Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Workers

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

DanielPalos, tax payers and society should care about how unemployed people consuming public funds are spending their time.

Government’s policies should be concerned regarding time spent by unemployed or under-employed people that are consuming public funds based in part or whole due to their previous behavior or lack of education or training.

When such people are directly receiving public funds or the government is required to act as their guardian or monitor, there’s greater opportunity and the government should have the legal right to require such people as best that they’re able, to avail themselves of opportunities to better themselves rather than being a public expense in the future.

While they are in publicly funded schools, prisons, on parole, collecting unemployment insurance, or most forms of public assistance, the government has the best opportunities to enable such persons to better themselves and our society; but doing that requires additional expenditures of public funds.

Respectfully, Supposn

yes, taxpayers should care that supply side economics should be supplying us with better governance at lower cost; not trickle down.

You make it seem like we need more socialism, to simply "tell people what to do"; capitalism is supposed to be efficient. We should be solving simple poverty and capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, simply to be legal to our own laws, and for the sake of public morals; so Persons from the third world, have less reason to call us, a bunch of Great Shysters.

In any Case, capitalism requires Capital to work, not fools or horses. Why be so socialist, while claiming to be for capitalism and the voluntary and mutually beneficial, social transactions that are usually associated with it.

People still spending money regardless of capitalism's, natural rate of labor disemployment, means less volatility in many markets.

Summary: The Role of Unemployment as an Automatic Stabilizer During a Recession--https://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/eta20101615fs.htm

This focus makes it one of the most effective targeted tools for maintaining American families’ purchasing power and keeping the economy on track during an economic downturn. Unemployment creates a snowball effect where people who have lost their job reduce their spending causing businesses to lose money and others to lose their jobs. Unemployment insurance acts to reduce this effect by helping the unemployed to continue to purchase vital goods and services for their family.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

who cares, if they want to stay at the "dead end" unemployment compensation job at that minimum cost. it is less expensive than welfare, as we currently know it.

only the fantastical right wing, prefers the cost of the outright communism of denying and disparaging steak and lobster to the poor on their EBT cards.

I care since that is more than most now get from SS after working for over 35 years. Extending UI benefits to all (and forever) is not less expensive than "welfare".

 

[I'm Supposn]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Posted by TTwtt78640: "The theory seems to be that higher wages (for all?) will increase consumption demand".

hard to imagine given that those who are not worth the new higher wages will be unemployed and have less to spend.

James972, TTwtt78640 is correct; refer to 7:33 AM, 6Nov2016 post.
Respectfully, Supposn  

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

I care since that is more than most now get from SS after working for over 35 years. Extending UI benefits to all (and forever) is not less expensive than "welfare".

Yes, it is; we have already spent more than a few trillion on our endless, War on Poverty.

Social security could be ended eventually when Persons prefer unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, regardless of age.

Providing for the general welfare in a manner that solves for that socioeconomic phenomena, acts as a positive multiplier on our economy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Yes, it is; we have already spent more than a few trillion on our endless, War on Poverty.

Social security could be ended eventually when Persons prefer unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, regardless of age.

Providing for the general welfare in a manner that solves for that socioeconomic phenomena, acts as a positive multiplier on our economy.

Why does no US state elect to perform this brilliant economic scheme of yours? Perhaps paying every non-working resident about $30K/year is just a bit more expensive than their budget allows.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Why does no US state elect to perform this brilliant economic scheme of yours? Perhaps paying every non-working resident about $30K/year is just a bit more expensive than their budget allows.

just lousy capital management.

The study found that UI benefits: have a multiplier effect of 2.0: for every dollar spent on unemployment insurance, this report finds an increase in economic activity of two dollars.

is capitalism really just useless to the right, when they can be socialist enough to just, "tell People what do, with a work ethic from the Age of Iron"?

 

[I'm Supposn]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Except for the fact that your UI (at $14/hour) nets more weekly.

TTwtt7840, what do you mean by $14/Hr?

In my state unemployment insurance benefits are not based upon need, or hours worked or pay rate; they’re only based upon past incomes. No one receives benefits per hour.
In the preponderance of cases the unemployed individual’s benefits are set after their first week of unemployment as 50% of their average earnings in the past 52 weeks they actually worked.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

TTwtt7840, what do you mean by $14/Hr?

In my state unemployment insurance benefits are not based upon need, or hours worked or pay rate; they’re only based upon past incomes. No one receives benefits per hour.
In the preponderance of cases the unemployed individual’s benefits are set after their first week of unemployment as 50% of their average earnings in the past 52 weeks they actually worked.

Respectfully, Supposn

A hypothetical minimum that wage pays one dollar hour less, equivalent; to the statutory minimum wage rates, ostensibly for rational choice theory purposes. On an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, simply for the sake of respect for the law and public morals.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

TTwtt7840, what do you mean by $14/Hr?

