Minimum Wage?

[Iriemon]

I dont know about where you live, but do you have any idea how many pizza joints are in Daytona Beach. Not to mention there are 3 Colleges/Universities in Town. There is no shortage of supply

Then why are they paid more than the minimum wage?

 

[Iriemon]

You said it your self "The minimum wage sets a floor on wages" So when the floor goes up the rest of the house goes up to.

Not at all.

Regrettably many of my friends live off MW. I have friends where I live in Oregon and in Washington where MW wage is high. I know people in Idaho and Texas where the Federal MW is the standard. They have no significant difference in there quality of life. Also I have seen the the rise of Oregon minimum wage throughout my life and people are no better off when MW was 5.50 or now that it is $7.80

Your own personal observations are fine, anecdotes do not represent a basis for general assertions. I find it hard to believe that someone is no better off making 7.80 versus 5.50. Ask your friends who earn the MW which they'd rather get.

First Pizza delivery is not the only job on the planet. Also many pizza joins supply a company car. If they don't you get paid more than MW plus tips.

Agree. You brought it up.

I should clarify my position I do care about people that are struggling to get by I have let many people live in my own home till they got back on there feet. There is a difference in me choosing to help those who need help and being forced to. What I was saying is it should not be the governments job.

If all were as altruistic as you we probably woudn't need the Govt to do the job.

MW has a effect on all wages.

Disagree. If you have something to support that assertion, maybe I'll change my mind.

People should be paid what they earned based on the work they did!

Agree 100%

If you choose to make your career fast food then you reap what you sow.

Disagree with your "the poor deserve their lot" philosphy.

 

[DeeJayH]

Then why are they paid more than the minimum wage?

asked, yet already answered

First Pizza delivery is not the only job on the planet. Also many pizza joints supply a company car. If they don't you get paid more than MW plus tips.

 

[Narph]

Your own personal observations are fine, anecdotes do not represent a basis for general assertions. I find it hard to believe that someone is no better off making 7.80 versus 5.50. Ask your friends who earn the MW which they'd rather get.

Well like I said I have lived through MW going from $5.5 to $7.80 and people making MW living standard have not gone up. Also the cost of living is different in different states.

Agree. You brought it up.

I did not bring up pizza delivery nor did I use it as a bases for my arguments. DeeJayH brought it up.

currently he works at Pizza Hut delivering

If all were as altruistic as you we probably woudn't need the Govt to do the job.

It should never be governments job to steel from one person and give it to another.

Disagree. If you have something to support that assertion, maybe I'll change my mind.

They estimate that 13.0 million workers would get a pay raise if minimum wage was raised to $7.25 Lets estimate that on average they would get a $1 raise sense some state are above the federal but below the 7.25 Lets estimate that on average they work 20hr a week. So how much money are we talking about a week? If you work 20 hrs a week and got a $1 raise that would be $20 a week raise now we times that buy $13,000,000.00 That would be $260,000,000. Now where does that 260 million dollars a week come from? And what effect will it have on other wages. Lets say for the sake of argument that no one loses there jobs and every one gets a raise. So now all the business have to come up with 260 million a week there options are cut cost without firing any one, raise prices, take less of a profit. So they do all of the above. The consumer has to pay that 260 million. This raises the cost of living, forces people that are making a little more the MW to get a pay raise, or if they don't get a raise they in a sense devalue there pay. When you raise the floor wage other floors either go up or you bring them down. Sense you admit that this MW is not bases on supply and demand you are in a round about way taxing every on else to subsidize MW income. Also business have to pay a 7% tax on your wages for Social Secretly that would add another 18,200,000 to that would make a conservative estimate of 278.2 million a week that would have to come from some where.

Agree 100%

You agree that people should be paid what they earned based on the work they did. MW wage does not do that. Supply and demand does that. You said that MW sets a floor wage despite supply and demand.
So you do you support people getting paid based on the work they did or base on a government inforced wage?

The minimum wage sets a floor on wages despite supply or demand so that the very lowest wage people will work for provides at least a poverty line level of subsistance.

