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.
Cost-of-living is lower across the board in Republican states, thus the need to raise the minimum wage in those states isn't the urgent matter that its become in more urban blue states. Average rent 1-bedroom rent in NYC and San Francisco is over $3000 per month, compared to under $600/month in Tulsa, Topeka, Indianapolis and Tucson.
Which is why if you want to pass high minimum wage laws, they should be done locally rather than statewide. Introducing a one-size-fits-all solution is going to cause as many problems as it fixes. Adjusted for cost-of-living, a $7.25 hourly wage in Oklahoma City is equivalent to a $12.00 hourly wage in Boston.
There's no "need," only "want," to raise the minimum wage. The whole minimum wage thing is simply political - it buys votes, that's all.
The wage is determined by supply (workers) and demand (consumers, aka, we the people) not by mobs or government bureaucrats.
Wage is low, particularly in California, is simply because there are too many qualified workers in addition to millions of illegal immigrants.
I worked plenty of minimum wage jobs when I was in school too. Rented rooms in crappy old "student slum" houses, lived in basements, didn't own a car, etc. But the minimum wage in most places has not kept up with the increase in the cost of living over the past couple decades.
That's not whining. It's simple arithmetic.
Why should the minimum wage or any wage keep up with the increase in the cost of living?
The problem I have is far too many who complain about the low minimum wage were completely silent while the Fed went about making the minimum wage so low.
Where were you when the Fed was handing out trillions and leaving you behind? That was the time to complain.
I agree that because of the Feds actions it has left the minimum wage too low but the minimum wage isn't the problem, the Fed is.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'Fed'. If you mean the Federal Reserve Board, they have nothing to do with it. The minimum wage is set by Congress; i.e., Congress passes a bill raising the minimum wage, which bill is signed by the President, and the Department of Labor is then responsible for enforcing the new minimum wage, in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
As I have noted elsewhere on CD, when I first entered the workforce in 1973 or so (it is becoming fuzzy), I earned $1.60 per hour. It does not sound like much, but gas was around 25 or 30 cents a gallon, a gallon of milk probably 50 cents, etc. I recall that for $2.00 I could buy a six pack of beer, a pack of cigarettes, and still have enough left over for a bag of peanuts. Try that today with $7.25.
Congress simply should have kept raising the minimum wage over the next four decades. Going from $1.60 to the current $7.25 during those years was not right. There were several long periods (ten or so years) with no increase at all ($3.35 for nine years, and ten years for $5.15). If Congress had simply kept up with small raises, we would not be having this issue about doubling the wage (actually, even if the wage had steadily increased over the decades to $15.00 per hour, some people would have probably been agitating for $30.00 per hour; some people cannot be pleased).
Yet, just a few years ago I applied for a legal secretary position and was offered $7.25 an hour (probably the firm justified this because it was described as "receptionist/legal secretary" and paid a low ball receptionist rate). I graduated from business college in 1980, and had over 30 years of office experience, as well as 10 years of experience in a legal firm. There was also a paralegal position open at the time that paid a whopping $8.25 an hour. I was over 50 at the time, had had a great deal more experience than a 20-something, but that wasn't taken into account.
I gave up on looking for legal assistant or any other secretary positions and stuck with my cafeteria food prep job at my local school district, which I'd taken while looking for something "better". Had I known what "lunch ladies" are paid in some school districts, I wouldn't have wasted my time. It pays considerably more per hour and has ideal hours (not to mention summers off and nice holiday breaks).
It's an employer's market right now. Greedy companies will pay as little as they can get away with.
Of course it wasn't. Because you were being paid for the job, not what you brought to the job. If a medical practice had an opening for a receptionist, and a surgeon applied for the job, would you expect them to be paid a lot more money because of their experience? No. Because the position pays a certain wage, and the potential employee is free to take that position for that wage, or not. It's obvious the position doesn't need a lot of skill. Why should they pay for something they don't need?
Cost-of-living is lower across the board in Republican states, thus the need to raise the minimum wage in those states isn't the urgent matter that its become in more urban blue states. Average rent 1-bedroom rent in NYC and San Francisco is over $3000 per month, compared to under $600/month in Tulsa, Topeka, Indianapolis and Tucson.
Which is why if you want to pass high minimum wage laws, they should be done locally rather than statewide. Introducing a one-size-fits-all solution is going to cause as many problems as it fixes. Adjusted for cost-of-living, a $7.25 hourly wage in Oklahoma City is equivalent to a $12.00 hourly wage in Boston where the current minimum wage is just $10/hr., so the workers in OKC are coming out ahead even at a lower hourly wage.
I agree with this....it is a large portion of the problem. There is nothing stopping States from enacting higher minimum wages. It's stupid to make it the same across the board.
It ranges from 25% to 46%. (Depending on the State)
As you would expect it is highest down south in places like MS, LA and AR. In CA, it is about 30%
1.3 % of us workers make minimum. 1.6 make less.. These are not and never have been designed to help someone raise families. They are minimum for a reason.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'Fed'. If you mean the Federal Reserve Board, they have nothing to do with it. The minimum wage is set by Congress; i.e., Congress passes a bill raising the minimum wage, which bill is signed by the President, and the Department of Labor is then responsible for enforcing the new minimum wage, in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
They have everything to do with why it has fallen so far behind.
Quote:
As I have noted elsewhere on CD, when I first entered the workforce in 1973 or so (it is becoming fuzzy), I earned $1.60 per hour. It does not sound like much, but gas was around 25 or 30 cents a gallon, a gallon of milk probably 50 cents, etc. I recall that for $2.00 I could buy a six pack of beer, a pack of cigarettes, and still have enough left over for a bag of peanuts. Try that today with $7.25.
And do you understand why those prices are no longer that low?
Quote:
Congress simply should have kept raising the minimum wage over the next four decades. Going from $1.60 to the current $7.25 during those years was not right. There were several long periods (ten or so years) with no increase at all ($3.35 for nine years, and ten years for $5.15). If Congress had simply kept up with small raises, we would not be having this issue about doubling the wage (actually, even if the wage had steadily increased over the decades to $15.00 per hour, some people would have probably been agitating for $30.00 per hour; some people cannot be pleased).
Did you see what the markets did when Yellen bumped the interest rates a smidge? Money shouldnt be free for those who already have it.
Why should the minimum wage or any wage keep up with the increase in the cost of living?
Inflation means that the cost of things will inevitably rise over time. historically that's about 2% a year though recently its been less than that.
If minimum wage (and wages in general) don't keep up with inflation making the cost of literally everything more expensive, then those workers are losing money year over year as the value of $7.25 fails to go as far as it once did. This is literally why we have minimum wage increases every few years and minimum wage isn't still $2.65 like it was in 1978.
From an employer perspective, inflation means that the burgers I'm selling for $1.00 might be $1.15 five years later. If minimum wage doesn't go up that means I'm getting a discount on labor relative to the price increases I'm charging on the product.
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.