In my state unemployment insurance benefits are not based upon need, or hours worked or pay rate; they’re only based upon past incomes. No one receives benefits per hour.
In the preponderance of cases the unemployed individual’s benefits are set after their first week of unemployment as 50% of their average earnings in the past 52 weeks they actually worked.

Respectfully, Supposn

The UI "system" that daielpalos proposed is for UI to pay $1/hr less than the MW (for 40 hours/week) to any (adult?) person not working with no restrictions on the duration of or reason for that person being unemployed. In other words, no 26 week limit, no need to have ever had job, no need to seek a new job and no variation on the UI benefit amount based on past earnings.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

The UI "system" that daielpalos proposed is for UI to pay $1/hr less than the MW (for 40 hours/week) to any (adult?) person not working with no restrictions on the duration of or reason for that person being unemployed. In other words, no 26 week limit, no need to have ever had job, no need to seek a new job and no variation on the UI benefit amount based on past earnings.

It would benefit the Youth of the Nation and help with rational choice theory, at the same time.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

It would benefit the Youth of the Nation and help with rational choice theory, at the same time.

Serving up more word salad when you could have just said that was a very concise summation of my past stated position.

 

[I'm Supposn]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

...
I wouldn’t object to non-profit organizations acting as an employee providing service to other enterprises. The non-profit organizations, (which are themselves usually partially or fully funded by charity and/or government), could subsidize the employer’s jobs that do not justify the minimum rate).
If a government does this, they are for those otherwise unemployable workers, the employment agency of last resouce for those workers they can place in jobs.

The danger arises if a government subsidizes jobs that would otherwise been created at the no less than the minimum wage rate. I suppose almost all NY City employers believe that the task of mopping floors does not justify paying $10 or more per hour while the federal minimum rate is $7.25/hour; but they must pay an excess of $10/hour if they hope to have dependable people mop their floors every business day. Such a job should not normally be subsidized; but conceivable that such a job could be subsidized from a healthcare budget as occupational therapy for the physically or mentally handicapped.

Respectfully, Supposn

Excerpted from Supposn's post of 12:48 am, 29Oct2016:
… The danger arises if a government subsidizes jobs that would otherwise been created at the no less than the minimum wage rate. I suppose almost all NY City employers believe that the task of mopping floors does not justify paying $10 or more per hour while the federal minimum rate is $7.25/hour; but they must pay an excess of $10/hour if they hope to have dependable people mop their floors every business day. Such a job should not normally be subsidized; but conceivable that such a job could be subsidized from a healthcare budget as occupational therapy for the physically or mentally handicapped.

Respectfully, Supposn

I did not mean to imply that the government should subsidize low-wage workers’ wage rates (and thus subsidize low- wage paying employers). I meant to point out that the government should not be indirectly or directly subsidizing employers simply because the employers believe that the tasks to be performed do not justify the minimum wage rate.
That would be the danger of government directly participating in such a job subsidy program.

Unlike government, revenue limitation and budgets of non-profit and charity organizations are more tight because they cannot borrow, or print dollars. They’re a preferable employment agents for finding work to employ the otherwise unemployable, (i.e. last resource for employment).

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Serving up more word salad when you could have just said that was a very concise summation of my past stated position.

Why whine about gun control regulation due to crime?

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Do you see Mark Cuban running a mom and pop store? Do you see Bill Gates running a burger joint?

I love it when leftists that prove daily they don't know a damn thing about business insist they know the way it would 'really' work.

You should try it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Why does no US state elect to perform this brilliant economic scheme of yours? Perhaps paying every non-working resident about $30K/year is just a bit more expensive than their budget allows.

Because states are users of money just like households. A program like that could only be funded by the federal government, that isn't a user of currency, rather an issuer.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Because states are users of money just like households. A program like that could only be funded by the federal government, that isn't a user of currency, rather an issuer.

That is not now the case for UI benefits. That is why states don't do it.

States provide most of the funding and pay for the actual benefits provided to workers; the federal government pays only the administrative costs. Although states are subject to a few federal requirements, they are generally able to set their own eligibility criteria and benefit levels.

Introduction to Unemployment Insurance | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

A hypothetical minimum that wage pays one dollar hour less, equivalent; to the statutory minimum wage rates, ostensibly for rational choice theory purposes. On an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, simply for the sake of respect for the law and public morals.

If the government offered a job guarantee at a set rate, there'd be no reason to have a "minimum wage" for capable citizens (that don't fall into exempt groups e.g. students, severely handicapped etc...). The government's wages would create a "soft" wage floor. If a company wants to create a product and it needs labor to do it, it could only do it by paying higher than the minimum unless the employee felt that the employer was offering non-dollar benefits that were worth something in real terms. Perhaps 16-year-olds might voluntarily take less to work as an electrician's apprentice. In this case, the 16-year-old would happily take less (than the government job at $15) because of the skills he's learning have value not easily expressed in real dollar and the fact that at 16 (with little work or life experience) someone is willing to hire him at all. So for example he might take $12 an hour and feel the skills he's learning are worth more than the $3 extra dollars he could get in a make work job the government is offering (that's not to imply that all government jobs would be low-skilled make-work jobs, but for those who are young and have no real skills, they probably would be). The employer would find value because the job the 16-year-old is doing (or perhaps the 65-year-old!) increases the businesses productivity at less than the $15 soft minimum giving his business a competitive edge.

