Poll: Most People Want County's Minimum Wage at $15.25 (San Francisco: buy, price)

[Beardown91737]

Originally Posted by bpeeps

The Big Three started gobbling up all independent auto makers in Detroit in the 30's and they moved/built all of their factories and buildings outside of Detroit. Unions had nothing to do with this. Most businesses Detroit is famous for, aren't actually in Detroit or even in the same county. The Big Three started a trend of businesses being built outside of the booming Detroit including sports franchises.

While I don't disagree that unions helped aide a decline in Detroit, they had nothing to do with why Detroit is the city it is today. There's a host of other reasons after The Big Three left Detroit for the suburbs, including city policies, corrupt officials, government embezzlement, years of debt buildup, funding for public education being cut all present in the 30's. The New Deal and unions like UAW didn't happen until the 40's.

Pretty sure the New Deal was not in the middle of World War II. Automakers did build plants across the country for various reasons. There was a GM plant in South Gate into the 1980s. Part was being closer to materials, or to markets, or cheaper labor. Unions will even agree to different pay scales in lower cost of living areas. Back in the 50s, not just cheaper labor, but available labor. Can't open a plant if there are aren't workers in the area. Better to move where there is lower employment, both for cheaper labor, and to get the applicants to work there.

I haven't read the entire thread, but there seems to be this macro level discussion, and not facing the issues that depress wages in LA County.

First and foremost is that good paying jobs are leaving California. This leads to a surplus of workers and no need to compete for wages. We recently moved to Texas because my employer hooked on to the Texas fad and I had to move to keep my job. With that you need less service jobs. Now that we are in this place, my son quickly got a retail job at $10 an hour, not at minimum wage. The ones who try hard to stick to minimum wage are getting a noticeably lower quality of employee. With so many good paying jobs leaving the state, it becomes more dependent on lower wage employment.

The next and also very important issue is immigration. Lots of competition for entry level jobs keeps the pay at minimum wage and also depresses the pay at the next tier of jobs as well.

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by UKWildcat1981

15 an hour isn't even much to live in Kentucky.. how do people survive in California on jobs only 12-17 an hour, that boggles my mind.

Sharing apartments, specifically bedrooms.

Government assistance often times.

Extreme budgeting.

Going into debt.

Side jobs.

Parents.

This article in today's LA times, which is far from a right wing paper, talks about how an increased minimum wage isn't necessarily a good thing: Businesses find creative ways to cope with minimum wage hikes - LA Times

[MordinSolus]

Originally Posted by dustin183

I disagree, the union-culture and mindset was a big part, as was the complacency of the corporate execs. The fighting between the groups made it difficult to focus on building quality cars that could compete with the Japanese. Look at market share. It used be much higher for US companies but they lost ground to foreign companies steadily over the last few decades. Lower quality means lower sales means dipping into dangerous financial territory as cars are a fixed cost, highly leveraged business... hence bankruptcy for GM, the continued demise of the job base in Detroit (and surrounding communities) and hence the current state of that area.

Auto manufacturers have been outsourcing jobs for a lot longer than the last few decades. American cars started falling out of favor when integral parts started being poorly manufactured in Mexico and other sweatshop countries. The quality went down because American workers were just assembling the cars, not manufacturing them. Foreign cars were a better value so American auto sales dropped. That's capitalism. The unions had nothing to do with it.

Originally Posted by dustin183

Let's take a simple real-world example:
North Korea = centrally-planned, communist/socialist-driven system.
South Korea = capitalist, western-style free market economy.
Prior to the split of Korea, the northern area was actually more prosperous and advanced. Post-split, different story clearly. What we've seen is a real-world petri-dish of two distinct economic systems and the results thereof. I doubt I need to go into more detail, I would hope you are up to speed on current events enough.
Do you believe the north a success, and the south a failure?

Talk about a red herring. South Korea is largely socialist. Every capitalistic push that would give businesses more control or lessen public influence on the economy is met with swift, widespread protest.
North Korea is a failed state and global sanctions put strain on them that South Korea has never faced. It's really apples and oranges.

Originally Posted by nmnita

Sure raise it to $15 or more $$ an hour, see how much people will be paying for say, a Micky Dls or Popeyes chicken.

This notion has been thoroughly debunked. Maybe read some of the thread?

Originally Posted by nmnita

What can't people understand about this: min wage jobs were never meant to be livable wage jobs. They are for the first time worker, the person who wants a second job to bring in a few extra bucks or the person, for whatever reason wants to work just part time. They are also for those who have chosen not to inprove their life by learning a skilled craft or further their education.

The average fast food worker is 29 years old. Whatever you think minimum-/low-wage jobs are for, you need to accept the reality of the situation.

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

She's not false. She's right. Provide some basis other than your opinion.

No, she entirely wrong and you've chosen to ignore facts because you're a sadsack. Everything she posited has been debunked in this very thread.

