• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why a federal minimum wage law?

I'm Supposn

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,819
Reaction score
281
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why a federal minimum wage law?

There are libertarians and/or credible economists that continue arguing the justification of a minimum wage rate. Currently, all of the world's industrial nations have government laws similar to our federal minimum wage rate, or some quasi-government organization that enforce something to accomplish our rate's purpose.

If the federal minimum wage rate statutes were eliminated, What are likely to be USA states net detrimental deliberate or unintentional harm to other states' economies? Particularly the consequences between neighboring states? The Constitutional Convention of 1787 addressed this issue and included the commerce clause within our constitution.

Currently, each state's government may, and many do expand upon the coverage and/or the amount of the federal minimum wage rate.

I'm a proponent of gradually increasing of the federal minimum wage rate to 125% of its Feb-1968 purchasing power, and then continuing to retain that purchasing power; that's of a little greater targeted purchasing power than that of H.R. 582, but I'm pleased with that last passed House resolution. It will be to Democrats' advantages in 2020.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
No need to be coy. The 1968 MW had the highest purchasing power in history. It would be $11.86 today and 125% of that would be $14.60

Why not just say you support $15.00 MW?

I support going to $9.50 immediately and then stepping up from there 75 cents every 3 years.


BTW the reason we have MW IMHO is to make it easier to debase the dollar, basically letting inflation liquidate the opportunity cost of debt.
 
Abolish the minimum wage and welfare and get this country back to work.
 
No need to be coy. The 1968 MW had the highest purchasing power in history. It would be $11.86 today and 125% of that would be $14.60
Why not just say you support $15.00 MW?

I support going to $9.50 immediately and then stepping up from there 75 cents every 3 years.
BTW the reason we have MW IMHO is to make it easier to debase the dollar, basically letting inflation liquidate the opportunity cost of debt.
Drawdown, The federal minimum wage rate is much less a cause and much more a victim of the U.S. Dollar's lost purchasing power. It is not among the primary causes of U.S. Currency inflation.

Although HR 528 is a good bill, I'm in favor of achieving 125% of the Minimum rate's February-1968 purchasing value rather than $15 per hour.
After Hr 258 could be passed, enacted, and achieve its $15/Hr., $15 will be worth less than 125% of the minimum rate's February-1968 purchasing value.

Minimum wage rate's purpose is to reduce the incidences and extents of poverty among the working-poor. Respectfully, Supposn
 
Abolish the minimum wage and welfare and get this country back to work.
Sheepdog, Abolishing both the definite minimum wage rate and our public assistance programs would cause the indefinite market-determined minimum wage rate to race down to extremely poor purchasing power and great national poverty would prevail. That would not be good for business.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Sheepdog, Abolishing both the definite minimum wage rate and our public assistance programs would cause the indefinite market-determined minimum wage rate to race down to extremely poor purchasing power and great national poverty would prevail. That would not be good for business.

Respectfully, Supposn

As opposed to massive inflation and extremely poor purchasing power for an increasing amount of people?
 
Abolish the federal minimum wage entirely. The effect would be more jobs and more of an ability to get onto the wage ladder, which one can then begin to climb (IOW, more ladders and easier to climb ladders). Yes, the lowest wages would be extremely low, but you shouldn’t be attempting to support a family of four on the wages from the first job you’ve ever had. Get some work experience when you’re in high school of college, jumping into one of the many ladders lying around, build your resume, climb that easier-to-climb ladder to a job and wage that one can responsibly use to support a family, and start a family. And for all those irresponsible folks out there or people without good parents/family to support them financially while they’re students, there’s no shortage of charitable fellow community members and congregation members and countrymen to help you out in your time of need. We need to, as a country, begin relying less on the federal government to solve our problems and more on the men and women to our left and right. And states and municipalities can experiment with all sorts of assistance programs if they feel its necessary to help fill in the gaps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Make the minimum wage whatever the living wage is for the area of worker residence and update (COL) annually. Federally subsidize to begin with on a sliding scale of some number of years to make up the difference between the given state’s min wage and living wage. We can take back the tax breaks we gave to the rich and large corps and restart a more progressive approach to our tax structure as was originally designed and begin to makeup for the regressive process we’ve been on since the late 1950’s. We went to unnecessary war in the ME and found trillions to pay for it that we said we didn’t have before for infrastructure, etc.

