Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-21-2006, 12:00 PM   #1 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: South Florida
Minumum wage

Here is my spin. Raising minumum wage is not only a stupid idea, but it will make the economy worse and cause a sudded rise in inflation.
Raising minumum wage makes prices go higher. For example you raise the wage by 4% well everything goes up in price by approximatly 4%. And the only people who are making more money are the people who are working at the lowest wage level anyway. Ppeople may make more but they end up spending more int he long run anyway.

I for one am glad that this bill was shot down. Minumum wage helps those who refuse to get a good job or cannot get a good job.

We all know that if you really want to o to school, you can. If you really want a job making 8-10 dollars an hour you can get one. they are not hard to find or difficult to get. America needs to stop asking for Higher wages they need to ask for everything else to get less expensive and for the Government to do something about inflation. Anyway just my two cents what does every body else think.


Quote:
WASHINGTON The Republican-controlled Senate refused Wednesday to raise the minimum wage, rejecting an election-year proposal from Democrats for the first increase in nearly a decade.

The vote was 52-46, eight short of the 60 needed.

"I don't think the Republicans get it," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., who backed a proposal for a three-step increase in the current wage floor to $7.25 an hour. The federal minimum wage has been fixed at $5.15 an hour since 1997.

Republican critics said the minimum wage was a job killer, not the boon to low-wage workers portrayed by Democrats.

"This is a classic debate between two different philosophies. One philosophy believes in the marketplace, competition and entrepreneurship, and the second is a philosophy that says government knows best," said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga. He said France and Germany have high minimum wages, but also high unemployment.

But Kennedy and other advocates of an increase said minimum wage workers have been without a raise since 1997.

Underscoring the political context of the debate, he said if Democrats win the Senate this November, a minimum wage increase will be one of the first pieces of legislation to be considered.
__________________
"Two men: one thinks he can. One thinks he cannot. They are Both Right."
florida0214 is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 12:08 PM   #2 (permalink)
Insane
 
VirFighter's Avatar
 
Location: Raleigh, NC / Atlanta, GA
I don't think we should have a minimum wage period.....

Shouldn't this be in the politcal forum though?
__________________
"The South is gonna boogie again"
- Disco Stu
VirFighter is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 12:10 PM   #3 (permalink)
Rookie
 
Gatorade Frost's Avatar
 
I'm apathetic about it, but when it was started in 1938 did the economy collapse?
__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips
Gatorade Frost is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 12:29 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Moderator Emeritus
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida0214
If you really want a job making 8-10 dollars an hour you can get one. they are not hard to find or difficult to get.
I don't necessarily believe that we should have a minimum wage... but that statement I am not sure is entirely accurate.. there are parts of this country where jobs are few and far between and people just cant up and move...

Jobs at the local target and other retail places in the north east would pay 10 dollars an hour, at 40 hours a week that's only 21K a year... that'd be tough to live on...

i don't think that the government should tell businesses what they should pay, I think the market shoudl determine that, as well as the skill level of the employee... but I'm also realistic enough to understand that in some places, if the jobs are scarce and the people who need jobs is high, that the employer will pay as little as possible.. because they can...
__________________
Free your heart from hatred. Free your mind from worries. Live simply. Give more. Expect less.
maleficent is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 12:40 PM   #5 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Ample's Avatar
 
Location: In your closet
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida0214
Raising minumum wage makes prices go higher. For example you raise the wage by 4% well everything goes up in price by approximatly 4%. And the only people who are making more money are the people who are working at the lowest wage level anyway. Ppeople may make more but they end up spending more int he long run anyway.
Not necessarily, supply and demand dictates what the price of goods are. With the increase of oil in the last couple of years, do you think that all of that cost went directly to the consumer? Sure in some industries it did, and in others it had to be swallowed by the organization. Im sure a raise in minumum wage would have the same effect.

Here is a thought, lets raise minimum wage and reduce the amount of money that we give our CEOs. Did you know that the average CEO makes over a hundred times more than the average worker?
__________________

Her juju beads are so nice
She kissed my third cousin twice
Im the king of pomona
Ample is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 05:10 PM   #6 (permalink)
Fledgling Dead Head
 
krwlz's Avatar
 
Location: Clarkson U.
While I don't agree entirely with raising minimum wage, I did read a good article today about it.

