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.
SO 10.10 is good for the economy but 10.20 would not be why? What minimum wage level would hurt the economy? Why would that level hurt the economy? If raising it is suppose to help the economy then who judges what helps and what would hurt ? Is 10.10 just a random number what we truly do not know if it would help or hurt?
10.20 probably would be fine as well, my point being that historically that sort of change is in the ballpark. At what point would it hurt the economy? Wherever sticker shock set in, and historical data indicates that going to 10.10 is BELOW that.
As for the number picked I suppose that was picked by someone with a phd in economics for the president. With a LOT more data and time then I want to spend at it. $10.10 is not however a random number.
Look you could easily argue that minimum wage should have tracked with productivity-and make a excellent case for the $26/hr. BUT the shock of changing it that much is excessive. So that number is unwise. Historically we HAVE seen changes that indicate that $10.10 will not in fact cause excessive price change issues.
Really though, why don't you tell us why $10.10 is a bad idea, and back it up with facts of your own composition, not a parroted response that you learned from someone else.
10.20 probably would be fine as well, my point being that historically that sort of change is in the ballpark. At what point would it hurt the economy? Wherever sticker shock set in, and historical data indicates that going to 10.10 is BELOW that.
As for the number picked I suppose that was picked by someone with a phd in economics for the president. With a LOT more data and time then I want to spend at it. $10.10 is not however a random number.
Look you could easily argue that minimum wage should have tracked with productivity-and make a excellent case for the $26/hr. BUT the shock of changing it that much is excessive. So that number is unwise. Historically we HAVE seen changes that indicate that $10.10 will not in fact cause excessive price change issues.
Really though, why don't you tell us why $10.10 is a bad idea, and back it up with facts of your own composition, not a parroted response that you learned from someone else.
Where have you seen someone ask why not 10,000 clearly not parroted
I can not say 10.10 an hour would have an overhaul bad effect on the economy just as there is no proof going to 10.10 would have positive effect on the economy. So the point , IMHO the smaller the business the higher the minimum wage goes has a greater possibility of hurting small business struggling to survive. It would force most small business to raise the price of their goods or services. A larger business might have the capital to not pass on the extra cost, however the way the become big is probably watching the bottom line .A large business would most likely pass the cost on through their prices , however since large business has a better chance to keep their price increase rather small due to salaried employs with known costs.
SO no one knows if raising the minimum wage would affect prices of good that people purchased. If you raise prices to cover the added expense you have made the minimum, wage purchasing power decline.
So how and when to raise the federal minimum wage is a crap shoot on the results. IMHO the purchasing power will decline or stay even to what they had pre MW raise, so what happens next is everyone will start saying we need to raise the MW again . While the effect of the MW worker will not be much to help you have also cut the purchasing power of salaried workers.
which brings me back to my point no one knows what effect it will have on the overall economy so even for the Pro raise the MW crown there must be some point too much is too much but we do no know if its 10.10 or not
10.20 probably would be fine as well, my point being that historically that sort of change is in the ballpark. At what point would it hurt the economy? Wherever sticker shock set in, and historical data indicates that going to 10.10 is BELOW that.
As for the number picked I suppose that was picked by someone with a phd in economics for the president. With a LOT more data and time then I want to spend at it. $10.10 is not however a random number.
Look you could easily argue that minimum wage should have tracked with productivity-and make a excellent case for the $26/hr. BUT the shock of changing it that much is excessive. So that number is unwise. Historically we HAVE seen changes that indicate that $10.10 will not in fact cause excessive price change issues.
Really though, why don't you tell us why $10.10 is a bad idea, and back it up with facts of your own composition, not a parroted response that you learned from someone else.
Historically, raising the minimum wage by any amount has not resulted in any long term benefit to minimum wage earners. Raising the minimum wage gives them additional purchasing power for a brief period of time, but as the market sorts itself out that buying power shrinks back to the levels that it was at before the raise.
There is a reason that minimum wage earners are poor, and it isn't because minimum wage is too low. It is because they make minimum wage and are, therefore, at the bottom of the economic totem pole.
No, it's quite the opposite. Inflation diminishes the buying power of minimum wage so any increases are simply playing catch up with prices. Inflation takes place regardless of minimum wage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom
Historically, raising the minimum wage by any amount has not resulted in any long term benefit to minimum wage earners. Raising the minimum wage gives them additional purchasing power for a brief period of time, but as the market sorts itself out that buying power shrinks back to the levels that it was at before the raise.
There is a reason that minimum wage earners are poor, and it isn't because minimum wage is too low. It is because they make minimum wage and are, therefore, at the bottom of the economic totem pole.
No, it's quite the opposite. Inflation diminishes the buying power of minimum wage so any increases are simply playing catch up with prices. Inflation takes place regardless of minimum wage.
While I don't completely disagree with your point, it doesn't change the fact that raising the minimum wage does not increase the economic status of minimum wage earners for any appreciable amount of time. Nor does it change the root source of the problem, which is not a minimum wage that is too low, but an entire economic class that is making the minimum wage and expecting it to support a lifestyle which it never was, and never should be, intended to support.
While I don't completely disagree with your point, it doesn't change the fact that raising the minimum wage does not increase the economic status of minimum wage earners for any appreciable amount of time.
Really? I get a salary increase every year. Should I turn it down as it doesn't increase my economic status then? Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom
Nor does it change the root source of the problem, which is not a minimum wage that is too low, but an entire economic class that is making the minimum wage and expecting it to support a lifestyle which it never was, and never should be, intended to support.
Oh. So you think the entire minimum wage should go out and get PhDs? Who would do their jobs then? MBAs? Lol
No my friend. The minimum wage is here to stay as there always be jobs paying entry level salaries. The minimum wage class is neither the root not the cause of the problem. They are needed.
While I don't completely disagree with your point, it doesn't change the fact that raising the minimum wage does not increase the economic status of minimum wage earners for any appreciable amount of time. Nor does it change the root source of the problem, which is not a minimum wage that is too low, but an entire economic class that is making the minimum wage and expecting it to support a lifestyle which it never was, and never should be, intended to support.
I can guarentee you that NOT raising it will in fact damage those folks.
And saying it never was intended to support a living wage is idiotic. Wether it was intended to or not-the reality is that for all too many folks thats what it is. As the wealthiest take more and more of the pie, the middle class and poor get squeezed out. Your suggestion is-hey thats the market, maybe if those poor folks negotiated better....and then scream how evil unions are.
Seriously?
As for increasing the minimum wage, there are in fact many studies about it-the vast majority indicating its good for us overall as Guess what? Consumer spending represents 70% or so of our economy. This isn't rocket science.
I swear some people here are intentionally ignorant.
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.