Living Wage Calculator
- Living Wage Calculation for Montgomery, AL
 
Abolish the federal minimum wage entirely. The effect would be more jobs and more of an ability to get onto the wage ladder, which one can then begin to climb (IOW, more ladders and easier to climb ladders). Yes, the lowest wages would be extremely low, but you shouldn’t be attempting to support a family of four on the wages from the first job you’ve ever had. Get some work experience when you’re in high school of college, jumping into one of the many ladders lying around, build your resume, climb that easier-to-climb ladder to a job and wage that one can responsibly use to support a family, and start a family. And for all those irresponsible folks out there or people without good parents/family to support them financially while they’re students, there’s no shortage of charitable fellow community members and congregation members and countrymen to help you out in your time of need. We need to, as a country, begin relying less on the federal government to solve our problems and more on the men and women to our left and right. And states and municipalities can experiment with all sorts of assistance programs if they feel its necessary to help fill in the gaps.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sheepdog and ForTheCause,
How inflationary is the federal minimum wage rate?

Although labor contributes a substantial portion, labor is only a portion of aggregate products' costs; (this is true even among service products). The federal minimum wage rate effects low-wage labor and has extremely little proportional effect upon higher wage rates, it is not among the primary cause for U.S. dollar's losses of purchasing power.
The federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power's much less a cause and much more a victim of U.S. Dollar's inflation.

Federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power's purpose is to reduce incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor. ...
Abolishing both the definite minimum wage rate and our public assistance programs would cause the indefinite market-determined minimum wage rate to race down to extremely poor purchasing power and great national poverty would prevail. That would not be good for business.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Make the minimum wage whatever the living wage is for the area of worker residence and update (COL) annually. Federally subsidize to begin with on a sliding scale of some number of years to make up the difference between the given state’s min wage and living wage. We can take back the tax breaks we gave to the rich and large corps and restart a more progressive approach to our tax structure as was originally designed and begin to makeup for the regressive process we’ve been on since the late 1950’s. We went to unnecessary war in the ME and found trillions to pay for it that we said we didn’t have before for infrastructure, etc.
Living Wage Calculator - Living Wage Calculation for Montgomery, AL
Bluesmoke, a living wage bill could evolve and be passed after we achieve sufficient and sustainable purchasing power for our minimum wage rate. Lacking that, a living wage bill's passage is less feasible.
Respectfully, Supposn
... Although HR 528 is a good bill, I'm in favor of achieving 125% of the Minimum rate's February-1968 purchasing value rather than $15 per hour.
After Hr 258 could be passed, enacted, and achieve its $15/Hr., $15 will be worth less than 125% of the minimum rate's February-1968 purchasing value. ...
 
Sheepdog and ForTheCause,Abolishing both the definite minimum wage rate and our public assistance programs would cause the indefinite market-determined minimum wage rate to race down to extremely poor purchasing power and great national poverty would prevail. That would not be good for business.

Respectfully, Supposn

Yeah, I read that when you wrote it before. That’s pretty unrealistic and pessimistic, but it doesn’t address my argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yeah, I read that when you wrote it before. That’s pretty unrealistic and pessimistic, but it doesn’t address my argument. ...
FortheCause, any extent of improving our nations educational and training systems will be reflected by no less improvement of our economic and social well-being.
But improving our educational and training systems or increasing the purchasing power of the minimum wage rate are not mutually dependent. We can strive to apply one, or the other, or both remedies. Increasing the minimum wage rate is not directly or effectively detrimental to government budgets. There's good reason to enact both of these remedies.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Yeah, I read that when you wrote it before. That’s pretty unrealistic and pessimistic, but it doesn’t address my argument. ...
FortheCause, you have advocated the elimination of the minimum wage rate statutes. But I suppose you're aware that many others that agree with you, also (as Sheepdog has) advocated elimination of our public assistance programs. I specifically addressed advocates of such draconian proposals.

