:shrug: probably not. They probably never would have been hired in the first place, in fact, and their lives would be harder than they even are now.
They could continue to do so, certainly. They could keep performing their labor at a million dollars an hour. What they can't do is provide value-added over the cost to hiring and maintaining them at those rates, meaning that employing them constitutes a loss for the employer, meaning that employers who hire them will lose in competition, watch their business fail, and have to fire all their workers.
But I can't help but notice that you didn't answer my question. Why is your response to the fact that my sister is a low-education, low-skill worker just starting out in life who can't command higher salaries "well screw her, fire her ass"? Why shouldn't she (and her brothers) be given a chance to start working, gain skills and experience, self-improve, and move up lifes' ladder? Why are you so keen on trapping them at the bottom by moving the bottom rung of that ladder out of their reach?
That is ridiculous... Pessimistic even... A janitor misses a crumb on the floor and the whole business goes down the drain
If your sister in law still has her job, she must be doing something right, so why should she be fired?
If she wants a higher paying job, she can always go back to school.... You are putting such limitations and low expectations on these people...
Everyone has their own path to follow in this life....
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make any sense to me.. You are assuming that these people are not doing their jobs... You cannot base anything on an assumption... Can you?
Actually it is not called exponential growth. Exponential growth involves growth at a rate over time. This is talking about the relative growth rates as the result of a discreet event. Nice try, but clearly economics isn't your forte...
--------------
I'm not sure where you're going with this.
Are you saying the same products cost more in Canada than the USA?
That this increased price is due to Canada's higher MW?
Oh please... Who are you trying to kid, bro? What relative growth rates? relative to what exactly?
Tim-
For those that still don't get the concept look at this example we used to have caddies who carried our clubs and people who pumped our gas for us. Now both of these jobs no longer exist because to decrease cost employers fired people and installed new technology. This is what happens when you increase cost companies try and find a way to reduce them.
That is completely, and entirely incorrect. Germany does NOT have an all union workforce, and there are laws AGAINST compulsory union membership. Because they can't force people to join unions, the unions actually have to try to represent the people. They may VOLUNTARILY join a union, which will negotiate salaries.
So no, there is no minimum wage, no compulsory union membership, AND their unemployment is lower.
You base everything you do on assumptions. For example, you turned your key in the ignition this morning on the assumption that no one had cut the wire, or that an extremely local EMP burst had not taken our your vehicles' electronics. That is what you call a "safe assumption."
Another "safe assumption" is that different jobs carry different values - for example, a mid level manager position carries a higher value than a busboy, but a lower level than a vice-president. You appear to be missing this critical step - if an employee cannot give greater value added than the cost of employing them, then that employee is not hirable. When you artificially increase the floor for the cost of hiring someone, similarly increase the portion of people who are not hirable. Unfortunately, those marginal workers will also typically be representative of our least educated, least skilled, least experienced workers.
It doesn't matter if they are doing their jobs at $7.50 or not. What matters is that they are not necessarily producing enough value-added to the employer to justify their positions once the cost of employing them goes up by 40%. In every other item we accept that a 40% increase in price means a decrease in demand - but somehow because with labor that comes with unfortunate circumstances for those who wish to increase it nonetheless, we must jump through hoops and insist that "that's different" for ill-defined and undemonstrated reasons.
So you are saying companies do not implement cost saving measures unless the minimum wage increases? Really?
No it is correct. See since All german employees get what only union people do in USA, therfore all German jobs are "union" from the USA view point.
here is an example
"GM executives in Detroit were flabbergasted at how the head of the Opel works council, Klaus Franz, acted as if he were running the company and desperately fought to keep Opel from being drawn into the US parent company's financial turmoil.
"The Americans say: the company belongs to us," said Franz after he left Opel. "In the US, trade unions have a protective function. They are there to negotiate wages and working conditions," says Franz. "Here in Germany, though, they play a key role in the area of products and their quality, along with each company's growth potential, and thus employment," he explains. "We are highly professional members of the supervisory boards and we get involved. American (corporate) culture has a problem with that," argues Franz.
US company executives also view the German model with suspicion because the US economy is strongly oriented toward shareholder value. Budgets are often only made on a quarterly basis, and rarely for more than a year at a time. By contrast, German companies tend to pursue long-term plans."
From
amazon-and-other-us-corporations-flout-german-labor-laws-a-900615
Also German workers have Reps on all corp boards, can you imagine THAT in USA!!!! LMAO
So, how about German labor laws in USA then????? (snicker)
"
I'm sorry, but my right hemisphere brain and progressive self thinks that your views are wrong from every angle....Anybody and everybody, unless they are retarded, has the capacity to better themselves, but they don't have to.. It's up to them.. If they are a janitor and are happy being a janitor, that is fine as well.. If they are happy being a clerk, that is great... I would not demean the job or the worker... I don't think that raising the minimum wage would affect these workers at all...
You're concluding that no one would be willing to work for less than minimum wage - already not true, people do it all the time.
your right hemisphere appears to be missing a critical link. Anyone can self improve. Unless they are denied an opportunity to do so. Which is what hiking the minimum wage does.
Would you pay $14,000 for a car that was worth $10,000?
Tell me--is this what happened the last time that the minimum wage was raised?
Yup. You may remember that it was about 3-6 months later that all those self-checkout machines started showing up in supermarkets. Where do you think the people who used to run those checkout lines went? The machines had become cheaper than the people, because the cost of people had been artificially increased.
Watched 37 seconds of it. It's ridiculous.What are you guys thoughts on this?
No, actually, I don't remember but I don't think that I have ever seen more than one in any store that I've been in...but I live rural, so...
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?