What is a minimum wage for, if not a living wage?

[NatMorton]

No, the working class is better off there.

I think you mean the non-working class, yes?

Regardless, we have an ample safety net here for those who find themselves without work.

 

[NatMorton]

You show me an adult who, after years in the work force, is only worth the federal minimum wage to their employer and I’ll show you someone with work skill issues.

 

[holbritter]

Ok but people have to eat and have a roof over their head. That's not a negotiable item.


These are all niches that don't actually result in McDonald's being able to operate. You can't staff a multi-billion dollar industry with edge cases. You can't staff a restaurant entirely with students or online poker players.


It's not one-size-fits all. Minimum wage is not universal.

You never answered the question really. What is it for?

That's actually the way it use to be, other than managerial positions there. Times have changed though, the optics not so much.

 

[holbritter]

I mean we live in a representative democracy so the direct answer is "the people we elect" and the indirect answer is "we do, because this is a society." Not really sure why I had to explain how laws work.

What society decides is important. Like just about everything else.


It has never been one-size-fits all in any of those categories.


You need to look up the word "minimum" in a ****ing dictionary. Unless you actually mean to argue that minimum wage somehow requires full communism? America has a minimum wage right now, are we literally the USSR now? Did you think about these questions at all before writing them?


If elected representatives were required to earn minimum wage and not one penny more from any source, I bet it would be more than $7.25/hour

But to answer your question... no I don't think anyone has proposed that. And the people we elect sure as hell aren't going to vote themselves a massive pay cut.

Why so nasty?

 

[VanceMack]

You show me an adult who, after years in the work force, is only worth the federal minimum wage to their employer and I’ll show you someone with work skill issues.

We have 2 generations of people that have been they should go to college and run up massive amounts of debt in degree fields they will NEVER use...because its always good to follow your dreams. We have generations of people taught that they should be able to do what they want and be given a livable wage for it. Artists that cant sell products are in some parts of the country monetized by the government...to "promote the arts". Baristas believe that working at the coffee house should not only be a rewarding hipster life but also should be well financially compensated.

Heres the funny thing about the American left. Many of them...not all but many...are actually practicing professionals. They actually worked hard to achieve a certain career and financial status. they UNDERSTAND that it takes hard work to get where they are today. And yet...because of their commitment to their idiot leftist politics, they champion minimum wage as a career option KNOWING that their advocacy dooms those that follow their agenda into a life of lesser rewards. But then...those people vote for their commie/rat/socialist agendas...so they see that as a win.

Its ****ing tragic.

 

[Individual]

Given that it seems rather disproportionate change everything for everyone.

From your BLS citation:

Highlights​

The following are highlights from the 2020 data:​

​

Age. Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented just under one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they made up 48 percent of those paid the federal minimum wage or less. Among employed teenagers (ages 16 to 19) paid by the hour, about 5 percent earned the minimum wage or less, compared with 1 percent of workers age 25 and older. (See tables 1 and 7.)​

This would seem to indicate it is largely those first time / first few jobs for those starting their working careers.

And some others, who might have a good paying job who just want to earn a little extra income, or for some other reason.

 

[Deuce]

That's actually the way it use to be, other than managerial positions there. Times have changed though, the optics not so much.

It was never that way. That was just an impression people had.

 

[bave]

Median is not average. 50% are worse off than the median. (by definition)

Wow. That is some amazing insight.

The average hourly wage in the US, last month, was $30.73.

Most people use median because median is *worse* than average, so I chose to give you the more favorable figure for your argument, which you refuted for the least favorable. Good game.

Also... I choose not to only worry about the average. All people matter, right?

By the way, below $15/hour is more like a quarter of the population.

There will always be people below average. Your initial point was about minimum wage, now it is at $15/hr? If you aren't earning $15/hr in a full time, adult job, then you have only yourself to blame. That basically means you can't pass a criminal back ground and drug test while showing up reliably to a job.

