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.
Agreed -- the only impact the minimum wage has on Nike is if you increase the income of millions of the poorest workers in the world's seventh largest economy, Nike is probably going to have to hire more third world workers for a few pennies an hour to make more shoes. Californians like their sneakers. You're welcome Asia.
I totally forgot about that, I was just thinking of Nike in terms of Oregon, not the ones who actually assemble the shoes making pennies a day for their labors.
You do realize Nike pays a lot more than minimum wage, their hiring and firing process has nothing to do with the minimum wage..
You are wrong. we are talking about ENTRY level jobs. I talked to their managers all the time, I know what is going on. They WILL cut their employees hours because of this. - I am talking about the sales job, they are all minimum wage workers.
We are talking about $15/hour minimum wage. From $10.5/hour - $15 That is a big jump for ANY companies.
Some of you here seem to have this YOU VS US mentality. Employers are not the enemies. Like I posted earlier, There is no “free lunch” when the government mandates a minimum wage. If the government requires that certain workers be paid higher wages, then businesses make adjustments to pay for the added costs, such as reducing hiring, cutting employee work hours, reducing benefits, and charging higher prices.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 04-08-2016 at 01:52 AM..
You are wrong. we are talking about ENTRY level jobs. I talked to their managers all the time, I know what is going on. They WILL cut their employees hours because of this. - I am talking about the sales job, they are all minimum wage workers.
We are talking about $15/hour minimum wage. From $10.5/hour - $15 That is a big jump for ANY companies.
Some of you here seem to have this YOU VS US mentality. Employers are not the enemies. Like I posted earlier, There is no “free lunch” when the government mandates a minimum wage. If the government requires that certain workers be paid higher wages, then businesses make adjustments to pay for the added costs, such as reducing hiring, cutting employee work hours, reducing benefits, and charging higher prices.
I definitely do not see this as an "us vs. you" thing, lily. I realize this is going to have a big impact on how business is done in California. I also realize as small business owners, this is going to impact you and your family more than most. If this turns out to be a failed experiment, you will bear the brunt of the blow. If I could protect you from the risk and still enact this legislation, which I sincerely believe is going to benefit virtually everyone maybe especially you, I would. Unfortunately, I can't.
I personally think that the boom in business is going to offset your losses and may even lead to increased profits. There are a lot of people who would like to update their wardrobes and who will do so much more frequently if they have more the discretionary income. There are millions of Californians who are making $10 an hour who are about to get a 50 percent pay raise. That is going to be huge lily. They are going consume a LOT more than they currently do. Unfortunately, the lowest paid workers usually those spend the most, so little of this increased income is going to go into investments or savings. It's going to go into the pockets of people like you who do business in California.
Yes, if you retain all 6 of your employees, and you employ them for eight hours a day, that will increase the cost of doing business by $240 a day (no small sum), but demand for your products is also going to increase substantially. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out.
You are wrong. we are talking about ENTRY level jobs. I talked to their managers all the time, I know what is going on. They WILL cut their employees hours because of this. - I am talking about the sales job, they are all minimum wage workers.
We are talking about $15/hour minimum wage. From $10.5/hour - $15 That is a big jump for ANY companies.
Good thing that "big jump" isn't happening all at once. It's going to happen gradually over several years.
Actually it's a two way street. The employer offering them and the workers offering them, similar to stock trade.
1. The worker offers to sell her labor at $X/hour
2. The employer budgets or offers to buy such labor at $Y/hour
3. The two parties negotiate and settle on $Z/hour.
It would come to a point where:
1. Worker A offers to sell her labor at $X/hour
2. Worker B at $X-5/hour
3. Worker C at $X-10/hour
4. The employer chooses Worker C at $X-10/hour even though their budget for this position is $Y/hour
The employer sets the wages. However, an employee might be able to convince the employer that the quality and value of their work performance is worth a higher wage, that is also true.
If all a person needs to do is stand there and offer free samples of hot dogs or pizza, it's obviously not a job to build a career around, not a job to raise a family on. It's a low skill, low paying part-time job, and may only be available a few times a year.
Good thing that "big jump" isn't happening all at once. It's going to happen gradually over several years.
If a $15/hour wage is such a great idea, why not make the law right now, why phase it in? I'll tell people why, it's because it will be destructive, and the people proposing it don't want the damage to be evident by instituting the mandatory wage hike all at once. They'd rather it gradually create the destruction in little bites, like a frog slowly boiling in a pot of water.
Or prioritizing their Life-Style so that they can eat.
It is a lot of money, depending on where you live in the US.
HUD will subsidize housing for some single people earning $53,940, or $25.93/hour
On the other hand, some single Americans earning $9,101 annually (which is $4.40/hour) earn too much for a HUD Section 8 subsidy from the tax-payers.
You can make $30,000 in some economies in the US and barely afford the $900 studio apartment you share with 3 other people, or you can make $30,000 and enjoy a nice 4-bedroom ranch home on an acre of land.
It's their choice.
So you haven't proved anything.
Since you know so much about economics - why is it that the value of the dollar varies so much from one location to the next?
I see this all the time right here in the Atlanta metro area - if I go away from the city, the price to eat out falls - $5.99 lunches anyone? But if I go *into* town, prices skyrocket - you can't even get an appetizer for $5.99, let alone a full lunch. Even a simple commodity like gasoline, which really should cost the same everywhere within the same taxing jurisdiction, varies rather dramatically - it's a little cheaper out from where I live, but be prepared to pay 20 cents more a gallon just by going inward a few miles. Some places in Buckhead charge up to 40 cents above what I pay here.
Perhaps they should implement a sliding minimum wage depend on where the employee works - in Atlanta proper, it should be $11 or so an hour to reflect the inflated cost of living. Out of town, you'll do just as well on $9 an hour, or even $8.50.