If public assistance is eliminated, your suggestion of “states and municipalities can experiment with all sorts of assistance programs if they feel it's necessary to help fill in the gaps” is somewhat off the mark. We don't generally think of it in that manner, but public libraries and schools are actually a form of public assistance.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Yeah, I read that when you wrote it before. That’s pretty unrealistic and pessimistic, but it doesn’t address my argument. ...
FortheCause, I suppose that you have considered tasks that previously didn't justify the minimum rate, as a time of newly created jobs is economically desirable. But the majority of those new jobs' wages are at sub-minimum purchasing powers and those job opportunities attract additional eager job applicants that previously couldn't justify the minimum rate, into our labor pools. Our rates of unemployment would actually increase.

We'd be generally reducing wages' purchasing powers, but particularly lower wages (which include the working poor). If additionally there's no public assistance, (i.e. unemployment insurance) back-up, we would much further reduce wages purchasing powers due to the need to quickly accept even the most extremely poorest wage rates.

I suppose you still maintain my predictions are unrealistic and unreasonably pessimistic?
Respectfully, Supposn
 
FortheCause, any extent of improving our nations educational and training systems will be reflected by no less improvement of our economic and social well-being.
But improving our educational and training systems or increasing the purchasing power of the minimum wage rate are not mutually dependent. We can strive to apply one, or the other, or both remedies. Increasing the minimum wage rate is not directly or effectively detrimental to government budgets. There's good reason to enact both of these remedies.

Respectfully, Supposn

I’m not interested in artificially trying to elevate the lowest wages bc that increases unemployment and makes it harder for small businesses to stay in business and offer all of the jobs their company offers, from the lowest paying ones to the highest. Your point about unemployment actually going up when you DECREASE minimum wage - because of all the people who were out of the workforce now reentering it to try to snag one of the new jobs - is a little ridiculous sounding to be honest. The point is, more people would have jobs, regardless of the unemployment numbers on paper.
I’m also not interested in artificially trying to improve education since that just leads to education of lower quality and higher price. Charter schools have shown that the free market is much better at improving education than the govt.
Likewise, I don’t care at all about what might or might not be detrimental to govt budgets. The federal govt has way too big of a budget. They should be engaged in a small fraction of what they are currently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FortheCause, you have advocated the elimination of the minimum wage rate statutes. But I suppose you're aware that many others that agree with you, also (as Sheepdog has) advocated elimination of our public assistance programs. I specifically addressed advocates of such draconian proposals.

If public assistance is eliminated, your suggestion of “states and municipalities can experiment with all sorts of assistance programs if they feel it's necessary to help fill in the gaps” is somewhat off the mark. We don't generally think of it in that manner, but public libraries and schools are actually a form of public assistance.

Respectfully, Supposn

There’s a big difference between state and local public assistance and federal public assistance. The first is constitutional. The second is not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Abolish the federal minimum wage entirely. The effect would be more jobs and more of an ability to get onto the wage ladder, which one can then begin to climb (IOW, more ladders and easier to climb ladders). Yes, the lowest wages would be extremely low, but you shouldn’t be attempting to support a family of four on the wages from the first job you’ve ever had. Get some work experience when you’re in high school of college, jumping into one of the many ladders lying around, build your resume, climb that easier-to-climb ladder to a job and wage that one can responsibly use to support a family, and start a family. And for all those irresponsible folks out there or people without good parents/family to support them financially while they’re students, there’s no shortage of charitable fellow community members and congregation members and countrymen to help you out in your time of need. We need to, as a country, begin relying less on the federal government to solve our problems and more on the men and women to our left and right. And states and municipalities can experiment with all sorts of assistance programs if they feel its necessary to help fill in the gaps. ...
FortheCause,at times of immediate need and lack of finances and other resources, your Pollyanna pep talk would be of no help.

