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.
Your argument of feelings aside.....why don't we set the minimum wage to $75,000? Your side makes it clear there are no downsides. So why not go big?
EDS, I responded to you when you previously asked the same question. Respectfully, Supposn
/////////////
Excerpted from the thread, "Private industry is not always the superior solution":
EDS, … I do not know why or how an extremely excessive minimum wage rate would be net economically detrimental to the economy, but I do not doubt that it would be detrimental. No nation has or is ever likely to do that. …”.
A great proportion of minimum rate opponents lack self-esteem. They need whatever affirmation of their own worth that they can derive by being able to look down upon people experiencing lesser financial conditions.
I wouldn't even know who makes minimum wage to derive whatever affirmation you're nonsensically babbling about. Only 2.3% of workers make minimum wage, it's not like the 1970s where you could just assume the kid handing you your order at the fast food place made minimum age.
But yes, when I used to see our neighbor's 16 year old son working at Subway part time I used to look down upon his lesser financial conditions, knowing that due to the low wages he had to work an extra two hours that week to afford the fancy new skateboard he was trying to save up for. "I could just buy that skateboard outright right now with my credit card, son!" I used to gleefully shout as his sweaty hands evenly distributed bell peppers on my #3 combo, his sullen glare partially hidden behind the bright green visor of his hat Then upon arriving home and seeing his father who was a program manager at Intel in the driveway of his 2,400 square foot suburban home I'd roll down the window and yell "sucks your son is poorer than me" and giggle maniacally.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57734
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57
From 1938-1969, the federal minimum wage got raised about once every 4 years.
From 1970-81, it was raised every year.
Starting in the 1980s, it only got raised about every 8-10 years.
We are now going on 13 years since the last vote in congress to raise the minimum wage, 11 years since the last of the 2007 increase went into effect. That is a function of political gridlock and stupidity. It will soon be 14 years.
More than half the states have already raised theirs. There are only 21 states that still have $7.25. In most of those, I'd wager the effective minimum wage rate is more like $10 and very few workers actually make $7.25
Assuming Democrats take the presidency and Senate, it will will get raised probably to $11-12 or thereabouts.
Which is where the minimum wage belongs, at the state level, with optional city minimums. There is a huge difference in the cost of living by state, and by cities within a state. There is no way that the minimum wage in Chattanooga, Tennessee or Bowling Green, Kentucky should be the same as in San Francisco or New York City.
Honestly this argument boils down to what 99% of the population in the world is guilty of doing: They want their cake and want to eat it too. Another words, hypocrisy. If you want to deny people the right to a livable minimum wage then you have to first acknowledge that most form of government bailouts should businesses should be abolished. Meaning, based on the USA's current practices, I agree with the OP regarding raising minimum wage.
The system in the US was built on the free market, self reliance, effort=results etc. However, you cant make that argument unless you are willing to throw out all the blatant examples of socialism the US bestows upon gigantic corporations. If you are against what the OP says then you need to get rid of the following:
-Bailouts of "too big to fail" businesses that give them billions without any mandate on how to spend it and not having any penalties for bailout misuse:
And yes I'm aware "they paid it all back and the government made a profit on the investment." However, they "profit" amounted to a annualized return of just .6% BEFORE accounting for inflation. Also, much of that money was used on things that should have been illegal. Meaning, if there was actual oversight by the government it may have actually turned a profit after accounting for inflation. More impotently, if your going to argue that no citizen is entitled to government help then you can't argue that big business gets to play by different rules. If the whole principle of the US is self reliance and free market, then the rules should be the same for all. The above is just the most well known example. Big business gets free government handouts all the time yet you people want to deny people the right to a fair wage. Ironically, that's not really socialism since these people would have to work full time to get that wage.
And I don't want to hear the nonsense regarding "well the economy would have been worse if not for the bailouts." If you are not willing to concede that every citizen in the US deserves a livable minimum wage if they work full time; then you cannot make the argument that big businesses deserves bailouts under any circumstance. I can get even deeper into this subject but I don't feel like typing an essay at the moment.
That's horrible analysis top to bottom. Sticking to one area tho.......maintaining a functioning banking system is nothing short of a national security issue. Society would revert to a 1750s like food search/scavenging based economy in a couple months. The minimum wage impacts a thin slice of our adult population who also have access to myriad direct and in-kind benefits.
Another way to think about this is if banking went away or reverted to a disjointed ad hoc system as we had pre-Great Depression so many businesses would fail there would be few entities left to pay any wage.