WIth today's inflation, minimum wage is actually lower than ever in the past couple decades... And at the same time, almost every year congressmen all pat themselves on the back and give themselves a raise... I thought they were serving the people?

Seems like a waste of money to me to raise politicians salaries past their already high 6 figure wages...

Seems a contridiction to deny bottom level workers a little more money, while giving yourself more with the tax dollars they already pay out of those wages. Just my $.02...

I'll try to find the article.
krwlz is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 06:57 PM   #7 (permalink)
Observant Ruminant
 
Location: Rich Wannabe Hippie Town
When I was in my late teens, back in the mid-70s, minimum wage was $2.00 an hour. Using a handy inflation calculator, that works out to $7.49 an hour in today's money.

On the other hand, today's federal minimum wage of $5.15 translates into $1.37 an hour in 1975 dollars. 40 percent less than the actual minimum wage of that time.

Personally, I think of the minimum wage as the "16-year-olds and illegal immigrant wage." Few others will work for $5.15, but these two groups are desperate for work. Personally, I think the minimum wage is kept artificially low to allow employers to exploit these two groups.
Rodney is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 08:30 PM   #8 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Infinite_Loser's Avatar
 
Location: Lake Mary, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by maleficent
i don't think that the government should tell businesses what they should pay, I think the market shoudl determine that, as well as the skill level of the employee.
That's a noble concept, but not a very realistic one. Most of the business which are affected by minimum wage laws aren't in the business of fair pay. Those jobs usually entail very few or no skills at all-- Certainly not enough for type of pay you would hope to see of the higher skill levels.

I know that, in the case of jobs with low skill level requirements, many businesses will try to exploit people by hiring labor as cheaply as possible if there were no minimum wage requirements (Business already do it in the case of illegal immigrants, though it's illegal). Personally, I can't tell you how many jobs I had which payed the minimum wage level. As it stands, if you tried to live off of minimum wage, you would BARELY cross the poverty threshold level, assuming you only have to take care of yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by florida0214
We all know that if you really want to o to school, you can. If you really want a job making 8-10 dollars an hour you can get one. they are not hard to find or difficult to get. America needs to stop asking for Higher wages they need to ask for everything else to get less expensive and for the Government to do something about inflation. Anyway just my two cents what does every body else think.
Three things:

1.) It's not that easy to go out and find an $8 - $10 job without the proper education, at least not around here. Minimum wage isn't designed as something to live off of. It's only supposed to appeal to a certain group of people.

2.) You make it sound as if raising the minimum wage would be a bad thing. Even if the minimum wage rose to $7.25 an hour, when coupled with inflation, it still won't be as high as it has been in the past.

3.) I've never really understood how minimum wage hurts an economy, as I've always believed it to stimulate economic growth.
Infinite_Loser is offline  
Old 06-21-2006, 09:01 PM   #9 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
It would hurt the economy because companies would outsource and layoff more people. Instead of hiring 10 people, they would only get 8, unless the other 2 would bring in a lot more money.

And it hurts the people who aren't working. Retirees, unemployed, injured, new immigrants, people with no money... Why, because if the workers can afford to pay more for products, and the supply doesn't increase, then prices go up.

And what incentive do people have to work hard if given the choice between going to college and getting an office assistant job making $12/hr with $25,000 in student loans, or getting a job at 18 making $7.25/hr. With 4 years of experience, they would probably be able to get $9-$10/hr.

On the other hand, this would be a good thing, because I would rather have the workers making more money, then just having the owners and investors making it all. The workers will still spend all of the new money, so the CEOs and other businessmen/investors will get the money in the end eventually anyway. (Trickle down economies don't work very well, trickle up ones do)

And workers who are financially secure could hold out and not be desperate for any job at any wage. They could afford to look around.

