[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by dazzleman

Ideally no, but we can't really control that. We can raise the minimum wage, but beyond a certain point, the inflation that results will make it a wash. There's also the issue of people improving their skills so that they can command higher salaries.

The real problem is that an average income in the US today no longer supports a middle class lifestyle. You now need two average incomes for a middle class lifestyle, and that leaves many people struggling.

Yet we cheer when housing prices increase, as if this were such a great thing. We have a great intellectual disconnect. We think it's great that housing prices increase 20% per year (which somehow doesn't make it into the inflation numbers), yet then we lament the fact that many people have to spend well over half their income for basic housing.

Our macro policies have created this mess, and raising the minimum wage is just tinkering at the margins. We can't really increase our overall standard of living through legislation. We need to do the much harder work of increasing our national income so that we're no longer consuming more than we produce. Then maybe we can see real improvements in living standards.

The minimum wage increase will help only a small number of people and won't address the larger problem (though I don't oppose the minimum wage increase, to be clear). We have had for some time an unserious government that is only interested in playing political games, and that's what this is. It's a way to trick people into thinking the problem is being addressed, when it isn't.

Wonderful post! +1.

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Wonderful post! +1.

Thanks, man!

[wma152]

Originally Posted by JayCT

How are things different than 50 years ago? people still need to make enough money to eat and pay their bills. Those bill may be somewhat different but the basic premise is still there. Jay

My point is that 50 years ago, the minimum wage is of no relevance to what it should be today, as someone had said that because minimum wage was x amount back then, it should be x amount today.

I know a lot of job salaries stay the same in the last 5 years, so why should the minimum wage increase, especially when there's another skill set above it that only pays 9-10 dollar range?

[wma152]

Originally Posted by munna21977

People opposing hike in minimum wages will whine even if Minimum wages are reduced to 1 Dollar per hour.

People who support the minimum wage hike will not stopped complaining until it reaches $15 dollar soon.

People will continue to make a fuss until the gov't stop enacting policies that make very little sense, redefining the issues to conform to their own agendas, creating condition unfavorable to health of the state.

A minimum wage is set based on other jobs with skill set above it and the wage for those jobs. If job A requires more skills then minimum wage and it pays 9-10 an hour, you think it's fair and make sense that the minimum wage is the same?

[Rakin]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Do you think someone should after working 40 hours a week should still be in poverty in the USA?

Yes when they have no skills, drop out of school, abuse drugs. Other than that MW is for teens and the young starting out.

[wma152]

Originally Posted by Rakin

Yes when they have no skills, drop out of school, abuse drugs. Other than that MW is for teens and the young starting out.

But the bleeding hearts want the minimum wage to be a living wage and to support a family. Which is my beef, they are redefining what a minimum wage is, that's why the $15 is not too far away on their agenda. MW is the bottom which make sense because there are more skill set jobs above it which pays a little more.

you know the left is all about the free hand out with no personal accountability.

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by wma152

There is no agenda to to pay as little as possible, a minimum wage is set for jobs that require no skills because jobs with some kind skills are pay at a certain level already. IF job A is paid 10 an hour with x amount of skills required, off course a job with no skills would be less.

If that is true, then why have so many jobs (many of which paid more than min wage in the US) been "shipped off" to China and India?

No one commented on my earlier post on this, but what does anyone think of the "basic income" idea? Where instead of a "minimum wage", a government safety net guarantees a certain income that provides basic but definite survival, and then work adds to that income. This keeps the incentive to "strive for more" while eliminating the need for a "minimum wage", allowing exactly what you say above regarding jobs with little or no skills needed.

[nep321]

The bottom line is that Republican wage policies have never been effective and never will be.

[Mr_250]

I'm not worried about the $10.10/ hr anymore. That is going to be implemented in 2017. The $12.00 an hour for large corporations/franchisees is what is going to hit the most. That increase, if approved, will start July 1, 2014. I'm glad it will not effect small businesses in the State.

This will have an effect on everything from groceries to gas. If you look at the big picture, the $10.10 will only effect a small portion of people (small shops and retailers) the majority of mw employers are large corporations such some large retailers, chain restruants and grocery stores. If approved, the mw will go from $8.70 on June 30 to $11.90 on July 1 ( if I'm reading this correctly). That will have price impacts across the board.

Thank goodness I know how to grow my own food and hunt. The prices of food are about to skyrocket in the near future.

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

Thank goodness I know how to grow my own food and hunt. The prices of food are about to skyrocket in the near future.

As if they haven't already skyrocketed since 2010