tick-like employers taking advantage of low-wage conditions have undeniably shredded Allegany-like regions for decades now. If you have a suggestion of how to improve the area's economic viability in a way that doesn't involve increasing pay, I'm happy to hear it. As is, all I hear is a lot of defensive language about maintaining the status quo of an area that you readily admit isn't doing well. It doesn't seem to make much sense (other than having a personal attachment to the area, of course).
Unions always support an increase in the minimum wage because they will maintain the differential in the union wage and the minimum. A higher minimum results in a higher union wage. The Democrat party gets the union vote.
Also, a high minimum wage will tend to reduce the availability of employment of last resort and less opportunity for people who simply are not worth the minimum wage.
I understand your emotion on the subject, but it seems to be clouding basic logic. The status quo of having the working poor take substandard pay (and the government stepping in with generational welfare, at this point) has clearly not worked. Tick-like employers taking advantage of low-wage conditions have undeniably shredded Allegany-like regions for decades now. If you have a suggestion of how to improve the area's economic viability in a way that doesn't involve increasing pay, I'm happy to hear it. As is, all I hear is a lot of defensive language about maintaining the status quo of an area that you readily admit isn't doing well. It doesn't seem to make much sense (other than having a personal attachment to the area, of course).
If you sense emotion, it is because for you this is a mostly philosophical argument about "tick-like employers" and "sub-standard pay." How many people do you know that will be personally affected by this proposed wage increase versus how much of your opinion is philosophical/idealogical? It will directly affect some of my friends and family.
I tried my best to show how income and costs work in Allegany County. $10 an hour makes you the working poor, but you can get by. Taking that job away and replacing it only with the smug satisfaction that the "tick like employer" no longer operates in Maryland doesn't help, it directly hurts these people who already have trouble getting by.
If you sense emotion, it is because for you this is a mostly philosophical argument about "tick-like employers" and "sub-standard pay." How many people do you know that will be personally affected by this proposed wage increase versus how much of your opinion is philosophical/idealogical? It will directly affect some of my friends and family.
I tried my best to show how income and costs work in Allegany County. $10 an hour makes you the working poor, but you can get by. Taking that job away and replacing it only with the smug satisfaction that the "tick like employer" no longer operates in Maryland doesn't help, it directly hurts these people who already have trouble getting by.
To answer your question, I know literally dozens of people (many of which I indirectly employ through vendor contracts) who have been affected by MoCo's minimum wage increases that have arrived in advance of the state's. Considering my building's cleaning lady now shows up in a car nicer than my own, I'm guessing she doesn't dislike the annual pay increases. My brother-in-law has been able to quit his weekend job at a miniature golf course because his M-F min wage job as a special education assistant now pays $3 more an hour than when he was hired.
I heard the same nonsense online back before the increases took effect about "oh no, low wage workers will be fired because they aren't worth paying more." Guess what, the unemployment rate has continued to drop across the county year after year even as the minimum wage increases occur every July 1. The working class isn't as valueless as you seem to think. If this conversation was about maintaining v. changing the status quo re: wages and employment in west Baltimore instead of western MD I think you'd be able to see the facts much clearer.
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.