And it would make the country stronger if there isn't a large poor community in certain areas. Yes, giving them $2 more an hour won't do a whole lot, but it's a start.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 08:08 AM   #10 (permalink)
Addict ed to smack
 
skinnymofo's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle
while i realize we are talking about the country as a whole..
the washington state minimum wage is 7.50 already.
i think its a good thing we have minimum wage, otherwise we would have walmart employees making 2.00 an hour to sweep and mcdonalds employees making 4 dollars to cook fries.

also, in my own opinion- ive always felt that people who have worked those super low paying jobs for years(minimum wage), fastfood, etc could have switched at any time but didnt do to simple lazyness.
skinnymofo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 08:36 AM   #11 (permalink)
Rookie
 
Gatorade Frost's Avatar
 
After thinking about it for a while, I think that there should be a minimum wage and that it should always keep up with standard of living costs.
__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips
Gatorade Frost is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 08:46 AM   #12 (permalink)
Comedian
 
BigBen's Avatar
 
Location: Use the search button
As a man who studied this subject in-depth academically, I really want to get into this discussion.

Didn't we have a thread on this already?

And for quoting articles, let me tell you that even the academics don't agree on this one.

Minimum wages affect the market, and it is true that in an unregulated wage market, labour would be taken advantage of, ceteris paribus. There is much discussion about CEO's and their wage market, and how a healthy business should cap the CEO wage at 30 times the lowest paid employee. The janitor makes 20k? CEO only allowed to make 600k.

Historical economists try to peg the minimum wage to a consumer price index; a bundle of goods that an hours worth of labour could purchase. The price of oil was also used as a benchmark, because oil is used to transport workers to their place of employment. I liked this theorem. That is all it was; a theorem.

What would you do if I offered you your dream job? Close your eyes and think about that for a second. Gourmet chef? Professional photographer? Circuit Court Judge? Teacher? Cop? Soldier?

What would you be willing to take as a wage for that job? What? You would do it for free? Come on now... You need to eat. You need to care for your family. You need to save for an uncertain future. Free doesn't cut it.

What if I told you that all of your needs, and some of your wants would be taken care of? You would never have to worry about money. You wouldn't be rich, but you would be able to concentrate on your dream job without worrying about finances. What would you say?

I am of the opinion that a minimum wage only protects those workers who would otherwise end up as endentured servants anyway. There are illegal immigrants working in agricultural jobs that are in that position now. Without it, a pound of Union strawberries would cost about 30 bucks.

Labour is being outsourced to countries without labour laws. It hurts to see those jobs leave, but do we want those jobs anyway? I say no, we should train our workforce to contribute skill in a value-added environment.

Shit, what a wide topic. I STUDIED THIS SHIT, and I still have a hard time wrapping my brain around it.
__________________
3.141592654
Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.
BigBen is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 08:53 AM   #13 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
All I can say is that there would be a race to the bottom in trying to figure out just how little companies could pay their low wage employees...


PS: Moved to Politics
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:02 AM   #14 (permalink)
big damn hero
 
guthmund's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnymofo
also, in my own opinion- ive always felt that people who have worked those super low paying jobs for years(minimum wage), fastfood, etc could have switched at any time but didnt do to simple lazyness.
That's a pretty broad net you're casting there. With years and years of minimum wage job experience under my belt, I found that the vast majority was far from lazy.

Minimum wage jobs tend to be very, very flexible, which is great for students who want to make an extra buck in high school, or the college kid looking to defray some of the cost of his tuition and keep his loans manageable.

Minimum wage jobs tend to be classified as 'unskilled,' which is great for anyone who wants to work, but isn't qualified (for whatever reason) to work in a skilled field. Some people can't afford college. Some people couldn't graduate if they did. Some people get stuck in the muck early on and minimum wage jobs are all they do to keep their head above water.

It isn't 'laziness.' Minimum wage earners bust their ass working 8 or more hour days (not counting those with two or more jobs) for 40 hours usually stretched over 5 or 6 six days a week for about $200 (less, once the government takes its cut).

My opinion? I like convenience. People pulling oranges in the groves, grilling my steak and such are very convenient for me. If paying them a bit more keeps them doing the stuff I find it inconvenient to do for myself, then so be it.
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

