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.
Yes it should be a minimum living wage, therefore the minimum can be tied to local areas better. Living wage in NYC is different than New York state. If one is working a full time schedule, that income should be enough to keep them from needing government assistance as will, currently that is not the case and we have private companies paying employees too little and forcing them to seek government assistance.
Lets play this out.
You want pay to be tied into location. You want someone who works a full time job to make enough money to live where they work without government assistance.
So this is all mandated, I am now going to quit my good paying job that requires skill and hard work (that is why it pays well) and work flipping burgers which requires no skill and now all of the sudden pays well enough to live my current life. Now these burgers I'm making are going to cost $30 because where I live is pretty expensive area in the nation. My previous employer is now going to have to pay nearly double what he was paying me to find someone to do the work because who wants to deal with the stress when they can get by in life without issues just flipping burgers.
Some cities are passing a law called a "Living-Wage Law", that says someone working for a large retailer must be paid at least 1-1/2 times the city's Minimum Wage. The purpose, they say, is so that the person can support a family (I presume a family of 4?) on his wages.
What if his work (clerking or flipping burgers or whatever) doesn't increase the company's revenue by that much?
What cosmic law suddenly made that company responsible for this person's family? Isn't that the person's responsibility himself? I thought companies (whether the corner store or K-Mart) were founded to sell good and make a profit for the people who risked their money to invest in them and set hem up?
Did God hand down a new commandment, saying that a family's needs must be supplied by working as a clerk or burger flipper?
As far as I know, that kind of work has never been sufficient to support a family of four. Someone who tries to support such a family while only working for McDonalds or Joe's Lawnmower Shop, is himself guilty of neglect. It's no different from trying to lift a 50-pound weight by using only a piece of kite string.
Does someone think they can change that by passing a law?
The problem isn't the wage, it's the inflated cost of living due to excessive government regulation.
Shouldn't a minimum wage worker be able to rent housing that is affordable, or should government be allowed to make housing unaffordable?
You want pay to be tied into location. You want someone who works a full time job to make enough money to live where they work without government assistance.
So this is all mandated, I am now going to quit my good paying job that requires skill and hard work (that is why it pays well) and work flipping burgers which requires no skill and now all of the sudden pays well enough to live my current life. Now these burgers I'm making are going to cost $30 because where I live is pretty expensive area in the nation. My previous employer is now going to have to pay nearly double what he was paying me to find someone to do the work because who wants to deal with the stress when they can get by in life without issues just flipping burgers.
The problem is not the wage, it's the cost of living. The proper solution is that developers and landlords should be allowed to provide housing which is affordable to burger flippers.
A living wage is a death sentence to the lowest class of unskilled workers. It just doesn't make economic sense to set a wage higher than what a employer will give; a employee will agree too. As long as they are free to both walk away. . I don't believe in any wage floor
Reality is this
Bob capability is $7.50
Johns capability is $9.50
mcDonald's is okay with the lower capability of bob and pays $7.50.
John keeps looking and finds a job that matches his capability.
Now lets say the living wage is $9.5
Bob is out of the running
Mcdonald might as well always hire Johns, because at $9.50 they are getting a higher worker at the same price as someone like Bob
Bob is screwed
Living wage is one of countless ideas floated by unconstrained persons that doesn't really work in real life, because not EVERYONE has the same ability.
The problem is not the wage. I do not believe in a wage floor and I do not believe in a housing density ceiling. Beyond minimal health and safety standards (below those which currently exist), government should allow the private sector to provide housing that is affordable to unskilled workers.
Middle class housing standards imposed by government is one of those ideas that don't work well in real life, because not all people have the same amount of money to spend on housing. The existence of the employed homeless is everyday evidence.
You want pay to be tied into location. You want someone who works a full time job to make enough money to live where they work without government assistance.
So this is all mandated, I am now going to quit my good paying job that requires skill and hard work (that is why it pays well) and work flipping burgers which requires no skill and now all of the sudden pays well enough to live my current life. Now these burgers I'm making are going to cost $30 because where I live is pretty expensive area in the nation. My previous employer is now going to have to pay nearly double what he was paying me to find someone to do the work because who wants to deal with the stress when they can get by in life without issues just flipping burgers.
Lots of people - even if pay were equal (which is NOT what anyone is saying btw) - would choose the more stressful, but interesting job.
Lastly, IF your pay would be equal to what a 'living wage' job at McDonalds is - you aren't making that much money anyway.
Someone will be waiting in line to do your job when you quit to go to the golden arches.
The problem is not the wage. I do not believe in a wage floor and I do not believe in a housing density ceiling. Beyond minimal health and safety standards (below those which currently exist), government should allow the private sector to provide housing that is affordable to unskilled workers.
You couldn't build a house anywhere in this nation that is affordable for someone making minimum wage. the labor and the raw materials are too much money, unless we start paying the people that build the house minimum wage as well.
You couldn't build a house anywhere in this nation that is affordable for someone making minimum wage. the labor and the raw materials are too much money, unless we start paying the people that build the house minimum wage as well.
You can't BUILD that house TODAY, yet many such affordable houses exist today because they were built years ago. Also, affordable apartments and trailers CAN be created today.
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.
