- Joined
- Jul 22, 2009
- Messages
- 1,819
- Reaction score
- 281
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Gulfman, joint manager's decisions are usually correct; their enterprises cannot survive too many bad decisions and I generally don't presume to argue with them. But sometimes I wonder if an industry is not just following a current fashion rather than thinking the entire concept all the way through.I'm a proponent of more robots in fast food joints.
Automation:
Automation reduces per unit costs and/or improves quality and/or consistency of those products’ quality. It has not and will not be to USA’s net economic detriment.
Automation tools, assembly lines, and methods require labor to design, create, maintain, and repair them even if they may not require many people to operate them.
Automated production, no less than the production of any other services or goods products, requires production supporting labor and enterprises.
Automation has always been, and I expect it will continue to be to our nation's best interest. To the extent that labor's costs are less, introduction of automation is delayed. This is typical of our world's poorest economies.
Respectfully, Supposn
our middle class is alive and well
in fact, the upper middle class is doing better today than ever before
our standard of living is better today than in 1940, 50, 60 ...
Respectfully, SupposnGdgyva, I doubt if those earning no more than the median wage are in aggregate doing all that well and their standards of living are better today than they were during the 1960's.
(although I do not particularly doubt, or refute, or agree with your contention that USA's upper-middle-class [and I would suppose along with those more wealthy], who earn more than USA's median wage are in aggregate “doing better today than ever before”.
In February-1968 the Cost Price index of federal minimum wage peaked at its maximum value. Between then and April-2019 it has lost more than 39% of its purchasing power. USA cannot achieve a more adequate median wage rate unless our federal minimum wage rate's adequate.
The purchasing power of USA's median wage rate's among the best indicators of USA's living standards.
Well, you need to consider everybody. If your CEO is making a reasonable salary, then there is an argument to be made that you can't afford to pay your workers more. But if your CEO is making millions, then wages could just be shifted to the lower end without affecting profits one bit. So your question missed the point. Of course everybody's wages should get a bump. But it's also possible that some (large) salaries should come down, as well. If a company is highly profitable, it's making those high profits on the backs of labor.
Government used to work better than it does now, before the influence of big donors took over. So we have already gotten a taste of what the country is like when government defers to business interests. I don't like that taste, and I really doubt that cutting even more regulations is going to make it taste any better.
Is post #54's 695 words in any manner germane to the discussion of USA's federal minimum wage rate?
There are better, more direct ways to eliminate those loopholes. If you don't like unpaid/low wage apprentice programs, just legislate rules that eliminate the problem.AlbqOwl said:I am for the federal government perhaps establishing a low minimum wage to prevent unethical employers from engaging in phony apprentice programs etc. and thereby utilizing what amounts to slave labor. It is appropriate at the federal level because often employers are working in more than one state and it would be difficult for the states to police that.
Labor is never compensated "what they are worth." Labor is compensated according to the demand for labor. The price of corn isn't "what it's worth," the price of corn varies with the supply and demand for corn. If there is lots of excess corn, then prices will go down. And if there is lots of excess labor, then, in a free market, wages will fall, too. Just like healthcare, wages are one of those things that needs some government intervention.
What an employee produces for the company merely sets the ceiling of his possible compensation, not the floor.
That, after all, is why successful wealthy and upper-middle-class families often encourage their children to take them.
Too many people consider economics as always a “zero-sum game”;(i.e. one's gain must be at the expense of other's losses). It ain't necessarily so, and it is specifically not so with regard to the U.S. federal minimum wage rate. [Paul Wellstone was a U.S. Senator from Minnesota]. Respectfully, Supposn
The progressive vision: We all do better when we all do better | MinnPost
The rallying cry of the labor movement is “an injury to one is an injury to all.” The Bible teaches us that “I am my brother’s keeper.” Benjamin Franklin implored fellow delegates to sign the Declaration of Independence saying, “We must hang together or most assuredly we will all hang separately.” And Paul Wellstone used to always say, “We all do better when we all do better.”
James972:Reasons intelligent people oppose minimum wage:
1) MW it illegal to employ people not worth minimum wage ...
... 5) raises prices, reduces demand, and thus reduces employment ...
... 8) speeds up transition from high density brick and mortar employment to low density on line employment ...
Well, I didn't anticipating liking your post in this thread, but well said.
The only thing I would add is that low-paid internships are often valuable because they establish connections and experience within an industry that can propel you to a more successful career later.
That, after all, is why successful wealthy and upper-middle-class families often encourage their children to take them.
Reasons intelligent people oppose minimum wage:
1) MW it illegal to employ people not worth minimum wage
2) raise prices for poor people who often shop where minimum wage folks work
3) speeds up automation and replacement of minimum wage jobs
4) teaches workers that you get ahead with govt violence rather than being worth more
5) raises prices, reduces demand, and thus reduces employment
6) makes American workers even less competitive with foreign workers
7) makes a huge % of work force (42%) minimum age workers with no incentive to improve their skills.
8) speeds up transition from high density brick and mortar employment to low density on line employment
9) encourages govt to enact similar libsocialist policies to get more votes from the supposed beneficiaries
10) a higher minimum wage encourages higher skilled workers to take jobs that were once held by mimimum wage workers.