Last edited by guthmund; 06-22-2006 at 09:24 AM..
guthmund is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:06 AM   #15 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBen
Minimum wages affect the market, and it is true that in an unregulated wage market, labour would be taken advantage of, ceteris paribus. There is much discussion about CEO's and their wage market, and how a healthy business should cap the CEO wage at 30 times the lowest paid employee. The janitor makes 20k? CEO only allowed to make 600k.
That's an interesting question. If we are going to have wage controls why not look at them all. If 7.50 an hour is good, maybe 15.00 an hour is better and we can get the additonal money from those at the top. I am just kidding but who knows once we start down this path.
flstf is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:23 AM   #16 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
Quote:
Originally Posted by flstf
That's an interesting question. If we are going to have wage controls why not look at them all. If 7.50 an hour is good, maybe 15.00 an hour is better and we can get the additonal money from those at the top. I am just kidding but who knows once we start down this path.
No shit. no one can live off 7.50 an hour. minimum wage should at least be $15-$20, if not more. Acutally the government should dictate how much everyone gets paid. that would obviously make it more fair. How about everyone get paid the same no matter what job they do. then no one will be poor and everyone will be able to do the job they want. Yes. thats the solution.
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:26 AM   #17 (permalink)
Rookie
 
Gatorade Frost's Avatar
 
I certainly enjoy all the sarcasm in this thread.

Anyway - I've come to the conclusion that there should be a minimum wage, and that it should be adjusted annually to the cost of living.
__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips
Gatorade Frost is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:34 AM   #18 (permalink)
Insane
 
cookmo's Avatar
 
Location: Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade Frost
After thinking about it for a while, I think that there should be a minimum wage and that it should always keep up with standard of living costs.

I agree with Gatorade Frost, that minimum wage should=cost of living. Admittedly, I don't know much about economics/wages, and I'm wondering if one of you who do could explain to me why this is/isn't possible. Instead of minimum wage being Federal, why not be set individually by state according to cost of living? Is this totally unrealistic for me to think this way?
cookmo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:38 AM   #19 (permalink)
Devoted
 
Redlemon's Avatar
 
Donor
Location: New England
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookmo
Instead of minimum wage being Federal, why not be set individually by state according to cost of living? Is this totally unrealistic for me to think this way?
The Feds set up an absolute minimum floor. States can create their own minimum wage, as long as it isn't lower than the federal.

...and here you go, DOL WHD: Minimum Wage Laws in the States. It's a clickable map that shows the rates. Kansas' is lower than the Federal rate ($2.65/hr!), so the Federal rate overrules in that case.
__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.

Last edited by Redlemon; 06-22-2006 at 09:42 AM..
Redlemon is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:44 AM   #20 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
Please keep your sarcasm under control.

Thanks.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:57 AM   #21 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
Whats the difference? Either the government should be able to tell businesses what to pay their employees or they shouldn't. people say the minimum wage should equal the cost of living. Well, in that respect the minimum wage should be at least 30k per year. At least. The only way to make minimum wage = 30k is to have the government also put a wage ceiling on compensation. So not only do we have a "livable" minimum wage that equals the cost of living, we're also dictating what the owner of a business can pay himself. Thats not even a stone's throw away from socialism. It is socialism. You can have it one way or the other. But not both.
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 10:04 AM   #22 (permalink)
Rookie
 
Gatorade Frost's Avatar
 
Quote:
The only way to make minimum wage = 30k is to have the government also put a wage ceiling on compensation. So not only do we have a "livable" minimum wage that equals the cost of living, we're also dictating what the owner of a business can pay himself.
Can you explain that a little more? I'm not ignoring the rest of your post, I just want to sort out what this means before I comment on it. I don't understand the correlation between why there would be a wage ceiling and why that is required for a minumum wage?
__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips
Gatorade Frost is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 10:09 AM   #23 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade Frost
Can you explain that a little more? I'm not ignoring the rest of your post, I just want to sort out what this means before I comment on it. I don't understand the correlation between why there would be a wage ceiling and why that is required for a minumum wage?
He's saying that paying employees a livable wage precludes obscene CEO pay.
filtherton is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 10:37 AM   #24 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade Frost
Can you explain that a little more? I'm not ignoring the rest of your post, I just want to sort out what this means before I comment on it. I don't understand the correlation between why there would be a wage ceiling and why that is required for a minumum wage?
Where is the money going to come from? Sure, its easy enough to dictate a minimum wage. but its not like businesses have extra money they could be paying their employees just sitting around. Its got to come from some where. If your advocating a minimum wage that equals the cost of living, then in most areas of the country you are mandating a wage at least equal to $30k a year. Its a lot of money that comes from somewhere and the most logical place for the lawmakers to mandate it comes from is the executives' pockets.

