minimum wage proponents--how should the minimum wage be determined? (unemployment rate, how much, military)
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.
The best judges of the proper wage for any individual is the individual and his or her potential employers, coming to a mutually agreeable wage. You think Congress or any state legislature or city council knows better? You are wrong, and you will hurt the very people you are purporting to help.
Have you ever stopped to consider that we have nowhere near enough jobs to go around BECAUSE the minimum wage was kited up by more than 40% by the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007? Anyone whose labor was worth more than $5.15 but less than $7.15 was priced out of the job market by this law...and we have massive unemployment among the low-skilled as a result.
The goodness or badness of welfare does not enter into it: a decent society makes sure that those who are unwilling or unable to pull their own weight do not starve to death or freeze to death. The wisdom of nailing employers to subsidize these poor souls (instead of society as a whole) is a separate topic from whether or not we ought to feed and clothe the poor.
Someone working full time IS pulling his own weight, but currently and even moreso at $5.15 has to be subsidized by everyone else through government. That amounts to a subsidy for EMPLOYERS who don't pay living wages.
I've actually thought about this a bit. Theres a lot of arguments.
No minimum wage. I always love this form people who then rail on and on about paying food stamps, or welfare. Uhmmmm.....hello? Lets stop subsidizing low paying companies. Lets NOT make our country into a plutocracy. This is so foolish it strains my credibility when people say this.
So whats a good number.....I dont think one single number is appropriate. I live in a expensive are, I think that minimum wage here should be higher then minimum wage in say Ohio.
So...
First pick a number thats enough to do OK. Not great-but more then welfare or other benefits.
OK got that? Now....adjust it for the cost of living in the area where the person resides. Not where the business is, but where the person is.
Now tie it to inflation and productivity. Yes productivity. But not a 1-1 on that. say....inflation plus 20% of the productivity gains that would be above inflation.
But is this reasonable? What would it look like if we put that into play in say 1970 (when I was born). Scratch that, the dataset I found goes back to 1980, not 1970, so lets use 1980.
In current dollars it was 12,600 PER person (working or not). 2013 - $51,600. 409%. So lets say 20% of that went towards labor. Would mean minimum wage would go up by 81%.....
Minimum wage in 1980 $3.10 aka $8.92.
Sooo if it tracked for inflation, and got JUST 1/5th of the gained productivity since 1980 it would be $16.15.
What the heck? Thats...much higher then I expected. Even if we took 1/10th of the productivity gains and gave it to the employees instead its still $12.48!
Anyways lets use the $12.48 number, and peg it at 20% productivity (at the national level) from here on out, or inflation-whichever is higher in the prior year.
Yes I know, the world will end. blah blah blah.
Now thats the baseline.
In new york (216% COL) it would be $26.95. Wow.
In Brownsville, TX (85.8% COL) it would be $10.7.
It would foster more telecommuting from minimum wage folks, and be more efficient economically I think.
I've actually thought about this a bit. Theres a lot of arguments.
No minimum wage. I always love this form people who then rail on and on about paying food stamps, or welfare. Uhmmmm.....hello? Lets stop subsidizing low paying companies. Lets NOT make our country into a plutocracy. This is so foolish it strains my credibility when people say this.
So whats a good number.....I dont think one single number is appropriate. I live in a expensive are, I think that minimum wage here should be higher then minimum wage in say Ohio.
So...
First pick a number thats enough to do OK. Not great-but more then welfare or other benefits.
OK got that? Now....adjust it for the cost of living in the area where the person resides. Not where the business is, but where the person is.
Now tie it to inflation and productivity. Yes productivity. But not a 1-1 on that. say....inflation plus 20% of the productivity gains that would be above inflation.
But is this reasonable? What would it look like if we put that into play in say 1970 (when I was born). Scratch that, the dataset I found goes back to 1980, not 1970, so lets use 1980.
In current dollars it was 12,600 PER person (working or not). 2013 - $51,600. 409%. So lets say 20% of that went towards labor. Would mean minimum wage would go up by 81%.....
Minimum wage in 1980 $3.10 aka $8.92.
Sooo if it tracked for inflation, and got JUST 1/5th of the gained productivity since 1980 it would be $16.15.
What the heck? Thats...much higher then I expected. Even if we took 1/10th of the productivity gains and gave it to the employees instead its still $12.48!
Anyways lets use the $12.48 number, and peg it at 20% productivity (at the national level) from here on out, or inflation-whichever is higher in the prior year.
Yes I know, the world will end. blah blah blah.
Now thats the baseline.
In new york (216% COL) it would be $26.95. Wow.
In Brownsville, TX (85.8% COL) it would be $10.7.
It would foster more telecommuting from minimum wage folks, and be more efficient economically I think.
Mind you this is all off the top of my head.
Sounds like a good idea to me, let's watch the right winger balk at this idea.
Sounds like a good idea to me, let's watch the right winger balk at this idea.
Yes, because it is totally irrational. Labor is worth what it is worth. No employer can pay less than market value for labor, or the workers will not show up. And no employer can sustainably pay more than market value, or weren't you paying attention to the UAW and the Hostess bankruptcy etc.?
A wage is a price that is mutually agreeable to an employer and an employee. It makes no more sense for the government to be involved in price setting for McDonalds labor than for buns or meat or pickles.