[True Freedom]

Originally Posted by Beardown91737

Pretty sure the New Deal was not in the middle of World War II. Automakers did build plants across the country for various reasons. There was a GM plant in South Gate into the 1980s. Part was being closer to materials, or to markets, or cheaper labor. Unions will even agree to different pay scales in lower cost of living areas. Back in the 50s, not just cheaper labor, but available labor. Can't open a plant if there are aren't workers in the area. Better to move where there is lower employment, both for cheaper labor, and to get the applicants to work there.

I haven't read the entire thread, but there seems to be this macro level discussion, and not facing the issues that depress wages in LA County.

First and foremost is that good paying jobs are leaving California. This leads to a surplus of workers and no need to compete for wages. We recently moved to Texas because my employer hooked on to the Texas fad and I had to move to keep my job. With that you need less service jobs. Now that we are in this place, my son quickly got a retail job at $10 an hour, not at minimum wage. The ones who try hard to stick to minimum wage are getting a noticeably lower quality of employee. With so many good paying jobs leaving the state, it becomes more dependent on lower wage employment.

The next and also very important issue is immigration. Lots of competition for entry level jobs keeps the pay at minimum wage and also depresses the pay at the next tier of jobs as well.

You're right. It all comes down to supply and demand. When there's a shortage of labor with a certain skillset, wages rise as competition for those workers intensifies. Right now, highly skilled tech workers are in short supply, especially in LA. We even had to open an office in the bay area and Austin just to tap into their talent pools. Workers are being lured away from our company with insane pay raises and huge stock grants as a signing bonus.

Here in California, we have a glut of low-skilled workers, which makes it an employer's market. They can get cheaper labor. If we quit subsidizing all the folks that can't afford to live here, and they went somewhere else, that would leave more housing and more jobs (and more public monies to help the neediest) for the rest of the low-skilled workers. Wages would likely rise as employers competed to get their workers.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

She's not false. She's right. Provide some basis other than your opinion.

No. You go research it yourself, the issue has been covered in spades. Start by reading right here in this thread. Including my previous posts. Links and credible references abound. Conservative as well as liberal and libertarian economists are vastly in agreement. Our system is being overrun with short-term, short-sighted, self-interests that threaten a healthy society by any definition, including conservative. This is no longer a political issue. This is an issue of pure avarice and greed choking the life out of the future of the economy and free middle class.

Don't tell us that avarice and greed are conservative values.

[ashpelham]

OMG. Why did this thread turn into a pissing contest? Because we used the dirty word "taxes"?

No other solution will do. We can't spend less. We have a growing nation that politicians have babied into a dependent country. It didn't start out that way. Now we need to raise the basic level of income for our less skilled but able to work citizens.

Instead, we have a peni5 contest here on City-data. Immature, at best.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by ashpelham

OMG. Why did this thread turn into a pissing contest? Because we used the dirty word "taxes"?

No other solution will do. We can't spend less. We have a growing nation that politicians have babied into a dependent country. It didn't start out that way. Now we need to raise the basic level of income for our less skilled but able to work citizens.

Instead, we have a peni5 contest here on City-data. Immature, at best.

First off, we don't need to continually "grow" as a nation. We're already huge, in every respect. Including leading all economies. And "growing" will only burden our future. Not enhance it.

Second, don't blame American politicians for human nature that is found the same around the globe. All life, even, not just human, seeks the easiest paths, just like water.

The justification for higher minimum wage doesn't lie in serving growth, in any case. It lies in social health. Not "socialist" health. Just plain, ordinary, basic social well being for all levels of society. Including the top.

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

No. You go research it yourself, the issue has been covered in spades. Start by reading right here in this thread. Including my previous posts. Links and credible references abound. Conservative as well as liberal and libertarian economists are vastly in agreement. Our system is being overrun with short-term, short-sighted, self-interests that threaten a healthy society by any definition, including conservative. This is no longer a political issue. This is an issue of pure avarice and greed choking the life out of the future of the economy and free middle class.

Don't tell us that avarice and greed are conservative values.

Read the LA times article

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by MordinSolus

Auto manufacturers have been outsourcing jobs for a lot longer than the last few decades. American cars started falling out of favor when integral parts started being poorly manufactured in Mexico and other sweatshop countries. The quality went down because American workers were just assembling the cars, not manufacturing them. Foreign cars were a better value so American auto sales dropped. That's capitalism. The unions had nothing to do with it.



Talk about a red herring. South Korea is largely socialist. Every capitalistic push that would give businesses more control or lessen public influence on the economy is met with swift, widespread protest.
North Korea is a failed state and global sanctions put strain on them that South Korea has never faced. It's really apples and oranges.



This notion has been thoroughly debunked. Maybe read some of the thread?



The average fast food worker is 29 years old. Whatever you think minimum-/low-wage jobs are for, you need to accept the reality of the situation.



No, she entirely wrong and you've chosen to ignore facts because you're a sadsack. Everything she posited has been debunked in this very thread.

Better solution: Why not give back ALL your lottery winnings to all the minimum wage workers?

[MordinSolus]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Better solution: Why not give back ALL your lottery winnings to all the minimum wage workers?

Give back my winnings to minimum wage workers? What? And if you can't argue the facts then just don't argue.