Why a federal minimum wage law?

[bluesmoke]

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

It wouldn't be a living wage if it didn't have sufficient and sustainable purchasing power.

 

[Drawdown]

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.

Getting a 39 cent pay raise every quarter for just having a body temperature will be very popular with some people, but you would be just as well off to go ahead and make it $15 and kill their job to begin with instead of giving the employer five years to replace them with a machine or an app.

 

[I'm Supposn]

Public assistance ...

FortheCause, What federal public assistance were you referring to? Respectfully, Supposn

 

[I'm Supposn]

Getting a 39 cent pay raise every quarter for just having a body temperature will be very popular with some people, but you would be just as well off to go ahead and make it $15 and kill their job to begin with instead of giving the employer five years to replace them with a machine or an app.

Drawdown, automation works fine for the USA. Respectfully, Supposn

Automation:

Automation reduces per unit costs and/or improves quality and/or consistency of those products’ quality. It has not and will not be to USA’s net economic detriment.

Automation tools, assembly lines, and methods require labor to design, create, maintain, and repair them even if they may not require many people to operate them.
Automated production, no less than the production of any other services or goods products, requires production supporting labor and enterprises.

Automation has always been, and I expect it will continue to be to our nation's best interest. To the extent that labor's costs are less, introduction of automation is delayed. This is typical of our world's poorest economies.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[I'm Supposn]

It wouldn't be a living wage if it didn't have sufficient and sustainable purchasing power.

Bluesmoke, so you do understand why we first need a minimum hourly wage rate of sufficient and sustainable purchasing power? Respectfully, Supposn

 

[forthecause]

FortheCause, What federal public assistance were you referring to? Respectfully, Supposn

All of it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[I'm Supposn]

Originally Posted by I'm Supposn:
FortheCause, What federal public assistance were you referring to? Respectfully, Supposn

All of it ...

FortheCause, you can't name any of them? what are the two or three that you're most opposed to? Respectfully, Supposn

 

[I'm Supposn]

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. ...

Lord of Planar, annual trade deficits indicate their nation used and or consumed more products than they produced.
I'm among the proponents of the improved trade policy described in Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
The unilateral IC policy would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate our nations chronic annual trade deficits of goods. Trade deficits are particularly detrimental to their nation's numbers of jobs and their aggregate amounts of payrolls.

Respectfully, Supposn
Refer to Import certificates - Wikipedia

 

[Bullseye]

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.

But, qis it fair assumption that those earning MW in 1968 have the same quality of live as those earning $15 today? I'd argue simply trying to apply a CPI correction is misguided. I posted an analysis a few weeks ago that suggested comparing the amount of time a person has to work to earn enough to buy certain items might be more enlightening. The author found that for most common items, e.g. shoes, clothing, household, appliances, food, entertainment, today's worker puts in far less time. And of course in 1968 access to the internet and the devices to gain access were few. Cell phones, tv with hundreds of channels, inexpensive cars with GPS navigation, advanced safety and performance features were decades in the future back then, but are common place today.

 

[forthecause]

Originally Posted by I'm Supposn:
FortheCause, What federal public assistance were you referring to? Respectfully, Supposn
FortheCause, you can't name any of them? what are the two or three that you're most opposed to? Respectfully, Supposn

Medicare, social security, all federal welfare


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[I'm Supposn]

But, qis it fair assumption that those earning MW in 1968 have the same quality of life as those earning $15 today? I'd argue simply trying to apply a CPI correction is misguided. I posted an analysis a few weeks ago that suggested comparing the amount of time a person has to work to earn enough to buy certain items might be more enlightening. The author found that for most common items, e.g. shoes, clothing, household, appliances, food, entertainment, today's worker puts in far less time. And of course in 1968 access to the internet and the devices to gain access were few. Cell phones, tv with hundreds of channels, inexpensive cars with GPS navigation, advanced safety and performance features were decades in the future back then, but are common place today.

Bullseye, what wage rate would you use to compare the amount of time a person has to work in order to earn to buy what items?

Refer to Access Denied regarding the Consumer Price Index.

in February-1968, the federal minimum wage rate was increased to $1.60 per hour. It then reached its historically peak CPI value.

When the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics online inflation calculator is fed $1.60 for February-1968,
it returns a value of $11.98 for June-2019 using their Consumer Price Index, CPI-U.
Refer to CPI Inflation Calculator

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[bluesmoke]

Bluesmoke, so you do understand why we first need a minimum hourly wage rate of sufficient and sustainable purchasing power? Respectfully, Supposn

How do you determine what is a "minimum hourly wage rate of sufficient and sustainable purchasing power"? What would those numbers be?

 

[SDET]

State minimum wages make much more sense. Having the same pay rates in Mississippi and NYC is just silly.

 

[I'm Supposn]

How do you determine what is a "minimum hourly wage rate of sufficient and sustainable purchasing power"? What would those numbers be?

Bluesmoke, that question's answer would be subjective, (i.e. a matter of opinions), rather than a matter of objective facts.

No increase of the federal minimum wage rate has ever been net detrimental to our nation's economy. I'm unaware of any nation's economy having been harmed because their wage rates were excessive. I'm among those that consider a very much greater minimum rate would have been of much greater economic benefit to us in 1968; (February-1968 the minimum reached its historical peak thus far).

But we cannot achieve what's politically unfeasible. I advocate a gradually increasing the minimum by 12.5% annually until we achieve 125% of the minimum's February-1969 CPI value, Thereafter we should annually adjust to retain that value. After a some years of experience, I expect the U.S, Congress seeking the best advice, will determine our further policy in this matter.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[noonereal]

Abolish the minimum wage and welfare and get this country back to work.

This is screwed up on so many levels.

I have to hand it to you, so few words and such a mess.

 

[Bullseye]

Bullseye, what wage rate would you use to compare the amount of time a person has to work in order to earn to buy what items?

Refer to Access Denied regarding the Consumer Price Index.

in February-1968, the federal minimum wage rate was increased to $1.60 per hour. It then reached its historically peak CPI value.

When the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics online inflation calculator is fed $1.60 for February-1968,
it returns a value of $11.98 for June-2019 using their Consumer Price Index, CPI-U.
Refer to CPI Inflation Calculator

Respectfully, Supposn

That was the point. The CPI doesn't really reflect the actual cost an ordinary family spends. It's "basket of goods" isn't a realistic measure of what people actually buy or spend on. For instance mortgage cost; the home a family would be buying in 1968 wouldn't be nearly comparable to what they're paying for in 2019. Same for appliances, food, TVs, etc.

 

[Drawdown]

But, qis it fair assumption that those earning MW in 1968 have the same quality of live as those earning $15 today? I'd argue simply trying to apply a CPI correction is misguided. I posted an analysis a few weeks ago that suggested comparing the amount of time a person has to work to earn enough to buy certain items might be more enlightening. The author found that for most common items, e.g. shoes, clothing, household, appliances, food, entertainment, today's worker puts in far less time. And of course in 1968 access to the internet and the devices to gain access were few. Cell phones, tv with hundreds of channels, inexpensive cars with GPS navigation, advanced safety and performance features were decades in the future back then, but are common place today.

I am not the one arguing for a $15 MW. I do believe the Minimum Wage should be increased some primarily for non-tangibles like utilities, making telecommunications more affordable, the cost of going to the dentist, insurance, etc. I am a proponent of value added taxes or even a national sales tax to put downward pressure on consumption of discretionary tangibles, and would be open to them occurring simultaneously to curb increased pollution that otherwise would occur with increased consumption of goods brought on by the MW increase. Smart metering, nationwide fiber, and all the other bells and whistles technology brings will drive up prices for consumers for services even if the prices for good is more muted.

 

[I'm Supposn]

State minimum wages make much more sense. Having the same pay rates in Mississippi and NYC is just silly.

SDET, the federal minimum wage rate is a minimum rate. States may, and many have enacted a higher minimum within their own jurisdictions.

Delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention determined a federal law was necessary for reducing the economic harm that a U.S. State may deliberately or inadvertently inflict upon any other State, particularly an adjoining state.

The constitution's commerce clause was enabled by delegates from wealthier states agreeing to sacrifice their own states' advantages. Without such compromises, the constitution would not have been ratified and our nation might not have survived to this day. That compromise is no less needed now, as it was in 1787.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[I'm Supposn]

Bullseye[/B];1070460161]That was the point. The CPI doesn't really reflect the actual cost an ordinary family spends. It's "basket of goods" isn't a realistic measure of what people actually buy or spend on. For instance mortgage cost; the home a family would be buying in 1968 wouldn't be nearly comparable to what they're paying for in 2019. Same for appliances, food, TVs, etc.

Bullseye, apparently you disrearded the link I provided. You speculated as to how "the basket's" created and maintained. Your speculations were incorrect. Take the time to read the provided link.
Respectfully, Supposn

Bullseye, what wage rate would you use to compare the amount of time a person has to work in order to earn to buy what items?

Refer to Access Denied regarding the Consumer Price Index. ...

 

[Lord of Planar]

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

I didn't say it wasn't suggested. Now i don't know about shooting foir 125% of 1968 purchasing power. Wouldn't 100% be good enough?

Besides, my main point was no sudden large increases at a time, and making them quarterly rather than annual. Makes the adjustments for business and economy easier.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Getting a 39 cent pay raise every quarter for just having a body temperature will be very popular with some people, but you would be just as well off to go ahead and make it $15 and kill their job to begin with instead of giving the employer five years to replace them with a machine or an app.

A slow move can then be monitored for if it will have negative effects.

Again, I am not advocating the wage increase. I just believe it will happen no matter what I want. I'm just suggesting a way of trying to minimizing its negative impacts.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Lord of Planar, annual trade deficits indicate their nation used and or consumed more products than they produced.
I'm among the proponents of the improved trade policy described in Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
The unilateral IC policy would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate our nations chronic annual trade deficits of goods. Trade deficits are particularly detrimental to their nation's numbers of jobs and their aggregate amounts of payrolls.

Respectfully, Supposn
Refer to Import certificates - Wikipedia

If that will make our trade balance close to zero, then it may have merit. I didn't mean to sound like I want trade eliminated. Trade is good. We just have too large of an imbalance with other countries.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I am not the one arguing for a $15 MW. I do believe the Minimum Wage should be increased some primarily for non-tangibles like utilities, making telecommunications more affordable, the cost of going to the dentist, insurance, etc. I am a proponent of value added taxes or even a national sales tax to put downward pressure on consumption of discretionary tangibles, and would be open to them occurring simultaneously to curb increased pollution that otherwise would occur with increased consumption of goods brought on by the MW increase. Smart metering, nationwide fiber, and all the other bells and whistles technology brings will drive up prices for consumers for services even if the prices for good is more muted.

I would use utilities, housing, and food. The basic necessities.

 

[I'm Supposn]

Drawdown & Lord of Planar, the federal minimum wage rate may be applied to the least desirable employee or applicant for the least challenging task or job, without regard to what industry, product, they're involved with.

I am not the one arguing for a $15 MW. I do believe the Minimum Wage should be increased some primarily for non-tangibles like utilities, making telecommunications more affordable, the cost of going to the dentist, insurance, etc. ...

I would use utilities, housing, and food. The basic necessities.

Drawdowns advocating different minimum wage rates for different industries? The janitor in a university is going to covered at a differing minimum rate than the guy that cleans the toilet in a bar or a bus terminal? I don't understand why that should be so?

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[I'm Supposn]

... I am a proponent of value-added taxes or even a national sales tax to put downward pressure on consumption of discretionary tangibles and would be open to them occurring simultaneously to curb increased pollution that otherwise would occur with increased consumption of goods brought on by the MW increase. Smart metering, nationwide fiber, and all the other bells and whistles technology brings will drive up prices for consumers for services even if the prices for good is more muted.

Drawdown, why or how does a minimum wage rate increase cause increased pollution that otherwise would occur with increased consumption of goods?
How are higher prices for smarter gadgets related to the minimum wage rate? Respectfully, Supposn