How else is this minimum wage=COL going to be funded? I suppose another option would just be to tax everyone that makes more than the COLmimimum wage and all that money would subsidize those that aren't paid the COLmin by their employer.

So the options so far are place a price ceiling on compensation and massive income redistribution. Any other "fair" options?
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 11:04 AM   #25 (permalink)
Insane
 
cookmo's Avatar
 
Location: Ohio
Well, since something like 1% of the population holds 60% of the wealth, it sound's good to me
cookmo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 12:09 PM   #26 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookmo
Well, since something like 1% of the population holds 60% of the wealth, it sound's good to me
Its closer to 1/3. that is the top 1% holds close to 33% of the wealth.
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 01:32 PM   #27 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
Its closer to 1/3. that is the top 1% holds close to 33% of the wealth.
What's the difference really? Either way it sucks.
kutulu is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 01:39 PM   #28 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutulu
What's the difference really? Either way it sucks.
So the government should dictate the maximum amount people can be paid in this country or should we just tax everyone and pass out checks so we all make the same?
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 02:27 PM   #29 (permalink)
Kick Ass Kunoichi
 
snowy's Avatar
 
Location: Oregon
If we don't have a minimum wage, or make the minimum wage less than the cost of living, the result is simple: there are more people living below the poverty line, and therefore more people dependent on public programs to make ends meet (food stamps, food banks, temporary assistance for needy families, WIC benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, or state insurance programs).

This, in the end, puts the pressure on whoever gets taxed the most, because the cost of these programs is coming out of their pockets. Based on the current tax structure of the United States, that means that the middle class is paying the bulk for these programs--not the rich.

Sure, a minimum, LIVEABLE wage puts pressure on business owners. But in the end, it takes pressure off people who have enough pressure on them already to make ends meet--the lower class.

I'm guessing that the majority of you have never had to make ends meet on minimum wage. Believe me, it is a most humbling experience--and I wish everyone could experience living below the poverty line for themselves. Then you would not be so quick to do away with it.
__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau
snowy is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 02:38 PM   #30 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
I suggest a maximum wage so as to prevent the seperation of incomes.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 05:13 PM   #31 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
A maximum wage is impossible. That is why three weeks ago, I posted the thread about limiting net worth. http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=105021. I have an invention idea that if 100 million people around the world bought one, I would be a billionaire. Would I have to slowly roll it out and cut production to stay under the maximum wage for the year?

Yes, it would cause major problems with the value of the currency, but having a 80-90% tax rate on income once you get past 200 million would even out the income distribution in this country a little better. And the lifestyle one family lives doesn't change if they are worth 200 million or 2 billion. The amount they have to invest changes though.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 05:21 PM   #32 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
I'm not talking about forcing people to spend money after a certian income, I'm talking about raising the wages of the bottom instead of the top. Instead of the CEO getting an additional $2 million a year, the 2000 workers on the floor make $1000 more a year. It's called class convergence, and it prevents poverty. Can you imagine the redistribution of wealth on a mass scale? Can you imagine Walmart employees making $25k a year, and the Walmart CEO making $20 million a year?

Tax breaks for those who follow the rule, and higher taxes for those who don't.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-22-2006, 06:09 PM   #33 (permalink)
Mulletproof
 
Psycho Dad's Avatar
 
Location: Some nucking fut house.
The company I work for starts employees at $8.50 to $11.50 per hour for the most basic of assembly jobs. Many people in one department get hired at $15.50 to $19.00 per hour with the expectation that we may still need to proivide a great deal of training. However we are talking about manufacturing jobs that many people don't enjoy. Work can be hot, dirty and outright boring. But I work for a company owned by a man who knows he gets what he pays for and not run by a board of directors looking out for their own asses. These jobs also include a half way decent insurance level of health insurance coverage, sick pay, vacation, 401k, etc. Yet we still have people who return to fast food jobs rather than come to work every day ready to follow procedures, work safely and work towards a quality product. Not that I'm saying fast food workers are having a cakewalk. I just don't understand why someone would opt for a minimum wage job with no benefits over a better paying job with good benefits. I suppose my opinions would be different were I to live somewhere else, but I'd half like to see where we would be with no minimum wage.
__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.
Psycho Dad is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 09:35 AM   #34 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
So the government should dictate the maximum amount people can be paid in this country or should we just tax everyone and pass out checks so we all make the same?
You know, that's borderline trolling. You (and others) twist what is said to an extreme. Saying people on the bottom deserve better living conditions in NO WAY AT ALL means that we are saying all the money goes in a pot and gets distributed evenly but it seems like it's the only response we get from those who don't support minimum wage or public assistance in general.