Or perhaps I'm hired to rub suntan oil all over smoking hot bikini models. I might take less for that job!!

A system like this would encourage employers to find ways to offer tangible non-dollar benefits to employees in order to lower wage costs AND provide real value to employees.

Freidman had a point even if he was misguided in that people can change their own lot in life by negotiating their wages. Freidman's mistake was that he didn't realize that you have to set a living minimum (whatever that is), not $0.

For you and I we realize the value of setting wage floors, but personally, I think they should be soft floors. In this sense people are truly making a choice, not based on desperation or manipulation, but because there could be potential intangibles offered by an employer.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Because states are users of money just like households. A program like that could only be funded by the federal government, that isn't a user of currency, rather an issuer.

It could be handled by the several States, with the general government, picking up the slack.

Capitalism requires Capital to work, not fools or horses. It really is that simple.

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

That is not now the case for UI benefits. That is why states don't do it.


Introduction to Unemployment Insurance | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

I'm not sure how this refutes my answer.....

You said:

"Why does no US state elect to perform this brilliant economic scheme of yours? Perhaps paying every non-working resident about $30K/year is just a bit more expensive than their budget allows."

And:

"States provide most of the funding and pay for the actual benefits provided to workers; the federal government pays only the administrative costs. Although states are subject to a few federal requirements, they are generally able to set their own eligibility criteria and benefit levels."

You asked why no state pay every worker $30k. I said because they couldn't afford it because states are users of the currency.

Think about it like this. You sit down to play a game of Monopoly and the banker asked each player for $1500 in Monopoly money so the bank can give you $1500 in Monopoly money. See the problem?

In Monopoly, the banker is the Federal government. It can create currency just by taking out of the banker's tray and giving it to players. The state in this analogy is a player, the Federal government is the banker.

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

It could be handled by the several States, with the general government, picking up the slack.

Capitalism requires Capital to work, not fools or horses. It really is that simple.

Sure, but that's really the same thing. The states would need the government to fund it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

I'm not sure how this refutes my answer.....

You said:

"Why does no US state elect to perform this brilliant economic scheme of yours? Perhaps paying every non-working resident about $30K/year is just a bit more expensive than their budget allows."

And:

"States provide most of the funding and pay for the actual benefits provided to workers; the federal government pays only the administrative costs. Although states are subject to a few federal requirements, they are generally able to set their own eligibility criteria and benefit levels."

You asked why no state pay every worker $30k. I said because they couldn't afford it because states are users of the currency.

Think about it like this. You sit down to play a game of Monopoly and the banker asked each player for $1500 in Monopoly money so the bank can give you $1500 in Monopoly money. See the problem?

In Monopoly, the banker is the Federal government. It can create currency just by taking out of the banker's tray and giving it to players. The state in this analogy is a player, the Federal government is the banker.

Changing which level of government taxes the employer to fund UI benefits would make no difference. Using newly printed (or borrowed) money to pay folks not to work is a different animal entirely from how UI now works.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Sure, but that's really the same thing. The states would need the government to fund it.

States are government. States also collect corporate taxes. Simplification of some taxes makes our economy more efficient and less expensive for the private sector, via "natural" market based forces.

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

States are government. States also collect corporate taxes. Simplification of some taxes makes our economy more efficient and less expensive for the private sector, via "natural" market based forces.

States are users of the currency, the US government is the issuer. There are enormous policy implications. If you don't know what they are, I encourage you to learn them, you will find that the policies you advocate are even more doable if you understand the differences I'm talking about.

 

[Econ4every1]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

Changing which level of government taxes the employer to fund UI benefits would make no difference. Using newly printed (or borrowed) money to pay folks not to work is a different animal entirely from how UI now works.

I only support UI for those that can't work, or belong to a group (like students) that aren't working because they belong to those groups.

There is work that needs to be done and people that need or want to earn money doing work and they can't find a job in the private sector, government should offer them a job.

Right now there are more things to do than there is money to get them done.

The opposite is there is more money than there are people that want to earn it to do things.

We need to get as close to putting everyone to work that can work and creating just enough money to get that done.

Where we're going to differ and the real discussion we should be having is, what the consequences are of government money creation as opposed to private money creation.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Raising Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift Wages for 35 Million American Work

States are users of the currency, the US government is the issuer. There are enormous policy implications. If you don't know what they are, I encourage you to learn them, you will find that the policies you advocate are even more doable if you understand the differences I'm talking about.

So what. Are you claiming a State could not fund unemployment compensation through general forms of taxation of Firms?