11) nothing is free.MW encourages employers to extract more in productivity, conditions, fringe benefits, scheduling, vacation/sick days, overtime, etc etc.
James972:Reasons intelligent people oppose minimum wage:
... (2) raise prices for poor people who often shop where minimum wage folks work
3) speeds up automation and replacement of minimum wage jobs
4) teaches workers that you get ahead with govt violence rather than being worth more ...
... (6) makes American workers even less competitive with foreign workers
7) makes a huge % of work force (42%) minimum age workers with no incentive to improve their skills. ...
... (9) encourages govt to enact similar libsocialist policies to get more votes from the supposed beneficiaries
10) a higher minimum wage encourages higher skilled workers to take jobs that were once held by minimum wage workers.
11) nothing is free.MW encourages employers to extract more in productivity, conditions, fringe benefits, scheduling, vacation/sick days, overtime, etc etc.
1. "Not worth minimum wage"?
2. That would apply if the minimum wage was *too* high. On the other hand, if half your population can't afford to buy anything, you really can't have a consumer economy.
CPWill, Hamish Howl, and James972, if the definite legally determined and enforced minimum wage rate were eliminated, it would be replaced by an indefinite market determined rate; Within every labor market there's effectively a minimum rate applicable to the least desirable applicant or employee.Yes.The value-added of a particular form or application of labor doesn't actually, magically, increase simply because we put a price-floor on it, any more than the value of anything else increases when we put a price-floor on it, or decreases when we put a price-ceiling on it.
That is correct - our minimum wage is too high, with the result that we price low-skill low-education labor out of the market, in favor of black market illegal labor (who may have similar education and skill level profiles, but who can work for a rate at which they can be hired, while Americans' cannot), and automation.
But if your CEO is making millions, then wages could just be shifted to the lower end without affecting profits one bit.
James972:
( The minimum wage is among the primary causes of U.S. Dollar's rate of inflation
The minimum wage does promote automation and replacement of many jobs including minimum wage jobs. We know that's to our nation's economic advantage and promote better living standards.
Regardless if there is a legally determined and enforced minimum rate or only an indefinite market determined minimum wage rate, everything described within this post remains applicable to employer/employee relationships.
Respectfully, Supposn
1. "Not worth minimum wage"?
2. That would apply if the minimum wage was *too* high. On the other hand, if half your population can't afford to buy anything, you really can't have a consumer economy.
(7) You contend that 42% of USA workforce now refrains from improving their ability to earn more because they're entirely satisfied with their present wages?
Reasons intelligent people oppose minimum wage:
1) MW it illegal to employ people not worth minimum wage
2) raise prices for poor people who often shop where minimum wage folks work ...
James972: … (2) Does the minimum wage rate raise prices only for poor people who often shop where minimum wage folks work? You mean that prices don't rise if the minimum wage rate doesn't rise? If we eliminated the federal minimum wage, the consumer price indexes would remain static? The minimum wage is among the primary causes of U.S. Dollar's rate of inflation and those price increases are only or more applicable to products that are primarily sold to poorer purchasers? ...
James972, you hadn't deliberately meant to quote me out of context? Your post makes it appear that I have not often within other threads asserted the federal minimum wage rate is not among the primary causes for U.S. Dollar's losses of purchasing power? To imply I'm contending otherwise would be a deceitful act on your part. Respectfully, Supposn[Originally Posted by I'm Supposn:
“James972: ( The minimum wage is among the primary causes of U.S. Dollar's rate of inflation.”]
the minimum wage does not change the money supply so has no affect on inflation. 1+1=2
James972, before attempting to prove your statement within post #71, can you try to explain and just briefly support it? What is it that you're contending?I contend that if 42% of workers are making the same minimum wage the link between education, ambition, hard work, creativity and income is severed and another liberal depression would be the result.
... Regardless if there is a legally determined and enforced minimum rate or only an indefinite market determined minimum wage rate, everything described within this post remains applicable to employer/employee relationships. ...
Regarding post #69, what specifically is within the portion of my statement you didn't quote, that you found to be wrong? How and why do you find “it” wrong?Wrong of course a free market minimum wage is based in economic efficiency while a libNazi minimum wage is based on wild guessing by a few bureaucrats in Washington who ruin efficiency lowering living standards.
Federal minimum wage rate.
I'm a proponent of the federal minimum wage be increased12.5% annually until it achieves no less than 125% of February 1968 cost price indexed value. Thereafter the monitored minimum rate should annually (when necessary), be modified to retain that purchasing power.
Respectfully, Supposn
According to BLS less than 3% of all workers make the federal minimum age. Demographically they tend to be young, single, less than full time workers. Many live at home. Most move up as they gave skills, experience and training.Since I'm neither a math genius, a geopolitical professor nor an economist all I know is that in most instances if you're making minimum wage, you're screwed. Unlike the old popular belief, greed is not good. We throw numbers around until we've deadened our senses to people's needs. To have a decent life without worrying yourself to death over bills and health care, car insurance, rent, food etc. The basics of life in 2019. Why has that become too much to ask? Why is it that ten percent of america has more than the other ninety percent together? Money, greed. We can change things in america but that would literally require we vote out everyone who is in office and if they don't do as we wish with our tax money, we vote them out next election. We demand how our money is being spent, we all want health care, we all want a living wage not a minimum wage. Am I wrong?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?