Be realistic about things:

1. There are not enough high paying jobs for everyone to live comfortably and there never will be. For this reason, it doesn't matter if a lot of people go to college or not.
2. Yes, some people find ways to rise above poverty and become sucessfull (even if sucessfull is just being able to have a house of your own and pay bills on time) but that low paying job is always there, so nothing changes for society as a whole.
3. Although people may be poor, they still need to have the ability to have a family. Otherwise our population shrinks and we either have to outsource everything we can and we still can't find people to serve us dinner, turn on the gas pump, ring up our groceries, etc.
4. If you pay people less than what is needed to get by they WILL end up being a drain on resources. They need money to eat, go to the doctor, to put a roof over their heads, get to work, etc.

It's hypocritical to complain about all the money that goes to aid the poor and then also complain that we pay too much for remedial services.

I see two solutions to the problem, pay the people at the bottom more or tax the people who refuse to give them enough to live on more. If you have a magical solution that incorporates reality into it, I'd love to see it.

Last edited by kutulu; 06-23-2006 at 09:39 AM..
kutulu is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 10:38 AM   #35 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
The reality is there has always been poverty and there always will be. the minimum wage will not fix it. moving the minimum wage up from $5.15 to $7.50 won't do a thing to fight poverty. because $15,000 a year is not a "livable wage" If you want to dictate that people get paid a livable wage they need at least ten grand more than that. and closer to $30k+ with a family. so you can have the government dictate what business should pay or you can have the government redistribute wealth to the poor.

There's the mentality that business owners aren't also "just trying to make it" but already have made it. And thats not true. Take restaruant owners. Many mom&pop restaurants are "just trying to make it" the owner of that business isn't some rich meanie with a fat cigar. he's a working stiff. he has a business to run and employees to pay. Where is the extra money going to come from? should he have the same standard of living as the dishwasher in the back? After all, this guy put his sweat and tears into his business to get it going and keep it open. He can get another dishwasher anywhere. If you mandate the minimum wage be some livable wage - where is the money going to come from?

Any business owner knows you get what you pay for and if he's satisfied with what he's got then why should he have to pay more? Its his business. If the low wage employee isn't happy they are more than free to find another job or start a business of their own.
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 10:57 AM   #36 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
The reality is there has always been poverty and there always will be. the minimum wage will not fix it. moving the minimum wage up from $5.15 to $7.50 won't do a thing to fight poverty. because $15,000 a year is not a "livable wage" If you want to dictate that people get paid a livable wage they need at least ten grand more than that. and closer to $30k+ with a family. so you can have the government dictate what business should pay or you can have the government redistribute wealth to the poor.
Minimum wage isn't about fixing poverty, it's about taking an active role in trying to prevent poverty. Not a fix, more of a piace of tape that prevents the back bumper from falling off. It's better than nothing. "...there has always been poverty and there always will be." is an excellent cop out and a great way to ignore your social responsibility. Stevo, there has always been murder and there always will be. Maybe we should stop taking steps to prevent it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
There's the mentality that business owners aren't also "just trying to make it" but already have made it. And thats not true. Take restaruant owners. Many mom&pop restaurants are "just trying to make it" the owner of that business isn't some rich meanie with a fat cigar. he's a working stiff. he has a business to run and employees to pay. Where is the extra money going to come from? should he have the same standard of living as the dishwasher in the back? After all, this guy put his sweat and tears into his business to get it going and keep it open. He can get another dishwasher anywhere. If you mandate the minimum wage be some livable wage - where is the money going to come from?
Some business owners are greedy, and no one can argue with that. Someone who makes over $50 million a year is no longer able to call him or herself a working stiff, and is living so far above the poverty line that it's not even visable. I put my sweat and tears in to my business, but I make damn well sure that my workers get fair compensation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
Any business owner knows you get what you pay for and if he's satisfied with what he's got then why should he have to pay more? Its his business. If the low wage employee isn't happy they are more than free to find another job or start a business of their own.
As much as the libertarian in me agrees with the previous statement, it's just not logical. Have you ever tried to start your own busniess? Do you know the capitol it takes to do that?

