Min Wage: Where did 15/hr come from?

[Absentglare]

Nope. I made no assumption on why the skilled and knowledgeable was not producing anything that anyone was willing to pay more than minimum wage for. But paying him a wage commensurate to the time he spent at university to roll dough won't help the economy much, but it will kill the company that does so.

Strawman.

You claimed that they aren't getting more money because they lack skills. Reality is far more complex than your "let's assume every wage negotiation is perfectly fair" model.

 

[joG]

Strawman.

You claimed that they aren't getting more money because they lack skills. Reality is far more complex than your "let's assume every wage negotiation is perfectly fair" model.

I did? show me.

 

[Deuce]

I did? show me.

"People are paid according to their skills" is based on the absurd idea that the world is fair.

 

[joG]

"People are paid according to their skills" is based on the absurd idea that the world is fair.

Where did I say that and was there a context?

 

[Deuce]

Where did I say that and was there a context?

I think it was ludin, which started this particular line of conversation you jumped into, but I don't care enough to go back and look.

 

[Absentglare]

I did? show me.

Here :

You are right. If a person of skill and knowledge does things nobody wants to pay for, she wont find a job.

Lack of skills and/or knowledge is not an exhaustive list of the reasons why someone could be underpaid in a given job market.

 

[joG]

Here :



Lack of skills and/or knowledge is not an exhaustive list of the reasons why someone could be underpaid in a given job market.

Anyone that demands an "exhaustive list" of economic determinants has much to learn, if he wants to be taken seriously.

 

[Absentglare]

Anyone that demands an "exhaustive list" of economic determinants has much to learn, if he wants to be taken seriously.

I didn't demand an exhaustive list, what i claimed is that you proposed your own list as exhaustive when it is clearly not so.

 

[eohrnberger]

Strawman.

You claimed that they aren't getting more money because they lack skills. Reality is far more complex than your "let's assume every wage negotiation is perfectly fair" model.

The world isn't fair. Life isn't fair. That's a fact.

Yet your position is that the government has to intercede and make it fair?

Who believes that the world and life will be more fair once government steps in and ****s it up some more?
Who believes that some isolated idiot in congress knows what's fair?
(Considering that these are the same guys that have been caught doing insider trading, and any number of other corruption)

You really think that?

 

[poweRob]

What would the federal min wage be now if it was linked to inflation from the get go?

With inflation... not much.

With productivity?

Minimum Wage Would Be $21.72 If It Kept Pace With Increases In Productivity​

 

[joG]

I didn't demand an exhaustive list, what i claimed is that you proposed your own list as exhaustive when it is clearly not so.

Nope. I mentioned major drivers.

 

[Absentglare]

The world isn't fair. Life isn't fair. That's a fact.

Yet your position is that the government has to intercede and make it fair?

Who believes that the world and life will be more fair once government steps in and ****s it up some more?
Who believes that some isolated idiot in congress knows what's fair?
(Considering that these are the same guys that have been caught doing insider trading, and any number of other corruption)

You really think that?

The role of government is to govern.

If someone could just murder their neighbor, that would be unfair.

The government exists to enforce limited fairness.

 

[poweRob]

yes you are incapable of educating yourself on the discussion. your refusal to inform yourself simply shows your dishonesty.
as I posted before common knowledge does not need to be cited.

since this has been all over the news etc ... it is now considered common knowledge.

you have simply removed yourself from this discussion due to lack of education. you may rejoin once you educate
yourself on what is being discussed.

thank you for your concession.

:rofl: what an epic dodge.

Asking you to back up your own claims is how debate works. That you refuse to do this is on your back. Yes, it is you who just threw up the white flag.

 

[poweRob]

When rich people are greedy, it's this magically helpful force that makes life better for everyone. When poor people are greedy, it's an evil force of socialism, totalitarianism, fascism, satanism, communism, and everything that's wrong with the world.

Lol...

That is an awesome quote.

 

[eohrnberger]

The role of government is to govern.

If someone could just murder their neighbor, that would be unfair.

The government exists to enforce limited fairness.

So based on your response here, which I accept as real and genuine, some further questions come to mind:

1. Is it within the scope of governing to dictate a minimum wage?
   (Acknowledge that precedence has already been set)
2. Does this government dictate interfere / intervene more than it should, given the managed free market that we currently have?
   (Acknowledge that precedence has already been set)
3. Does this government dictate actually promote more fairness? Less fairness?
4. Or does the market just absorb this increase in labor costs, and re-balance itself?
5. Who's idea of fairness, which is a subjective term, does the government use as a measure in it's response?