If you choose to make your career fast food then you reap what you sow.

Disagree with your "the poor deserve their lot" philosphy.

So your saying if someone makes a choice that has undesirable consequence that we should alter the consequences and reward them more then they earned. In effect removing there responsibility of there own lives?

 

[Iriemon]

Well like I said I have lived through MW going from $5.5 to $7.80 and people making MW living standard have not gone up. Also the cost of living is different in different states.

Sorry, I just disagree with you implicit contention that to someone making 5.15 an hour, roughly $10k a year, getting an extra $4000 a year is not crucial. It just doesn't make sense.

It should never be governments job to steel from one person and give it to another.

Agree. But taxes aren't stealing.

They estimate that 13.0 million workers would get a pay raise if minimum wage was raised to $7.25 Lets estimate that on average they would get a $1 raise sense some state are above the federal but below the 7.25 Lets estimate that on average they work 20hr a week. So how much money are we talking about a week? If you work 20 hrs a week and got a $1 raise that would be $20 a week raise now we times that buy $13,000,000.00 That would be $260,000,000. Now where does that 260 million dollars a week come from?

Accepting your numbers as accurate (I don't know that they are, you did not give a source) that means that 13 million get a $1/hour raise, that is roughly $2000 a year per person, times 13 million, is $26 billion a year.

While the extra $2000 a year is crucial to someone trying to survive on $12k; $26 billion isn't even spit in the bucket in a nation with a gross personal income in the neighborhood of $11 trillion. It's not even close to 1% of the overall gross national income. A $26 billion increase in low end salaries is not going to have any significant effect on inflation or anything else in the $13 1/2 trillion economy.

And what effect will it have on other wages. Lets say for the sake of argument that no one loses there jobs and every one gets a raise. So now all the business have to come up with 260 million a week there options are cut cost without firing any one, raise prices, take less of a profit. So they do all of the above. The consumer has to pay that 260 million. This raises the cost of living, forces people that are making a little more the MW to get a pay raise, or if they don't get a raise they in a sense devalue there pay. When you raise the floor wage other floors either go up or you bring them down. Sense you admit that this MW is not bases on supply and demand you are in a round about way taxing every on else to subsidize MW income. Also business have to pay a 7% tax on your wages for Social Secretly that would add another 18,200,000 to that would make a conservative estimate of 278.2 million a week that would have to come from some where.

See above.

You agree that people should be paid what they earned based on the work they did. MW wage does not do that. Supply and demand does that.

Market forces dictate what the market says their labor is worth. What they earned is something different. What they earned is based on what they are paid. And they should be paid based on the work they did. No doubt.

But not necessarily what laissez-faire capitalism market forces would put as their market worth.

You said that MW sets a floor wage despite supply and demand. So you do you support people getting paid based on the work they did or base on a government inforced wage?

Two different things, which are not mutually inconsistent alternatives. I support both.

If you choose to make your career fast food then you reap what you sow.

Folks don't always have a choice. Many lack the education, smarts, and opportunity.

So your saying if someone makes a choice that has undesirable consequence that we should alter the consequences and reward them more then they earned. In effect removing there responsibility of there own lives?

Again, IMO, if someone is working full time, they are taking responsibility for their own lives. Not everyone can be a winner, not everyone has the smarts to get a college degree, not every one has the ability to get advanced educations or the ability or opportunity to learn a trade.

Obviously most of us on this board do. We wouldn't have the resources and time to do this if we were living in sub-poverty level like millions do.

I personally am thrilled when someone takes the responsibility of getting a job instead of looking for handouts. If someone is willing to work at a full time job, IMO they have earned the right to make a poverty line level of subsistence, even though free market capitalism supply and demand forces might dictate that folks would work for less than poverty level wages.

Capitalism is a great economic engine and I am not in favor of socialist regimes. However, in the end, capitalism values labor (or any other input) solely on market forces, and has nothing to do with whether or not those forces provides for a substinance level of living nor does it give a hoot about human or social factors. For those on the bottom of the ladder, IMO it is valid to consider factors other than simply the value that the market would put on their unskilled labor in terms of rewarding them for taking the responsibility of working.

