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.
but let's say that wage increases do cause some inflation, can you demonstrate with ANY factual data that the amount of inflation would cancel out the wage increase?
What my workers do outside of work is none of my business. Maybe their spouses work?
Regardless, their wage is not determined by what they need to earn in order to make ends meet, it's determined by what I can afford to pay them and keep the doors open. If the business can't make a profit, then all 6 workers lose their jobs, and so do the receptionist, the salesman, the bookkeeper, the maintenance man, the HR specialist, and myself.
You know who else loses money? The companies I've hired to help me keep my business operational, profitable, and compliant:
the cleaning service,
the linen service,
the law firm that handles the company's legal matters,
the landscapers that keep up the grounds,
the garbage company that empties the dumpster every week,
the trucking company that delivers my product to my customers,
the suppliers from whom I purchase material and supplies,
the pest control service,
the company that inspects and maintains the fire sprinklers and fire extinguishers,
the vending company whose Coke and snack machines are in the break room,
the company that leases the copy machine and sells toner,
the phone company that provides phone and internet service,
the IT company that maintains the computer and VoIP network,
the insurance company that writes the liability and workers' comp policies,
the bank that has the company's accounts,
the mechanical contractor that keeps the HVAC & heating systems working,
the city, state, school district, and hospital district that receive tax revenue from my business,
etc.
The community also suffers loss, as the business itself can no longer make monetary or in-kind donations to local charities, sponsor little-league teams, Adopt-A-Highway, etc., nor can it incentivize its employees to volunteer for Habitat For Humanity, donate blood, or make donations to charity.
But it is determined by what they need to make ends meat that is why it is not lower and is even raised at all. FDR created it so people would not be living in poverty. It is not a big loss to the community if they lose business who can not even pay its employees enough to live on and have to rely on taxpayers money to make up for it.Businesses like that are leeches.
If they really wanted to earn more money they'd increase their earning power, rather than agitating for government to force employers to pay more.
Moderator cut: Language, you always say that, it's your handy dandy apologist excuse for all poorly run businesses. If I am making your crummy T-shirts there are only so many ways I can demonstrate that I am worth more money. In the first place you can't sell more of your T-shirts so me making them faster wouldn't help it would probably just lead to my hours being cut. In the second place if you are like 99% of business owners you don't even know the name of your line workers and don't care, so how are they going to demonstrate their 'worth' to you, by licking your boots?
So why can you not either not have as many employees until you can pay better
That's exactly what happened in the example I gave. The cost per man-hour increased, so I had to reduce the total number of man-hours (by laying two people off) to compensate. I can afford to spend $60 per hour for labor, regardless of how it is divided among the workers. The more I have to pay each worker, the fewer workers I can afford to pay.
This is elementary-school arithmetic. Take the total cost per hour of labor ($60), and divide it by the desired wage ($15), and the answer is the number of employees I can afford to pay. At $10 per hour, I can afford to pay 6 workers. At $12 per hour, I can afford to pay 5 workers. At $15 per hour, I can afford 4 workers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Eagle
If you had thousands of employers you would be making a lot of profit and could afford to pay better.
Having employees on the payroll doesn't mean that a business will be profitable. It it did, there would never be layoffs! Employees cost money, which negatively impacts profit. Some employees do generate revenue, but that does not automatically equal profit, as there are still fixed and variable costs (labor being one of those costs) that must be paid out of the revenue that is brought in. The money left over after expenses, if there is any, is profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Eagle
So what is wrong if people would be happy with just the minimum?
If they were happy with just the minimum, then they wouldn't be complaining about the minimum and we wouldn't even be discussing this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Eagle
They may not reach a level you have or think they should but as long as they are happy it is not your business.
What they do outside of work is not my business. What they do at work most certainly is my business. And if they are content to do just the minimum at work, then they should also be content to earn minimum wage.
You raise the point I often wonder about. I get that the corps have political talking heads convincing people to vote based on very biased info that often doesn't hold up. Often people vote that way because there is some issue where a closely held belief "forces" them to go with one party and then they justify the party's other stands on issues. But what I don't get is how anyone other than the ultra rich can strongly support actions that only benefit the ultra rich in the face of so much evidence. In this case, 1976 is almost 40 years ago - we have that much recent data to examine and you really have to cherry pick if you believe that the common worker has benefited from the prosperity in the modern era.
You raise the point I often wonder about. I get that the corps have political talking heads convincing people to vote based on very biased info that often doesn't hold up. Often people vote that way because there is some issue where a closely held belief "forces" them to go with one party and then they justify the party's other stands on issues. But what I don't get is how anyone other than the ultra rich can strongly support actions that only benefit the ultra rich in the face of so much evidence. In this case, 1976 is almost 40 years ago - we have that much recent data to examine and you really have to cherry pick if you believe that the common worker has benefited from the prosperity in the modern era.
+1 can't rep you again. I think about this a lot, how could the rich co-opt millions of people who are one or two paychecks away from poverty themselves to support their agenda of suppressing wages, eliminating unions and cutting pensions and social security? It's tragic and does not bode well for the future of the working class in this country.
The workers who I (hypothetically) employ care. The two who (hypothetically) got laid off and their families care. Controlling costs - including labor cost - is a big part of remaining competitive.
+1 can't rep you again. I think about this a lot, how could the rich co-opt millions of people who are one or two paychecks away from poverty themselves to support their agenda of suppressing wages, eliminating unions and cutting pensions and social security? It's tragic and does not bode well for the future of the working class in this country.
I really think that a lot of it is what I mentioned earlier. There are hot button issues that people can't get past and they pick their party and then they fall in line on other stuff. I get that. But some posters really sound completely convinced tat the economic policy is in the best interest of workers. That I don't get.
Minimum wage is not a wage you can live on and should never be. Leave it low. Under $10/ hr. Someone with no skills who works in a stick room for the summer should not make anything close to s skilled worker doing anything else. You get paid what you are worth. I don't deserve $400 / her just because my attorney makes that. This country is completely insane these days.
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.
I think about this a lot, how could the rich co-opt millions of people who are one or two paychecks away from poverty themselves to support their agenda of suppressing wages, eliminating unions and cutting pensions and social security? It's tragic and does not bode well for the future of the working class in this country.