 

[Deuce]

Wow. That is some amazing insight.

The average hourly wage in the US, last month, was $30.73.

Most people use median because median is *worse* than average, so I chose to give you the more favorable figure for your argument, which you refuted for the least favorable. Good game.



There will always be people below average. Your initial point was about minimum wage, now it is at $15/hr? If you aren't earning $15/hr in a full time, adult job, then you have only yourself to blame. That basically means you can't pass a criminal back ground and drug test while showing up reliably to a job.

If we raise the minimum wage to $15/hour... come on... you can make the connection...

I'm glad you proved me right about your thoughts on minimum wage, though. Right wingers really dont have an answer to the primary question of this thread, they all dance around it, but you didn't. You just look down on low wage earners. You think they are beneath you and that's the reason you don't want a minimum wage.

 

[Deuce]

I think you mean the non-working class, yes?

No, the working class is better off in nations with a strong social safety net. I think you've missed the issue here.

Regardless, we have an ample safety net here for those who find themselves without work.

We really don't.

 

[bave]

If we raise the minimum wage to $15/hour... come on... you can make the connection...

If we raise the minimum wage to $15/hr, what? I actually employ people, do you? I deal almost exclusively with other business owners, do you? I know what people are getting paid all over the place. I know of no employer right now who is starting anyone at less than $14/hr for unskilled labor. All they have to do is show up reliably, try, and pass a drug/criminal background check.

Your are tilting at a problem that isn't there. The people who aren't making that money are either kids in part time work, tipped professions, or people who are borderline unemployable.

 

[bave]

No, the working class is better off in nations with a strong social safety net. I think you've missed the issue here.

We really don't.

Meh, statistics would debate that. Median household income in France is ~half of what it is in the US. Their disposable income is even worse.

 

[Deuce]

If we raise the minimum wage to $15/hr, what? I actually employ people, do you? I deal almost exclusively with other business owners, do you? I know what people are getting paid all over the place. I know of no employer right now who is starting anyone at less than $14/hr for unskilled labor. All they have to do is show up reliably, try, and pass a drug/criminal background check.

Then you really don't have anything to worry about.


But you've proven my point about your real answer to the primary question. You just look down on workers.

 

[Deuce]

Meh, statistics would debate that. Median household income in France is ~half of what it is in the US. Their disposable income is even worse.

Context is important. He's talking about insurrection.

 

[Atreus21]

So, I often hear on these forums that a minimum wage was "never meant to be" a "living wage." (living wage always in scare quotes) It's not "supposed to be" able to support yourself.

But I never really hear an answer to... what the **** is it for?

If not a living wage, why do we have it at all?

Historically, to keep unskilled workers from threatening unions.

It's primary purpose is unemployment.

 

[bave]

Then you really don't have anything to worry about.

But you've proven my point about your real answer to the primary question. You just look down on workers.

Just because *I* don't have something to worry about with my employees isn't the point. I think what you are suggesting is ignorant to the facts and detrimental to the very people you think you are helping. It is the typical ignorant idea that the government can wave a wand and make a quick solution to a foundational problem. This is the same thing countries like France and Belgium have done with disastrous results for the very people they tried to help.

Exactly how do you conclude that I look down on workers? Because I said, and stand by, the fact that if you are an adult making $15/hr or less you did it to yourself? Great, I will stand by that one all day and wait for you to show me some data to the opposite.

Context is important. He's talking about insurrection.

No, it looks like he is talking about where workers are better off with more government intervention or less. That was literally the context of his comment which you responded to.

 

[OrphanSlug]

So, I often hear on these forums that a minimum wage was "never meant to be" a "living wage." (living wage always in scare quotes) It's not "supposed to be" able to support yourself.

But I never really hear an answer to... what the **** is it for?

If not a living wage, why do we have it at all?

A few things in no particular order...