If you believe working people deserve sub-poverty levels of existance for whatever reason, fine, you are entitled to your opinion. IMO folks willing to work and keep a full time job deserve a little better than what the lowerst market rate for their labor might be.

 

[1069]

Again, IMO, if someone is working full time, they are taking responsibility for their own lives. Not everyone can be a winner, not everyone has the smarts to get a college degree, not every one has the ability to get advanced educations or the ability or opportunity to learn a trade.

Agreed. Someone working full time- regardless of their profession- deserves a wage that will allow him or her to live at at least a subsistence level, ie to afford shelter, food, and the basic necessities of life.
In a country this wealthy, it is a travesty that we do not compensate our low-end and unskilled workers in a manner that permits them to survive unassisted.
There's nothing "lazy" about manual labor; maybe a few of you ought to try it sometime.

Obviously most of us on this board do. We wouldn't have the resources and time to do this if we were living in sub-poverty level like millions do.

We here are some of the most privileged people on the planet.
We are not only literate, but also have internet access and ample leisure time.
We are, however, the privileged minority.

 

[Narph]

Before I go on to my rebuttal. I would like to try and clarify common ground on the issue. I will ask some True or False questions of course I do not expect you to answer if you feel like the question is a trap. I will do my best to not ask such a question but a I'm like every one else driven by there views.

Q:We don't want people starving,homeless or without basic health care.

Qeople should be paid what they earned based on the work they did. We just don't agree about what they deserve.

Q:MW is not based on supply and demand.

Q:We want to increase the standard of living for all people. We just don't agree how that would be done.

Q:Not every one will be successful no matter what we do at least partly do to inividual choice which we have no direct control over.

Back to it then. :duel

Sorry, I just disagree with you implicit contention that to someone making 5.15 an hour, roughly $10k a year, getting an extra $4000 a year is not crucial. It just doesn't make sense.

I agree that someone making $4000 more a year is a big deal.
I don't agree that they will really get $4000 in the terms of buying power.
I don't believe that minimum wage has ever gone up dollars at a time. I think the average is 0.50 a year. To make my point they keep raising minimum wage but why does quality of life stay the same?

Would you rather raise MW to 7.25 or remove the tax burden on the first 24000 made.? What do you think would help more.

Agree. But taxes aren't stealing.

Can you show me where in the constitution it gives the power to take money from one group of people and give it to another for there personal gain if so I would like to see it. If they don't have the legal authority to that then they are stealing it. In the constitution there are specific thing the government can collect taxes for and welfare and healthcare are not one of them. If you think they should have such a power then start a movement to amend the constitution.

Accepting your numbers as accurate (I don't know that they are, you did not give a source) that means that 13 million get a $1/hour raise, that is roughly $2000 a year per person, times 13 million, is $26 billion a year.

While the extra $2000 a year is crucial to someone trying to survive on $12k; $26 billion isn't even spit in the bucket in a nation with a gross personal income in the neighborhood of $11 trillion. It's not even close to 1% of the overall gross national income. A $26 billion increase in low end salaries is not going to have any significant effect on inflation or anything else in the $13 1/2 trillion economy.

I got the 13 million from here the rest was simple math.
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/issueguides_minwage_minwagefacts

Like I said I agree that the raise would help MW workers. I just don't think they will get it in terms of buying power. Your right that in terms of percent 26 billion is not much. The problem is that the economy is not compartmentalize and will have a effect the rest of it. The economy is interconnected changing 26 billion will send waves of change through the economy. Like the person who is making a few dollars more that the MW now they will want a raise then the next guy will want a raise. Then there is the company that buys the products that where effected by price increases they will have to fire people, take a loss, raise prise or cut services. That will effect the company that uses his services ect. Firing people is the same as Cutting services. Cutting services if the same as raising prices. Now for taking a loss this is the very last thing a company will do.