Same thing with California - $15.00/hr won't get you squat in San Francisco, but you'll be able to live like a king in Bakersfield - except that the businesses in poor Bakersfield won't be able to pay $15 an hour - or even $10 an hour.
The law phases in over a 7-year period, so its effect will be gradual and
commesurate with many other political changes over the next 7 years.
The question is what type of changes will take place.
Will we secure the border and deport illegals, or will they continue to take
jobs and resources away from Americans ?
Will we finally start protecting American interests in trade agreements,
which would protect American jobs, or will we continue along the merry
path of unrestricted corporate globalism ?
Will we get a grip on our money supply and return to an operable interest
rate and return to a strong dollar, or will we continue inflating so that $15/hr
in 2022 is worth no more than what the current minimum wage is ?
Will we change the healthcare laws so that the nation's largest employer
can no longer hold the vast majority of its staff under the 35 hour threshold,
thereby escaping the obligation to cover health insurance, while passing
along all that cost to the government ? Or can we help all businesses, no
matter how large or small, by moving to a single-payer system which absolves
them of all obligation to pay for any healthcare ?
I could go on, but you get the point. Carefully considering what is necessary
to change, you can see why the old Republican Party has virtually no support
and why the Trump and Bernie Sanders movements are reshaping the landscape.
I definitely do not see this as an "us vs. you" thing, lily. I realize this is going to have a big impact on how business is done in California. I also realize as small business owners, this is going to impact you and your family more than most. If this turns out to be a failed experiment, you will bear the brunt of the blow. If I could protect you from the risk and still enact this legislation, which I sincerely believe is going to benefit virtually everyone maybe especially you, I would. Unfortunately, I can't.
I personally think that the boom in business is going to offset your losses and may even lead to increased profits. There are a lot of people who would like to update their wardrobes and who will do so much more frequently if they have more the discretionary income. There are millions of Californians who are making $10 an hour who are about to get a 50 percent pay raise. That is going to be huge lily. They are going consume a LOT more than they currently do. Unfortunately, the lowest paid workers usually those spend the most, so little of this increased income is going to go into investments or savings. It's going to go into the pockets of people like you who do business in California.
Yes, if you retain all 6 of your employees, and you employ them for eight hours a day, that will increase the cost of doing business by $240 a day (no small sum), but demand for your products is also going to increase substantially. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out.
Now we are talking.
This is exactly the point I am trying to make.
I absolutely hate it (hate it), when people look at somebody like me and think i was born with a silver spoon in my mouth simply because I am a trust fund baby and I have family businesses.
according to small business definition
The definition of a small business is an independently owned and operated company that is limited in size and in revenue depending on the industry. A local bakery that employs 10 people is an example of a small business. A manufacturing facility that employees less than 500 people is an example of a small business.
My family has about 4 retail stores, 1 franchise, 2 restaurants, and a small manufacture. We perhaps have less than 200 employees, so by definition, we belong to the "small business" although we also belong to the "upper middle" category.
Each and every single one of my family business belongs to the small business category, but my family corporation also belongs to the "big business" category when it comes to tax paying. (confusing hun?)
I often wonder "Why do I have to pay more taxes - Mr. Bernie Sanders" and Why do I have to pay employees more salary - Mr. Bernie Sanders?
Don't get me wrong, I like Sanders, but why should small businesses have to be pay exactly the same as mega businesses, like NIKE or WALMART?
They argue
The majority (66 percent) of low-wage workers are not employed by small businesses, but rather by large corporations with over 100 employees;
Each and every single one of my family businesses belong to small business category, but my family business pay taxes as "large corporations" because we have more than 100 employees if you put all our businesses together. But we are completely different from mega businesses like NIKE.
I don't pay top executive compensation $9.4 million a year, and we don't have returned $174.8 billion to shareholders in dividends or share buybacks over the past five years.
In my humble opinion,
Minimum wage is a tool of a previous century. When we wield it now with technology as advanced as it is, we will only increase technological unemployment.
Why pay someone $15 an hour, when touchscreen kiosks are enough to do the job more efficiently at a lower cost? Mandatory higher wages only help those with jobs, and many of these jobs are jobs people would refuse to take without sufficient pay if they had that choice. If people could refuse jobs that don’t pay enough because they already have enough to get by, and the result would be that people either get paid more or no one has to do those jobs anymore, why not immediately do this instead? Why not give people the ability to refuse jobs entirely, and instead pursue the work most important to them?
Like I said, every single one of my family business is small business, but because we have so many, we pay tax as big corporations because we have more than 100 employees combined. Over the next several years, if we calculate and plan carefully, we can survive this insane law, but you bet we will let go at least 5% of our employees. Many workers will lose their hours. I hate to let people go, this is what I hate the most about my job. But I have to do what I have to do. I simply cannot afford raising prices of our products. It is not going to work.
I wonder, If we have to let some of our employees go, what is going to happen to the Papa and Mama operation? What is going to happen to millions of small business owners? Why do they have to pay EXACT same amount mega businesses have to pay?
It is ANOTHER law punishing the middle class - upper middle class owners in my opinion. It is another law punishing the corporations obey the law (obviously, we cannot outsource our operations lol)
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 04-08-2016 at 08:46 AM..
If a $15/hour wage is such a great idea, why not make the law right now, why phase it in? I'll tell people why, it's because it will be destructive, and the people proposing it don't want the damage to be evident by instituting the mandatory wage hike all at once. They'd rather it gradually create the destruction in little bites, like a frog slowly boiling in a pot of water.
Because your premise is flawed, that's why. Most of even the staunchest wage increase advocates acknowledge it needs to be gradually fazed in so businesses have time to plan.
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.