No matter if you associate minimum wage with living wage or not, the intention was always about economic participation and dealing with vulture capitalism driven poverty conditions for too many. Those two terms became divorced by political argument, not economic argument.

If Republicans were not so insane over this topic they would realize the more the bottom income quintile has to spend the more business opportunity they have to capitalize on the generally accepted economic principle that the lowest income quintile tends to spend everything they make.

However, if Democrats were not so insane over taxing wealth away we might see more room for mixed model economics that tends to avoid the pitfalls of vulture capitalism where very few have a good life and the pitfalls of government dominated socialism where even less have a good life.

 

[bave]

Historically, to keep unskilled workers from threatening unions.

It's primary purpose is unemployment.

Unskilled and even low skilled workers have largely lost the ability to unionize courtesy of global labor markets and trade agreements combined with automation and computerization options.

 

[bave]

If Republicans were not so insane over this topic they would realize the more the bottom income quintile has to spend the more business opportunity they have to capitalize on the generally accepted economic principle that the lowest income quintile tends to spend everything they make.

This statement is myopic. Giving a poor person $100 because they will spend all $100 does not in turn create $100 of cost benefit. You might recoup a portion of that, but it will be the vast minority particularly when the bulk of that spending is on commoditized products and foreign produced goods.

 

[OrphanSlug]

This statement is myopic. Giving a poor person $100 because they will spend all $100 does not in turn create $100 of cost benefit. You might recoup a portion of that, but it will be the vast minority particularly when the bulk of that spending is on commoditized products and foreign produced goods.

I am not talking about giving them $100, I am talking about economic participation. The less healthy that is the more likely you add to the wealth divide, but more importantly you create more chance of economic turbulence because not enough participate well enough to deal with the economic cycle.

The more that participate well the more business opportunity there is.

 

[Deuce]

Unskilled and even low skilled workers have largely lost the ability to unionize courtesy of global labor markets and trade agreements combined with automation and computerization options.

Which begs the question, what is our solution to this? The general trend will be towards more automation and computerization, and the global market isn't going anywhere.

 

[PirateMk1]

So, I often hear on these forums that a minimum wage was "never meant to be" a "living wage." (living wage always in scare quotes) It's not "supposed to be" able to support yourself.

But I never really hear an answer to... what the **** is it for?

If not a living wage, why do we have it at all?

Its a floor nothing more. Thats it.

 

[Deuce]

This statement is myopic. Giving a poor person $100 because they will spend all $100 does not in turn create $100 of cost benefit. You might recoup a portion of that, but it will be the vast minority particularly when the bulk of that spending is on commoditized products and foreign produced goods.

It can actually create more than $100 of benefit.

 

[Geoist]

Too many jobs are not intended to be carreer type jobs. Macdonalds, unless management and other fast food joints are great for part time, students in college or high school, second jobs, and they don't require lots of skill of training. That's what you pay for skill, previous training and education. Anybody can slide open a window and hand you a bag of burgers, (have the time they get the order wrong).

This is what minimum wage would be if it kept up with our nation's productivity:

CORRECTION: This is What Minimum Wage Would Be If It Kept Pace with Productivity

cepr.net

Like it or not, there will always be adults working minimum wage jobs. Our leaders should ensure they are paid properly, especially since they have no union to fight for them.

 

[PirateMk1]

Too many jobs are not intended to be carreer type jobs. Macdonalds, unless management and other fast food joints are great for part time, students in college or high school, second jobs, and they don't require lots of skill of training. That's what you pay for skill, previous training and education. Anybody can slide open a window and hand you a bag of burgers, (have the time they get the order wrong).

You can make a career out of practically any job to include ditch digging. All that is required is the ability to be consistent and learn the business and move up and eventually out. You can make money digging ditches believe it or not. Start by being labor move into foreman and eventually contractor. 123. Hell this is the model for any trade you can think of. McDonalds is a valid career choice and one can make a good living eventually simply by learning the business and moving up in the company to eventually run the restaurants to own franchises.