1). Falls to precedence, and one that isn't going to stop anytime soon.
2). I'd have to say yes to.
3). I don't think greater fairness really happens because of the government's actions
4). Most defiantly, so much so that I don't think any permanent change actually happens, the re-balancing moves it all around to where it was before, relative to each other.
5). That'd have to be up to congress which has to pass the law raising MW.

 

[ludin]

:rofl: what an epic dodge.

Asking you to back up your own claims is how debate works. That you refuse to do this is on your back. Yes, it is you who just threw up the white flag.

those claims are all over the place in the news. in fact another poster in this thread even saw them.
no white flag when someone else is being ignorant of the discussion.

in fact others have posted the same thing in other threads on this forum.

so they have already been cited in various places. it is not my job to educate someone on the subject.
when the information is already out there in the open. that is their job.

I made no claim that is not considered public knowledge at this point. public knowledge does not have to be cited.
this is a given in any debate.

 

[poweRob]

those claims are all over the place in the news. in fact another poster in this thread even saw them.
no white flag when someone else is being ignorant of the discussion.

in fact others have posted the same thing in other threads on this forum.

so they have already been cited in various places. it is not my job to educate someone on the subject.
when the information is already out there in the open. that is their job.

I made no claim that is not considered public knowledge at this point. public knowledge does not have to be cited.
this is a given in any debate.

It's your job to support your claims regardless of what you consider "public knowledge." It's not other people's job to look up your claims. That you don't support your claims only makes your claims baseless either in fact or in appearance. Besides, if its such easily found public knowledge then pulling up a link shouldn't be hard for you to do.

 

[Absentglare]

So based on your response here, which I accept as real and genuine, some further questions come to mind:

1. Is it within the scope of governing to dictate a minimum wage?
   (Acknowledge that precedence has already been set)
2. Does this government dictate interfere / intervene more than it should, given the managed free market that we currently have?
   (Acknowledge that precedence has already been set)
3. Does this government dictate actually promote more fairness? Less fairness?
4. Or does the market just absorb this increase in labor costs, and re-balance itself?
5. Who's idea of fairness, which is a subjective term, does the government use as a measure in it's response?

1). Falls to precedence, and one that isn't going to stop anytime soon.
2). I'd have to say yes to.
3). I don't think greater fairness really happens because of the government's actions
4). Most defiantly, so much so that I don't think any permanent change actually happens, the re-balancing moves it all around to where it was before, relative to each other.
5). That'd have to be up to congress which has to pass the law raising MW.

1) I should say so, but it is useful to acknowledge why we need such a minimum wage. Part of the advantage of a minimum wage is that it helps limit the amount of public assistance that a full time employee requires. Our labor laws do not facilitate a satisfactorily alternative means of gaining this, say, through labor unions. This is because of the combination of the federal exclusive representation requirement in conjunction with states passing right to work (right to be a union freeloader) laws. I think it is necessary to keep the minimum wage moderate at the federal level, but i think it should be raised to, perhaps, $9/hr and indexed to inflation.

2) Sometimes yes, sometimes no. There are many government policies that serve to help big businesses but not small ones. I consider our high nominal corporate income tax rate in conjunction with our complex code to be such an example. I don't agree that either more or less government is a valid "one-size-fits-all" type of solution.

3) Depends, a lot. It seems that our style of big government (US, Canada, Europe, etc) works better at maintaining fairness than small governments (Africa, South America, etc).

4) The market may see increased costs as a result. But if you look at the total cost increase of a $15 minimum wage on McDonalds, it's less than $10 billion per year (first link, motley fool has a ridiculously pessimistic view of scaling current total compensation /$7.25 and then * $15 to come up with $9.8 billion) and they planned up to $20 billion in stock buybacks (second link).

What Will a Minimum Wage Increase Cost You at McDonald's? -- The Motley Fool

McDonald’s Plans Up to $20 Billion in Buybacks, Dividends - Bloomberg

5) The people collaborate and the result is, hopefully, what comes to pass. The consequences of policies are observed and used to help guide future policies.

 

[SocialD]

You posted data up to January 2016. Never mind the whole "seeing what you want to see" euphemism, you're just being straight-out dishonest.

Dishonest? what the hell are you talking about. Its all from the Bureau of Labor Statistics website.