Some people, like myself, are stuck in the job that they have because either they have no other options, or the other options are even worse than the job you currently have. I'd love to start my own business or change jobs right now, but I have a responsibility to my family to do waht it takes to put food on the table and a roof over our heads.

Stevo, have you ever worked for minumum wage?
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 11:00 AM   #37 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
Its closer to 1/3. that is the top 1% holds close to 33% of the wealth.
The following data is the stuff that violent revolutions are eventually made from:
Quote:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/f.../200613pap.pdf
<b>From page 10:</b>

Concentration ratios. Because the Gini coefficient attempts to summarize many complex changes in terms of a single number, it may miss important variation for particular parts of a distribution or for particular subpopulations. A more detailed means of summarizing the relative distribution of wealth is the use of concentration ratios, the proportion of total wealth held by specific groups. In 2004, slightly more than one-third of total net worth was held by the wealthiest one percent of families (table 5). Although the estimated level of this share has changed over the surveys since 1989, the differences are not statistically significant. In 2004, the next-wealthiest nine percent of families held 36.1 percent of total wealth, again, a figure not significantly changed over the course of the surveys. <b>This leaves less than a third of the total for the remaining ninety percent of the population.</b> A subset of that group, families in the bottom half of wealth distribution, held only 2.5 percent of total wealth in 2004, and this figure is significantly different from the higher estimates for 1995, 1998, and 2001; of course, those differences reflect movements elsewhere in the distribution, but the statistical power of the tests is not sufficient to identify where among the groups shown the offsetting changes occurred. <b>A possible explanation of the decline for the lowest wealth group might be changes in their use of debt, but a separate examination of gross assets yields a pattern similar to that seen for net worth......</b>
Couple the data above with the decline of better paying union organized and collectively bargained jobs, the failure of government to perform it's chartered duty of guarding the borders, which has resulted in a "parallel" labor force of at least eleven million, low skilled illegals who are willing to work for a lower wage, and I have to ask those who speak against a higher minimum wage, what is the role of this federal government, now....

now....that it has allowed the distribution of wealth to become even more lopsided, because, among other things, the executive has appointed all 5 members of the NLRB from non-labor sympathetic factions, i.e....only those who side with the agenda of management....

now....that an illegal parallel labor force has been allowed to form as it passed unchecked, across the border guarded by an underfunded border patrol....

now...that representative government has been replaced with government by lobbyists paid and controlled by the top 2 percent...the class that already controls 67 percent of the wealth....

so....friends....what now??? Can you not recognize that failure of government to enforce the law, to represent the "people", to uphold the integrity of instruments to "level" the playing field...(as in the stacking of the NLRB with management "hacks"), is the cause of wage stagnation of the lowest paid workers?

In 2004, Floridians forced the issue with a populist driven effort to add a minimum wage referendum to the state ballot. The people bypassed their own
"special interest" corrupted legislature. They voted overwhelmingly to raise their minimum wage by one dollar per hour, raising the pay of at least 250,000 workers.

Why is government only "interfering" when it actually represents the people, and not when it is bought out by the wealthiest, or when it benignly neglects to guard the borders, while the employers, across the board, enjoy the benefits of reduction of upward wage pressure that a "parallel" illegal labor force, predictably brings to the status quo?
host is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 11:25 AM   #38 (permalink)
Rail Baron
 