There more likely to do things like not give raises to other employees if they can get away with it. They might cut health benefits, overtime, or vacation pay. Then they might fire someone who has been there and is making 12 hr and hire a new guy pay him MW. Then like the a company I worked for they hired felons, guys on parole or probation cause they could pay them crap and the state gives tax incentives to do hire them. It works for them because they hire these guys with skills but they don't get paid for them because they where criminals.

Then there is the worst option but the more MW goes up the more it appeals to companies and that is taking there company out of the country.

Market forces dictate what the market says their labor is worth. What they earned is something different. What they earned is based on what they are paid. And they should be paid based on the work they did. No doubt.
But not necessarily what laissez-faire capitalism market forces would put as their market worth.

This statement is rather confusing. I think I get what you are saying but I would like to clarify.

Question: How do you think wage should be determined?

Question: What is wrong with supply and demand?

Folks don't always have a choice. Many lack the education, smarts, and opportunity.

If buy smarts you mean ability to comprehend things that is the one thing you don't have a choice about.

The others it's your choice to get a education or learn a trade.

People make there own opportunity as well.

Please give a example of the average guy working for MW that was forced there. It can be real or hypothetical.

Again, IMO, if someone is working full time, they are taking responsibility for their own lives. Not everyone can be a winner, not everyone has the smarts to get a college degree, not every one has the ability to get advanced educations or the ability or opportunity to learn a trade.

I agree working full time is responsible. Expecting to be able to live well or raise a family of MW is not.

I personally am thrilled when someone takes the responsibility of getting a job instead of looking for handouts. If someone is willing to work at a full time job, IMO they have earned the right to make a poverty line level of subsistence, even though free market capitalism supply and demand forces might dictate that folks would work for less than poverty level wages.

Capitalism is a great economic engine and I am not in favor of socialist regimes. However, in the end, capitalism values labor (or any other input) solely on market forces, and has nothing to do with whether or not those forces provides for a substinance level of living nor does it give a hoot about human or social factors. For those on the bottom of the ladder, IMO it is valid to consider factors other than simply the value that the market would put on their unskilled labor in terms of rewarding them for taking the responsibility of working.

If you believe working people deserve sub-poverty levels of existance for whatever reason, fine, you are entitled to your opinion. IMO folks willing to work and keep a full time job deserve a little better than what the lowerst market rate for their labor might be.

MW is a hand out. Supply and demand is what you have earned more is a hand out. We don't know how supply and demand would effect minimum wage jobs.

We don't live in a free market. And socialism where there! Any problems that you have with the economy are most likely related to socialism and you don't even realize it. Just a few examples of socialism or communism with the elusion of a free market

Central bank controls the production of money and the interest rates.
Business are told how much they can pay there employees.
Social Security.
Medicare
Weal fair
unemployment benefits
Progressive income tax

If all are manufacturing jobs were not leaving as fast as they can get out of the country we would not need to have this conversation.

 

[Iriemon]

Before I go on to my rebuttal. I would like to try and clarify common ground on the issue. I will ask some True or False questions of course I do not expect you to answer if you feel like the question is a trap. I will do my best to not ask such a question but a I'm like every one else driven by there views.

Q:We don't want people starving,homeless or without basic health care.

Qeople should be paid what they earned based on the work they did. We just don't agree about what they deserve.

Q:MW is not based on supply and demand.

Q:We want to increase the standard of living for all people. We just don't agree how that would be done.

Q:Not every one will be successful no matter what we do at least partly do to inividual choice which we have no direct control over.

Back to it then. :duel

I agree that someone making $4000 more a year is a big deal.
I don't agree that they will really get $4000 in the terms of buying power.
I don't believe that minimum wage has ever gone up dollars at a time. I think the average is 0.50 a year. To make my point they keep raising minimum wage but why does quality of life stay the same?

I disagree that the quality of life stays the same after the MW is increased. That is your contention based up anecdotal evidence.

Would you rather raise MW to 7.25 or remove the tax burden on the first 24000 made.? What do you think would help more.