EDS, I responded to you when you previously asked the same question. Respectfully, Supposn
/////////////
Excerpted from the thread, "Private industry is not always the superior solution":
EDS, … I do not know why or how an extremely excessive minimum wage rate would be net economically detrimental to the economy, but I do not doubt that it would be detrimental. No nation has or is ever likely to do that. …”.
Do you agree that smaller increases to the minimum wage are in a strictly macroeconomic sense mostly negative? It follows if a large increase is bad a smaller increase is also bad?
The essence of personal and political opposition to the FMW rate.
The federal minimum wage, (FMW) rate is of net social and economic benefit to our nation. It has never been among the major causes and is certainly a victim of the U.S. dollar’s inflation rate. Inflation occurs when the minimum rate is or is not being increased.
To the extent of its purchasing power, it reduces the incidences and extents of poverty among earners of lower wage rates and their families. No employees are poorer and no enterprises suffer any competitive disadvantage to any USA enterprises due to the FMW rate.
[there’s no doubt that USA’s higher wage rates contribute to our products’ price disadvantages in comparison to products from lower-wage nations; but although the elimination of our FMW rate laws would be greatly detrimental to our nation’s net social and economic well-being, eliminating it would accomplish extremely little to remedy our products’ global price disadvantages.
[Refer to Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article.]
I suppose most USA’s population, (significantly more than a 10% plurality) to some extent approve of federal minimum rate’s existence. There are few among wealthy or competent people that are opposed to the federal minimum rate.
A great proportion of minimum rate opponents lack self-esteem. They need whatever affirmation of their own worth that they can derive by being able to look down upon people experiencing lesser financial conditions. They cannot acknowledge even to themselves their fears of improving the financial conditions of others would consequentially reduce their own social status. That’s the essence of personal and political opposition to the FMW rate.
Respectfully, Supposn
I wouldn't be surprised to hear them say that we should be happy to get 7.25 $ an hour. Many apparels are producing in countries like Pakistan, Madagascar, Nicgaragua, Lebanon, Thailand, Bangladesh at less than 1 $ per hour.
Consider yourself blessed. For low/no skills, you are making more than you deserve.
When we leave the country to be run by usurers, should be expect any better??
Do you agree that smaller increases to the minimum wage are in a strictly macroeconomic sense mostly negative? It follows if a large increase is bad a smaller increase is also bad?
You talk like an economist. One question for you. What is the use of the billions of net worth when it cannot translate to any use during this pandemic?? Or it the wealth an individual thing so they chose to spend however they like??
Your argument of feelings aside.....why don't we set the minimum wage to $75,000? Your side makes it clear there are no downsides. So why not go big?
75K is just denomination. So as MW is "minimum", as long as higher ranked, or more senior/more tenured employees earnings are trending into the 6 digits, I dont see why not. Is all relative.
I do believe that in some countries they do work with denominations that high for very basic goods, and services. $10 is 1000 pennies, $100 is 10K pennies.
I wouldn't even know who makes minimum wage to derive whatever affirmation you're nonsensically babbling about. Only 2.3% of workers make minimum wage, it's not like the 1970s where you could just assume the kid handing you your order at the fast food place made minimum age.
But yes, when I used to see our neighbor's 16 year old son working at Subway part time I used to look down upon his lesser financial conditions, knowing that due to the low wages he had to work an extra two hours that week to afford the fancy new skateboard he was trying to save up for. "I could just buy that skateboard outright right now with my credit card, son!" I used to gleefully shout as his sweaty hands evenly distributed bell peppers on my #3 combo, his sullen glare partially hidden behind the bright green visor of his hat Then upon arriving home and seeing his father who was a program manager at Intel in the driveway of his 2,400 square foot suburban home I'd roll down the window and yell "sucks your son is poorer than me" and giggle maniacally.
Lieqiang, we’re all entitled to our own opinions. In regard to extents of how we consider extents of people’s poverty, I’ve expressed my opinions and you’ve expressed yours.
Words and phrases referring to extents of poverty, (as do many terms employed in languages), are usually more subjective rather than objective matters).
Governments and other organizations in the USA often attempt to define some extents of poverty within their jurisdictions or regions of interest, expressed in terms of specific annual amounts of U.S. dollars. This better facilitates our governments’, other organizations and individuals to approach some mutual understanding of poverty extents and/or qualifications of persons subject to various regulations or statutes.
Respectfully, Supposn
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.