I started at the minimum wage, most people do. Now my income taxes are $39 per hour. And no law mandated any of my wages at any job since I became more valuable than the minimum.
Jobs are not some twisted form of charity. They are the purchase and sale of labor. Welfare for those who need it, charity for the unfortunate, but market wages for all.
Yes, because it is totally irrational. Labor is worth what it is worth. No employer can pay less than market value for labor, or the workers will not show up. And no employer can sustainably pay more than market value, or weren't you paying attention to the UAW and the Hostess bankruptcy etc.?
A wage is a price that is mutually agreeable to an employer and an employee. It makes no more sense for the government to be involved in price setting for McDonalds labor than for buns or meat or pickles.
I started at the minimum wage, most people do. Now my income taxes are $39 per hour. And no law mandated any of my wages at any job since I became more valuable than the minimum.
Jobs are not some twisted form of charity. They are the purchase and sale of labor. Welfare for those who need it, charity for the unfortunate, but market wages for all.
What's market value for labor? Got a number? Of course you don't, wages are subjective. The only involvement the government has with what an employee gets paid is the minimum, an employer is free to pay an employee anything they want above the minimum.
Obviously you are one of those people who wish others would be paid the least amount possible for no good reason.
Oh and Hostess went bankrupt because of poor management. Notice Hostess products back on the shelves because better run companies are able to make it work.
Yes, because it is totally irrational. Labor is worth what it is worth. No employer can pay less than market value for labor, or the workers will not show up. And no employer can sustainably pay more than market value, or weren't you paying attention to the UAW and the Hostess bankruptcy etc.?
A wage is a price that is mutually agreeable to an employer and an employee. It makes no more sense for the government to be involved in price setting for McDonalds labor than for buns or meat or pickles.
I started at the minimum wage, most people do. Now my income taxes are $39 per hour. And no law mandated any of my wages at any job since I became more valuable than the minimum.
Jobs are not some twisted form of charity. They are the purchase and sale of labor. Welfare for those who need it, charity for the unfortunate, but market wages for all.
OK wages are $.01/hr for everyone wherever possible. 90% of our population is on welfare. Congrats!
Seriously minimum wage has little to do with "this is the minimum negotiated amount between two folks for the labor specified" which you seem to indicate, and everything to do with "we as a society do not want to subsidize a corporations employees, nor do we think that abject poverty for those who work is appropriate in a modern civilization"
Why you want to live in some third world plutocratic heck hole is beyond me. You have these statements of your ideology, that in reality would function horrifically, and yet you seem to think that despite the reality of what would occur that they are good ideas.
What's market value for labor? Got a number? Of course you don't, wages are subjective. The only involvement the government has with what an employee gets paid is the minimum, an employer is free to pay an employee anything they want above the minimum.
Obviously you are one of those people who wish others would be paid the least amount possible for no good reason.
Oh and Hostess went bankrupt because of poor management. Notice Hostess products back on the shelves because better run companies are able to make it work.
Sheesh, you have NOT been paying attention. The exact, precise market value of the labor of any individual, accounting for his or her unique combination of skills, attitudes, habits, work ethic, et cetera is the highest wage that any employer will offer. Period. It is not an abstract number that Nancy Pelosi or you pull out of your rear ends, it is not a formula, and has nothing to do with the cost of rent or groceries. You are worth what an employer will pay you, no more and no less.
That's the number. Stop acting like this isn't the way it works. Subjective? Not at all.
OK wages are $.01/hr for everyone wherever possible. 90% of our population is on welfare. Congrats!
Seriously minimum wage has little to do with "this is the minimum negotiated amount between two folks for the labor specified" which you seem to indicate, and everything to do with "we as a society do not want to subsidize a corporations employees, nor do we think that abject poverty for those who work is appropriate in a modern civilization"
Why you want to live in some third world plutocratic heck hole is beyond me. You have these statements of your ideology, that in reality would function horrifically, and yet you seem to think that despite the reality of what would occur that they are good ideas.
Your misguided brutality against the unfortunate is your passion for outlawing the sale of low-skill labor. A person learns a lot at their first job, and your good intentions are an excellent way to deny that opportunity to those who need it most. Your position is the immoral one, the one that has turned our inner cities into hellholes. Criminalizing the sale of labor? Rotten idea. Stop it.
Sheesh, you have NOT been paying attention. The exact, precise market value of the labor of any individual, accounting for his or her unique combination of skills, attitudes, habits, work ethic, et cetera is the highest wage that any employer will offer. Period. It is not an abstract number that Nancy Pelosi or you pull out of your rear ends, it is not a formula, and has nothing to do with the cost of rent or groceries. You are worth what an employer will pay you, no more and no less.
That's the number. Stop acting like this isn't the way it works. Subjective? Not at all.
And apparently you do not comprehend that a minimum wage does not exist for the benefit of a corporation, it exists for the benefit of a society. Period.
We;re not debating a economics discussion of capitalism, we're debating what we as a society think is a valid number. Corporations have no compunction about having their employees subsidized either.
Additionally theres a larger discussion about economics, and how 70% of the US economy is based upon consumer spending-which is valid as more and more of that base is at the lower end of the pay scale.
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.