Its particularly ironic that you advocate eliminating the minimum wage rate.
The minimum wage rate did not cause or exacerbate the problems of those you would address, but eliminating it would certainly exacerbate those problems. You accuse me of being unrealistic?

Respectfully, Supposn
 
FortheCause,at times of immediate need and lack of finances and other resources, your Pollyanna pep talk would be of no help.

Its particularly ironic that you advocate eliminating the minimum wage rate.
The minimum wage rate did not cause or exacerbate the problems of those you would address, but eliminating it would certainly exacerbate those problems. You accuse me of being unrealistic?

Respectfully, Supposn

I’m not sure all the people who would have the opportunity to climb one of the higher number of and easier to climb wage ladders would agree with you. You seem to be very concerned about the guy who is trying to support a family on entry level work rather than making it easier for people to engage in entry level work before they’re old enough to have a family and then climb up a couple steps before starting one. If people want to be irresponsible with their family planning or lack thereof then their fellow man and possibly their state can do plenty to help them. To the bleeding heart practical solutions always seem draconian.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There’s a big difference between state and local public assistance and federal public assistance. The first is constitutional. The second is not. ...
FortheCause, that's nonsense.
Minimum wage rate is not public assistance and is not given by the government and it's generally hard-earned.
Its been legally challenged over an excess of a half-century, and it has prevailed as constitutional. Respectfully, Supposn
 
No need to be coy. The 1968 MW had the highest purchasing power in history. It would be $11.86 today and 125% of that would be $14.60

Why not just say you support $15.00 MW?

I support going to $9.50 immediately and then stepping up from there 75 cents every 3 years.


BTW the reason we have MW IMHO is to make it easier to debase the dollar, basically letting inflation liquidate the opportunity cost of debt.

I think other economic changes should be made rather than minimum wage hikes, but I don't think I will ever have my way. Therefore I suggest this. No immediate high increase. Instead, we set a target wage by today's standards. If we use $15/hr with the current federal wage of $7.25/hr, than we chose a time to get there. If we choose for example five years, we divide the difference into 20 quarters. We not only increase by around 39 cents a quarter, but this would be indexed to inflation as well. After five years, the cost of living might go up 25% or so. If it is 25% higher, then after five years we achieve a wage of $18,75/hr rather than $15.

I know people are in a rush, but that's why liberals are do destructive to this nation. The economy needs small changes to keep from upsetting things in negative ways.
 
Abolish the minimum wage and welfare and get this country back to work.

It would help to stop buying "made in China" products and support the USA manufacturing instead. We need tariffs with countries we have trade imbalances with if we are going to buy from them. We need to manufacture as many products as we buy. Put people back to work that way.

Also, stop illegal immigration! Don't allow them to work. Stop letting them steal jobs from our own citizens.

Supply and demand works. That's why wages are so low. We have an excess of labor vs. jobs available. We need more jobs available, and get rid of people who shouldn't be working our jobs.
 
I think other economic changes should be made rather than minimum wage hikes, but I don't think I will ever have my way. Therefore I suggest this. No immediate high increase. Instead, we set a target wage by today's standards. If we use $15/hr with the current federal wage of $7.25/hr, than we chose a time to get there. If we choose for example five years, we divide the difference into 20 quarters. We not only increase by around 39 cents a quarter, but this would be indexed to inflation as well. After five years, the cost of living might go up 25% or so. If it is 25% higher, then after five years we achieve a wage of $18,75/hr rather than $15.

I know people are in a rush, but that's why liberals are do destructive to this nation. The economy needs small changes to keep from upsetting things in negative ways.
Lord of Planar, I suppose it's bursting your bubble, but your described suggestion has been passed by the Democratic house as HR 258. It's effectively what you've described. Respectfully Supposn
H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage. In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power. ...
 
FortheCause, that's nonsense.
Minimum wage rate is not public assistance and is not given by the government and it's generally hard-earned.
Its been legally challenged over an excess of a half-century, and it has prevailed as constitutional. Respectfully, Supposn

I wasn’t talking about minimum wage rates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom