Think the US federal minimum wage will go up?

[Cirris]

New York is going up to $15 an hour I believe. Other states are rising too.

Hope the federal government gets with the program.

New York City will be at 15$ by 2020. The rest of the state will only be up to 12.50$

They're staggering the wage increases by .70 per year to avoid wage shock on companies.

But even still the crappy bottom feeder companies like the one i work for is having issues as even their foreman, seconds, long timers. Their wages were only a dollar or two above the original minimum wage of a few years ago. which is causing wage compression and angst within the company.

Companies don't want to pay. There's even talk of moving the entire company down to Tennessee where they have a smaller facility they bought a few years back.

The only thing holding them back is that they're having issues running just that little outfit that doesn't even do a fifth of what the plant up in NY does.

 

[cincymma79]

Translation: "I once thought anarcho-capitalism was the answer. But now I realize it's white ethno-nationalism."

Anything I don’t agree with is racist too

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'm a potato and I deserve $10 an hour for doing potato things. Anything a potato can do, I can do not better.

$10/hr for a human, on the other hand, is a huge bargain.

It's a situation where anyone can see the market has some problems. Huge information asymmetry between buyers and sellers of low-skilled labor, huge power imbalance, etc. We know that in the absence of any regulations, low-skilled workers will be systematically underpaid relative to what they'd get in an ideal market.

If someone wants to get rid of MW laws in a reasonable way, they should also come up with ways to improve the problems with the low-skill-labor market (like protecting unionization).

 

[nostradumbass]

What exactly is your point? There is a statistically significant group who work multiple minimum wage jobs just to have some half-semblance of a normal life. And I'm talking the usual shit: have one or two kids, have food for said kids, set money aside for retirement.


And? So they fall into a specific bracket and therefore shouldn't be compensated with a livable wage? If you work a job for 40 hours a week, you deserve to not starve with no roof over your head. Do you forget why the minimum wage was created?


Yes, that is my concern. What avenue do you suggest to combat the increasing wealth disparity and cost of living, if not to raise the minimum wage?

You seem to be confused about what jobs pay minimum wage and who is working them. There is absolutely not a statistically significant group of people working 40 hours/wk raising a family on minimum wage. There aren't even people who've worked consistently for over a year who make MW. As I said, it's mostly part-time employees who are doing it for some spending money and work experience, not to make a full-time living.

Did you just not read anything in the post you responded to? If an employee costs a company more than their productivity is bringing in, they will simply be fired, hours cut, or the position will be automated, resulting in fewer jobs and less opportunity for the poor just because you thought the federal government should step in and mandate that teenagers with part-time jobs should be able to buy houses.

 

[Ornife]

But how long is ya shlong tho?

You make a good point.

 

[ChillBroBaggins]

You seem to be confused about what jobs pay minimum wage and who is working them. There is absolutely not a statistically significant group of people working 40 hours/wk raising a family on minimum wage. There aren't even people who've worked consistently for over a year who make MW. As I said, it's mostly part-time employees who are doing it for some spending money and work experience, not to make a full-time living.

Have you never walked into a retail store to find old ladies working there well past retirement age? Do you imagine they work there because they enjoy the Walmart experience?

Did you just not read anything in the post you responded to? If an employee costs a company more than their productivity is bringing in, they will simply be fired, hours cut, or the position will be automated, resulting in fewer jobs and less opportunity for the poor just because you thought the federal government should step in and mandate that teenagers with part-time jobs should be able to buy houses.

I read all of it which makes sense, considering I deconstructed what you said and asked you questions on a line by line basis. I understand the economics of value and labor, and I'm not even arguing for massive minimum wage increases, which I agree would cripple smaller businesses.

Your stance appears to be that a non-living minimum wage is a non-issue. Understood, but my point is altogether different.

I'm not quite sure what parts of America you are looking at to make sweeping statements like (paraphrased) "there is no a statistically significant group which lives off a minimum wage." Maybe a source would lend some credence to what you say, because my own observations have been quite different.

 

[GuanoApes]

New York City will be at 15$ by 2020. The rest of the state will only be up to 12.50$

My mistake.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You seem to be confused about what jobs pay minimum wage and who is working them. There is absolutely not a statistically significant group of people working 40 hours/wk raising a family on minimum wage. There aren't even people who've worked consistently for over a year who make MW. As I said, it's mostly part-time employees who are doing it for some spending money and work experience, not to make a full-time living.

Did you just not read anything in the post you responded to? If an employee costs a company more than their productivity is bringing in, they will simply be fired, hours cut, or the position will be automated, resulting in fewer jobs and less opportunity for the poor just because you thought the federal government should step in and mandate that teenagers with part-time jobs should be able to buy houses.

This isn't as dumb as Nostra's posts usually are. Poverty in the developed world is a basic condition of having a market-based income-distribution system (about half the population--with kids, the elderly, the disabled making up the vast majority of that group--doesn't get any market income and about half of them aren't lucky enough to be dependents of a person or people with a high enough income to keep the whole household out of poverty). Flaws in the market for low-skill labor are mostly a separate issue from poverty.

That said, I find the automation argument to be really dumb. If a higher MW leads to more automation, that's a reason that we *should* have a higher MW. Increasing labor productivity is good! It's a goal that advanced nations are having a hard time hitting, as we've pretty much maxed on out education returns. America can still use high-skill immigration to bring about continued improvement in living standards, but we're polluting that well.

 

[ultramanhyata]

I'm not quite sure what parts of America you are looking at to make sweeping statements like (paraphrased) "there is no a statistically significant group which lives off a minimum wage." Maybe a source would lend some credence to what you say, because my own observations have been quite different.

That whole line of argument from the right is just a canard.

They want people to ask themselves, "How many Americans do you actually know who are really working for $7.25 an hour, much less full time??" Because they know the typical answer to that question.

This is to avoid the REAL question that must be asked relative to any proposed increase in the MW. Let's take Sanders' $15 increase as an example.

The question thus becomes: "How many Americans do you know who are working for less than $15 dollars an hour?" And the reality is that this threshold encompasses the majority of wage workers in the current US work force. So most of the people answering that question will inevitably know many, many people working for such a wage. In fact, it will likely include them, personally.

Of course, once you out the right on this naked ruse they will just move the goalpost and hurry on to a new, unrelated, though probably equally deceptive talking point.

 

[MaxMMA]

I don't know enough about this issue to really voice my opinion. I don't generally like government bodies telling business owners how to run their shit, but I also think it's bullshit that companies like McDs and Walmart pay their employees slave wages while purposely giving them less than 40 hrs to avoid benefits.

The only thing I can say is that I used to own a business that employed 1 employee and I didn't pay them by the hour, I paid them by the day and depending on who I had working that day.

If it was someone I knew could already handle the work with minimal supervision, and I would pitch them between $60-$150 a day depending on what time we finished.

If it was someone I had to walk behind and tell shit over and over I would give them $40-60.

Seems like to many businesses don't invest enough time or reasources into what I consider to be the most important reasources of a business. It's employees.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

When you're the "backbone of America" you should be granted entitlements denied the plebes.

Lol yes the salt of the earth

 

[bushman505]

Lol @ working for minimum wage after you’ve finished highschool. Lol @ not finishing highschool and making minimum wage.

 

[GuanoApes]

Why don’t they make it a law that if a company makes over let’s say $5 million in profit per year, they have to pay a higher minimum wage. While small businesses could pay the $7.25 federal minimum wage?

Can’t believe a politician hasn’t brought this up before.

 

[ScottE]

You seem to be confused about what jobs pay minimum wage and who is working them. There is absolutely not a statistically significant group of people working 40 hours/wk raising a family on minimum wage. There aren't even people who've worked consistently for over a year who make MW. As I said, it's mostly part-time employees who are doing it for some spending money and work experience, not to make a full-time living.

Did you just not read anything in the post you responded to? If an employee costs a company more than their productivity is bringing in, they will simply be fired, hours cut, or the position will be automated, resulting in fewer jobs and less opportunity for the poor just because you thought the federal government should step in and mandate that teenagers with part-time jobs should be able to buy houses.

And yet there is a statistically significant number of workers that earn less then the often proposed $15 living wage standard. 42% of American workers in actuality. And yet you want to focus on only those that make minimum wage, and not the nearly half of this country that would have their wages directly impacted if the minimum wage was raised to $15. Nevermind the indirect effect that would have on those already making $15 or more dollars.

Focusing on the small group making minimum wage and ignoring the much larger group that make between minimum wage and the proposed living wage is just being entirely dishonest on the subject.

 

[ScottE]

Lol @ working for minimum wage after you’ve finished highschool. Lol @ not finishing highschool and making minimum wage.

Lol @ at the guy that didn't know the minimum wage was meant to be a liveable wage.

 

[ScottE]

Why don’t they make it a law that if a company makes over let’s say $5 million in profit per year, they have to pay a higher minimum wage. While small businesses could pay the $7.25 federal minimum wage?

Can’t believe a politician hasn’t brought this up before.

That's essentially what the BEZOS Act proposes. If you are a huge company and you pay below a living wage those companies would be taxed to cover the government subsidies those workers have to utilize as a result of those wages.

 

[Pride23]

That's essentially what the BEZOS Act proposes. If you are a huge company and you pay below a living wage those companies would be taxed to cover the government subsidies those workers have to utilize as a result of those wages.

They probably would just let those workers go in that situation and hire a more skilled worker where they would not be taxed and get more out of them.

 

[7437]

If the cost of living is too high in an area for a person to earn enough to sustain a good living, might I suggest moving to an area where the cost of living is lower.

We live in a very big country, with a lot of diverse geographical economic situations.

The rural areas of our nation shouldn't be forced to accommodate the fact that the cost of living in a city is in an eternal upward spiral.

Moving is always easy when you dont have enough money to live.

 

[GuanoApes]

That's essentially what the BEZOS Act proposes. If you are a huge company and you pay below a living wage those companies would be taxed to cover the government subsidies those workers have to utilize as a result of those wages.

Has the Bezos Act gone in effect? Or is it just a proposed plan?

 

[7437]

Lol @ at the guy that didn't know the minimum wage was meant to be a liveable wage.

Uhhh...... source? Because the guy who made the minimum wage disagreed.