I agree generally in a progressive tax system. However, folks making MW or less already do not pay federal income taxes. So removing the tax burden from them will accomplish nothing.

Can you show me where in the constitution it gives the power to take money from one group of people and give it to another for there personal gain if so I would like to see it. If they don't have the legal authority to that then they are stealing it. In the constitution there are specific thing the government can collect taxes for and welfare and healthcare are not one of them. If you think they should have such a power then start a movement to amend the constitution.

The Govt has been doing it for decades. No one from the Govt has been put in jail for stealing based on taxes, that I am aware of.

I got the 13 million from here the rest was simple math.
Minimum Wage Issue Guide: Facts at a Glance

Like I said I agree that the raise would help MW workers. I just don't think they will get it in terms of buying power.

We disagree that someone making $10k who gets a $4000 increase in wages won't have any more buying power.

Your right that in terms of percent 26 billion is not much. The problem is that the economy is not compartmentalize and will have a effect the rest of it. The economy is interconnected changing 26 billion will send waves of change through the economy. Like the person who is making a few dollars more that the MW now they will want a raise then the next guy will want a raise. Then there is the company that buys the products that where effected by price increases they will have to fire people, take a loss, raise prise or cut services. That will effect the company that uses his services ect. Firing people is the same as Cutting services. Cutting services if the same as raising prices. Now for taking a loss this is the very last thing a company will do.

There more likely to do things like not give raises to other employees if they can get away with it. They might cut health benefits, overtime, or vacation pay. Then they might fire someone who has been there and is making 12 hr and hire a new guy pay him MW. Then like the a company I worked for they hired felons, guys on parole or probation cause they could pay them crap and the state gives tax incentives to do hire them. It works for them because they hire these guys with skills but they don't get paid for them because they where criminals.

You contention about the macro effects of the MW wage increase is based on speculation. When the MW was increased in the 90s there was no appreciable effect on inflation or unemployment. If you have data that shows otherwise, I'll consider it.

Then there is the worst option but the more MW goes up the more it appeals to companies and that is taking there company out of the country.

Were this true you'd have seen a decrease in outsources in the late 90s and 00s when the MW was not increased.

This statement is rather confusing. I think I get what you are saying but I would like to clarify.

Question: How do you think wage should be determined?

Generally by market factors.

Question: What is wrong with supply and demand?

I'll repeat what I said in my last post:

Capitalism is a great economic engine and I am not in favor of socialist regimes. However, in the end, capitalism values labor (or any other input) solely on market forces, and has nothing to do with whether or not those forces provides for a substinance level of living nor does it give a hoot about human or social factors. For those on the bottom of the ladder, IMO it is valid to consider factors other than simply the value that the market would put on their unskilled labor in terms of rewarding them for taking the responsibility of working.

If buy smarts you mean ability to comprehend things that is the one thing you don't have a choice about.

The others it's your choice to get a education or learn a trade.

People make there own opportunity as well.

Please give a example of the average guy working for MW that was forced there. It can be real or hypothetical.

You are contending that most folks working as laborers or at a cash register for a MW do it because they don't like making more money?

I agree working full time is responsible. Expecting to be able to live well or raise a family of MW is not.

I agree. $14,000 a year is not living well by most standards.

MW is a hand out. Supply and demand is what you have earned more is a hand out. We don't know how supply and demand would effect minimum wage jobs.

Disagree. It is not a hand out; the person works for an earns the wage. It is modifying the lowest wages from the market would otherwise provide.

We don't live in a free market. And socialism where there! Any problems that you have with the economy are most likely related to socialism and you don't even realize it. Just a few examples of socialism or communism with the elusion of a free market

Central bank controls the production of money and the interest rates.
Business are told how much they can pay there employees.
Social Security.
Medicare
Weal fair
unemployment benefits
Progressive income tax

Too far off topic

If all are manufacturing jobs were not leaving as fast as they can get out of the country we would not need to have this conversation.

Sure we would. Doesn't matter what kind of job it is. Capitalism will seek to pay the lowest price possible for a unit of input, whether it is labor or anything else.