Minimum wage is an issue of character. (jobs, employee, economy)

[TaxPhd]

Originally Posted by redguard57

No one's saying that. But it does us no good if we have to supplement low incomes with things like EITC, food stamps, etc... that is just inefficient.

They need to make enough so that a FT job will be enough to rent a living situation for the area. Last I saw, even the cheapest states like Arkansas require a FT worker to make $14 an hour to rent an apartment. In the expensive states it's more like $25.

There are other ways to make this happen besides just MW, though, which is why I'm increasingly in favor of a UBI. We also need to bring back single room occupancies, make it easier to rent out rooms, etc.., incentivize builders to build something other than luxury units, etc.. In addition to getting MW out of the single digits.

Actually, that’s exactly what SHOULD be happening.

We as a society have decided that people should have a minimum standard of living. And we as a society pay for that for those that can’t do so on their own. Now this is the most important part - Society in general has decided to help the less fortunate, and Society in general pays. However, a minimum wage above the equilibrium point serves only to shift the burden of paying an economic benefit AWAY from society in general (where it belongs) and places that burden solely on the shoulders of business owners. This is simply wrong.

Whatever level of benefits society in general decides is appropriate, should be paid for by society in general. It is wrong to shift a portion of the economic burden for that benefit solely to business owners.

[Supposn]

Originally Posted by TaxPhd

The field of economics is pretty well developed, especially at the principles level. If you believe that you have some special insight that is not impounded into the current standard knowledge base of the field, then by all means - share it with us.

Or, continue to steadfastly refuse to learn. I really couldn’t care less.

TaxPhD, I suppose additional, if not entirely unpublished economic concepts do arise. You’re contending we know it all, or only you know it all, or if you don’t agree with an economic concept, it cannot be a valid concept?

I confess not understanding the meaning of your phrase, “special insight that is not impounded into the current standard knowledge base of the field”, but I suppose that’s a phrase of no definite meaning. Such a phrase is dependent upon its individual writer, or speaker, or audience’s interpretations. Respectfully, Supposn

[JobHunter2018]

Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133

Same goes with bailouts, QE, or whatever mumbo jumbo financial terms they come out with.

Still, it invalidates the idiocy of "why not make minimum wage $75,000". We need a minimum wage just like we need oxygen. What we also need is to judge what that minimum should be.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by JobHunter2018

Still, it invalidates the idiocy of "why not make minimum wage $75,000". We need a minimum wage just like we need oxygen. What we also need is to judge what that minimum should be.

My proposed $75,000 level was to make a specific point that A). didn't involve you B). is, judging from your last number of posts, way over your head.

[TaxPhd]

Originally Posted by Supposn

TaxPhD, I suppose additional, if not entirely unpublished economic concepts do arise. You’re contending we know it all, or only you know it all, or if you don’t agree with an economic concept, it cannot be a valid concept?

It is not my contention that anyone knows it all. Just that you don’t know any of it.

I confess not understanding the meaning of your phrase, “special insight that is not impounded into the current standard knowledge base of the field”, but I suppose that’s a phrase of no definite meaning. Such a phrase is dependent upon its individual writer, or speaker, or audience’s interpretations. Respectfully, Supposn

It’s plain language of very definite meaning. Its meaning isn’t dependent upon your interpretation.

[JobHunter2018]

Originally Posted by EDS_

My proposed $75,000 level was to make a specific point

Which was utterly pointless, irrational and far off the mark.

that A). didn't involve you B)

You made a post that anyone could see and quite easily debunk.

. is, judging from your last number of posts, way over your head.

You made a post that indicated you know nothing about logic or economics whatsoever and nothing you say should be taken seriously in any way whatsoever. Either that or you're just trying to get under people's skin. Which is it?

[Supposn]

Originally Posted by TaxPhd

Actually, that’s exactly what SHOULD be happening.
We as a society have decided that people should have a minimum standard of living. And we as a society pay for that for those that can’t do so on their own. Now this is the most important part - Society in general has decided to help the less fortunate, and Society in general pays. However, a minimum wage above the equilibrium point serves only to shift the burden of paying an economic benefit AWAY from society in general (where it belongs) and places that burden solely on the shoulders of business owners. This is simply wrong.

Whatever level of benefits society in general decides is appropriate, should be paid for by society in general. It is wrong to shift a portion of the economic burden for that benefit solely to business owners.

TaxPhD, the minimum wage rate doesn’t require employers to hire or retain any employees. guarantee anyone a job or an income; it doesn’t determine wage rate differentials; it doesn’t require employers to retain any worker. But employers are prohibited from paying less than the legally mandated minimum wage rate. To permit them to do so would be to the net detriment of our nation’s economy and our society.

Respectfully, Supposn

[Supposn]

TaxPhD, your favoring consideration of USA enacting UBI, (i.e. Universal Basic Income) surprises me. UIB would be a politically determined. Your posts certainly inferred the basis of your opposition to minimum wage rates is due to their rate being political determined. You’ve been no less opposed to a minimum wage rate annually pegged to a market indicator. UIB would be a politically determined equilibrium price.

Originally Posted by redguard57

No one's saying that. But it does us no good if we have to supplement low incomes with things like EITC, food stamps, etc... that is just inefficient. …
… There are other ways to make this happen besides just MW, though, which is why I'm increasingly in favor of a UBI. We also need to bring back single room occupancies, make it easier to rent out rooms, etc.., incentivize builders to build something other than luxury units, etc.. In addition to getting MW out of the single digits.

Originally Posted by TaxPhd

Actually, that’s exactly what SHOULD be happening. ...

As I’ve stated before, IMO, no U.S. Congress will pass any “living wage” act until they have passed and we’ve experienced a federal minimum wage rate that’s been annually monitored and updated when necessary to retain its purchasing power.
I have no doubt the purchasing power of that minimum wage rate, (or something else that’s similar to it), will inevitably be passed and enacted in the USA. I also expect that rate's purchasing power to be substantially greater than our current federal minimum.
Respectfully, Supposn

[Vic Romano]

Originally Posted by Supposn

TaxPhD, the minimum wage rate doesn’t require employers to hire or retain any employees. guarantee anyone a job or an income; it doesn’t determine wage rate differentials; it doesn’t require employers to retain any worker. But employers are prohibited from paying less than the legally mandated minimum wage rate. To permit them to do so would be to the net detriment of our nation’s economy and our society.

Respectfully, Supposn

We're over 100 posts into this thread and all you can do is regurgitate what every single working American already knows?

[JobHunter2018]

Originally Posted by Vic Romano

We're over 100 posts into this thread and all you can do is regurgitate what every single working American already knows?

It's gonna take longer than that for many who are arguing with him to understand what it is.