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.
Sarcasm aside - simply pointing out a "cause and effect" is irrelevant in the grand spectrum of things.
There isn't any decision that a government could make which wouldn't have some negative cause and effect - obviously some type of "cost - benefit" analysis has to be taken into consideration no matter what the decision is.
Abolishing slavery. for example, might have caused some people (who weren't slave owners themselves) to lose livelihood, but in the grand spectrum of things, we consider abolishing slavery to be a good thing in the long run.
Excellent point!
Those who are against raising the minimum wage, hope to, in some way, benefit from exploiting a segment of our population with less than livable wages.
What I get from your post is that you somehow believe that by holding others (minimum wage earners) down, you will succeed.
You would be better off improving yourself instead of pushing our country to the bottom with China as far as standard of living.
Whenever our economy hits the crapper, the president gives the LOW income earners a stimulus. Why? Because in reality the economy works best as a trickle up model.
you like most leftists believe that trickle up poverty works...it doesn't
Denmark 1
Switzerland2
Finland 3
Australia 4
Netherlands5
Austria 6
Iceland 7
New Zealand8
Germany 9
Estonia 10
Norway 11
Oman 12
Sweden 13
Slovenia 14
All these ^ countries have a higher standard of living than the US.
I have lived in Germany, Austria, and Australia...and while they are very nice countries, very pretty countries..they lack the FREEDOM of the USA..and some of the amenities that we take for granted
Republican presidents (GWB, and trump) caused economic conditions requiring a stimulus to keep the US from collapsing. Both GWB and trump signed the bill with earnest.
now you are being dishonest...
the so-called "great recession" was caused by LIBERAL POLICIES of the 90's (Clinton era)
and are you really saying that trumpo caused the pandemic??
you like most leftists believe that trickle up poverty works...it doesn't
The past two republican presidents believe it because they gave stimulus checks to the low income earners to stimulate the economy. You know what? It worked.
The small business that is flexible to change will adjust. Either prices of goods and services offered will increase OR employee hours will change. For example,
Retail boutique with 4 sales people on the floor: One will be let go, the other 3 will have reduced hours and the owner will work more hours. Prices will increase 15% across the board.
some businesses will survive and some will shut down. I think the real people they are hurting are people who need these jobs. Owners? if they have something consumers really want? won't be hurt that much.
I really wish people understood this better and would back off of the federal minimum wage thing. Don't get me wrong, In some places, $15 is long overdue. In other places, it’s completely unnecessary, and raising it will do more harm than good.
It should't be all black, or all white. There are a lot of grey areas.
While I do agree with what you said, to a point. It is more complicated than you example.
It is always most profitable for the business owner to work as many hours as he can. He gets paid differently than his employees. He simply can take a draw from his business when he need to pay himself. Now there may be personal, practical, or other reasons why he can't work those hours but in general that is the case. So odds are he is already working the most he wants to. Getting rid of one full time position(40 hours) and reducing the hours of the remaining 3 might create too many hours for the owner to be able to cover and disrupting 4 people might not be the best move in terms of human resources.
The way the federal min. wage works is that things like commission, tips, and piece work can be paid at a lower rate than the min. wage. Right now it is $2.13 an hour but the tips, piece work or commission must bring the wage up to $7.65. Note this varies state by state as some states require that these workers be paid the full minimum wage before tips, commission, ect.. So again how this works out could vary. If his workers were already bringing in $15.00 an hour via commission he might just adjust his commission structure. And most likely if the min wage goes to $15.00 and hour these workers would only get like 10.60 an hour.
There is also the issue of if there is enough demand(or work) for said employees if the store is able to clear enough to pay the employees after the min. wage and still make a profit there maybe no problem, but if not the owner might simply reduce the hours that the store is open(if possible). This would impact the part time workers. He could also eliminate the full time worker and divide the hours among the part timers or just get ride of an part timer. He also could eliminate the full timer and add a part timer.
Anyway the best way to handle it isn't that simple. Also in general most studies has found that increasing the min. wage actually tends to increase net employment(it generates more jobs than it destroys). The business that tend to go under are the ones that were treading water to begin with but increasing the spending power at the bottom leads to more money being spent on goods and services which leads to more employment.
The great recession was caused by deregulation and OTC derivatives. The end.
the "great recession" was caused by the Clinton housing bubble (started in 1995), and all the liberal freetrade agreements that caused massive off shoring of jobs
the "great recession" was caused by the Clinton housing bubble (started in 1995), and all the liberal freetrade agreements that caused massive off shoring of jobs
1995 clinton (through his chief of HUD (Henry Cisneros and later his second chief andrew coumo)) eased the rules on obtaining mortgages allowing more 'exotic' mortgages and 'no-doc/low doc' mortgages-----the consequence ......housing SKYROCKETED causing low inventories causing a 'not normal' increase in home prices, sellers got greedy, buyers got even greedier (looking to PROFIT in a skyrocketing market by flipping) and bought THINKING that prices would still increase and their ADJUSTABLE mortgage would pay it self off in MINIMUMAL years...EVEN THOUGH THESE INCREASES IN HOME VALUES WERE TOTALLY UNHEARD OF, AND MORTGAGE RATES WERE AT 40 YEAR LOWS( what did they think an adjustable mortgage gotten at 40 year lows would do in the term(3 months-3years) when it adjusted...of course it would go up, their CONTRACT even said after the term it would be 6% PLUS PRIME)))
For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership."
The above is the start of the mortgage meltdon: Clinton's National Homeownership Strategy
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.