stevo's Avatar
 
Location: Tallyfla
Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
Minimum wage isn't about fixing poverty, it's about taking an active role in trying to prevent poverty.
No its not. Its about making people who are in favor of minimum wage feel good about themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
Not a fix, more of a piace of tape that prevents the back bumper from falling off. It's better than nothing. "...there has always been poverty and there always will be." is an excellent cop out and a great way to ignore your social responsibility. Stevo, there has always been murder and there always will be. Maybe we should stop taking steps to prevent it?
We don't try to prevent murder as much as we try and punish people who have comitted murder. Anyway the bumper analogy is pointless. If my bumper was falling off I wouldn't tape it back up. I'd bolt it back on. Bumpers on cars are nothing like poverty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
Some business owners are greedy, and no one can argue with that. Someone who makes over $50 million a year is no longer able to call him or herself a working stiff, and is living so far above the poverty line that it's not even visable. I put my sweat and tears in to my business, but I make damn well sure that my workers get fair compensation.
Some <- thats the key word here. What about the average business owner the guy who is the working stiff? It sure is convenient to ignore him when we talk about minimum wage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
As much as the libertarian in me agrees with the previous statement, it's just not logical. Have you ever tried to start your own busniess? Do you know the capitol it takes to do that?
With today's technology it is less expensive than ever to start a business. While I personally don't run my own business I have (and still help) family members run theirs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
Some people, like myself, are stuck in the job that they have because either they have no other options, or the other options are even worse than the job you currently have. I'd love to start my own business or change jobs right now, but I have a responsibility to my family to do waht it takes to put food on the table and a roof over our heads.
But no one has yet to answer the question - Where does the money come from to pay the minimum wage? Where?

Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
Stevo, have you ever worked for minumum wage?
yes. way back when.
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
stevo is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 11:30 AM   #39 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutulu
If you have a magical solution that incorporates reality into it, I'd love to see it.
Coming up with a way to help those who do not earn enough to live above poverty is certainly a noble cause and I don't have a solution except maybe more government control of wages and/or a reverse income tax.

With the minimum wage law our government isn't giving the minimum wage earners anything but is instead telling us that if we hire someone we must pay them more than a certain amount regardless of our ability to do so.

I wasn't being completely sarcastic when I said if 7.50 is good maybe 15.00 is better. I don't have a good understanding of what a 7.50/hr minimum wage would do to the economy and what difference it would make if it was 15.00/hr or 3.00/hr.

I guess if every business, restaurant, landscapper, etc.. had to pay their workers 30K per year then no one would have a competitive advantage over another but prices would probably go up and patrons would fall off so some would have to close. This may happen anyway with the 7.50/hr proposal. Also as wages go up some businesses will probably have trouble competing on the international market.
flstf is offline  
Old 06-23-2006, 12:27 PM   #40 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
No its not. Its about making people who are in favor of minimum wage feel good about themselves.
What a fantastic point! Yes, the one and only reason for minimum wage is to make me sleep better at night. It's not like McDonalds would be paying people $3.45 an hour if they could. It's not like busniesses have to be heald responsible for the ability to give out fair wages to their employees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
We don't try to prevent murder as much as we try and punish people who have comitted murder. Anyway the bumper analogy is pointless. If my bumper was falling off I wouldn't tape it back up. I'd bolt it back on. Bumpers on cars are nothing like poverty.
Well what if you can't afford bolts because you only make $1.25 per hour? Punishment = deterrant so far as murder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
Some <- thats the key word here. What about the average business owner the guy who is the working stiff? It sure is convenient to ignore him when we talk about minimum wage.
Again, anything over $20 million a year isn't a working stiff. You can't tell me that the CEO of Viacom works harder than my gardener (who makes about minimum wage). That's the bottom line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
With today's technology it is less expensive than ever to start a business. While I personally don't run my own business I have (and still help) family members run theirs.
Could poor people afford computers without minimum wage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
But no one has yet to answer the question - Where does the money come from to pay the minimum wage? Where?
The income of the company. I don't know why you are making this seem so complicated. Company X has 4 levels of employees. Level 1 is the bottom level worker comprised of 40 people that do manual labor and makes minimum wage (about $10k a year). Level 2 is local managment comprised of 12 people that makes about $15 per hour (about $25k a year). Level 3 is the board of 4 people who makes about $70k a year. Level 4 is the CEO who makes about $750k a year. Is something wrong with this picture?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
yes. way back when.
And what would life have been like for you then if you did the same job for $2.00 per hour? What if that was the best paying job for your work experience that you could find?


The answer to the above "Is anything wrong with this picture" is, of course, the CEO makes more than ALL the level 1 employees COMBINED.

Last edited by Willravel; 06-23-2006 at 12:36 PM..
Willravel is offline  
 

Tags
minumum, wage

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:32 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360