New Minimum Wage

[dairygirl4u2c]

i know it's not what i was arguing before exactly. and the other minimum thread was too long and convuluted. so, i thought i'd start a new thread. if someone is confident that they think there shouldbe no minimum wage, i'm interested in a one on one debate to focus the discussion.








but anywhere i look anyone can get a job for minimum wage if they have their bits together. the only people i know, from experience only which might not be accurate, who can't get a job at minimum wage are the dim wit slacker type. so, no one is being denied a job because of the wage, really. maybe the low wits are being denied 3.50 jobs, i'm not sure, but i doubt we should worry about that too much.

and all we need to do is look back to the 80s. back then, the minimum was 3.50. and you can bet people were being paid that much at mcdonald's too. what did increasing it do? it simply caused the people who were paid much less than they shold have to be paid more. so, i think the notion is empiraclly proven wrong that economics will cause the wage to increase, if only we'd ban the minimum.
and yes, they don't stay at exactly 3.50 for long, but they do stay in that territory for long. so you can't argue it's only temporary.

you can't have a society that denies those at the bottom anything substantial. they can work their way up, sometimes but not always. whatever the case, they should get a fairer wage whether temporary or long lasting. it's like denying indians the right to land: as a practical matter we have to have laws that prevent them from land, but we should recognize how our laws infringe, and act accordingly. with indians, and here.

if you can't afford to pay a decent wage, you sholdnt be in business. we're always denying someone the opportunity to hire for beans but that doesn't mean we should just ban the minimum wage.

of course, it's not always wise to increase it, too high is too high. i am only argin that we have one, and that we have a reasonable one.


also, even if some places pay more than minimum doesn't mean we shouldn't have the minimum, as has been suggested. if it's not being used, hten great. if it is, then that's when it matters and the law should exist.

also, i'd be open to allowing categorical exclusions or something for people who pick dandelions for others or somehting. they shouldn't be paid minimum wage. most jobs should though, mcdonald's etc.

Edited October 23, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

my philosohpical basis for arguing for a minimum wage. not just cause it's the nice thing to do, and not putting it all on charity when charity is not warranted.



[quote]the two theories that are the basis of my economic disposition are the following from my past threads.
i am aware of the flaws and limits of my arguments, but, i think the following shows there are flaws in justice with simply thinking let economics dictate, given our artificial society.


QUOTE
it's all about entitlement. what is everyone entitled to. whatever you work for, sure, to an extent. look at the indians. naturally, the indians should be able to roam free and grow things, but we with our artificial laws deprive them of God's bounty. i agree to an extent that God gives a certain amount that is inherently ours, and then some. the land you farm is yours and if you farm a lot it's yours. but with our technology, and fake laws, people start claiming and taking more. the indians can't farm and the poor can't take a basic share.
we've created an artificial society, but we should at least recognize it as such and allow people to have a basic amount. i don't claim to know what that is, but it should be something he can pull himself up from, not peanuts. "pull yourself up from your bootstraps" what if you have no bootstraps to pull yourself up from?

also, take the idea of a giant. he makes the masses fight for a good job. someone will be stuck at the bottom. does that mean they should have less than the minimum? sure evolution theory. but if they are willing to work 40 a week for a year they should at least get a minimum.



QUOTE
we could ensure that everyone got entitled an amount of land. but that would not be good as people would not like it, so monetary is an alternative. plus many people can't farm as our society is artifically not farming. so we have to recognize people are the consequence of our structure and switch from land thinking to other thinking.

i agree you're forcibly taking what's anothers, but you're also forcibly preventing people with laws and technology acccess to God's bounty. you may say... well they have that right, first in line etc. but i don't think they do. i think when it comes down to it, others have a right to take what you're using in excess to an extent. if we prevent them, we should make up for it in our laws. like i won't call that charity giving to them, i also wouldn't call it stealing from the other person. it's "justice"

if a rich man were to be in primitive earth and there was a farm of people, and the giant and the means to take and own everything, he'd argue it's his as he's got the mean and the law (of man). there's land simply sitting there waiting for the family to branch off into, but they an't take it, according to the law of man. the law of God is that they can because the guy's claim is artificial. it's not "stealing". it's taking what God has given everyone.



now, i realize that society itself is the perpetrator in my theories, and in a sense i shouldn't focus on the lowly businessman. in a sense, they are some of the last. but, i justify it as they are a part of society and are rich enough for a business, so they should at least be rich enough to pay substantially, and if they cna't then tough.
i'm an advocate of the rich paying more than a flat tax, so the lowly businessman isn't hurt as bad. and, i'm an advocate of giving tax credits to those who pay around minimum wage. while adjusting laws to the effect that they aren't manipluating that system too much.


there are several compoents to sound economic system that you have to build into the system.... freedom to fail, personal responsibility, but also the giant problem of the theories i described, and some other things i had thought of but can't remember.


and if you think the theories are just too complicated, do you agree there is a problem presented? and if so, how would you address the problem?[/quote]

[CatherineM]

My first pay check kind of job was in 1977. I made $1.75 when the minimum wage was around $2. They got away with it because we were all 14-15 years old. One girl who stayed late to tally stuff got $2.25. Then in 1978 they changed the law, or got caught, and we all started making $2.50. The one girl who had been making 50 cents more than the rest of us was mad that she didn't get as big a raise as the rest of us. This was a time when minimum wage jobs were only being filled by teenagers. None of us was trying to pay rent or support a family on it. We were supporting cars and stereos mostly. This was a movie theatre. The last time I went to the movies, there were only people over the age of 30 working there. Most were my age, and not a teenager in the bunch. That has to make a difference to the discussion.

The problem with North Americans, is that we haven't paid the actual cost of what something takes to produce in so long, that when forced to, we freak. If we paid what it actually cost to produce a loaf of bread or gallon of milk, we'd all be on diets real quick. A person's toil is worth a certain amount too, a living wage, but our economy couldn't really handle it. I was in a debate about disability law policy once, and it was pointed out that if everyone in the US who was on social security disability re-entered the job market tomorrow, the unemployment would crush the economy. It is easier to keep a class of people below the poverty level, than to really alter the way our economy works. Besides, most people on disability can't afford to go to work, because they would lose their health insurance, and with pre-existing clauses, would never get private insurance.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i do acknowledge that those who make more than the minimum will get upset as they are relatively making less, and inflation will increase slightly. but that's life. it's better in my mind to do what's right for the minimum thatn try to appease those slightly disenfranchised people.

i'm not sure how you are saying your comments on social security etc applies. i doubt as a question of fact whether minimum wage would wreck havoc on society. it is in effect now, after all and no one is dying. i'm not saying everyone should be paid what they are worth, just the minimum. or not saying SS people should get back on hte clocks or anything.

also an incidental point. i agree a wage increases inflation, but it does not nullify having the wage. peple often argue increasing wage increases price of goods so teh wage increase is canelled out and they are doomed to minimum living. but this is not the case. true inflatino would be if everyone got their wages increased. if just the minimum gets it, inflation would increase, but not wholly, and so the incrase would be much less proportionally ot the increase in minimum.

Edited October 23, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[CatherineM]

Sorry, I was trying to make the point that our economy isn't designed to be able to pay for people or things at a "real" price, and then my mind wandered. I've found since I hit 45 that my mind does that more and more.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i sorta figured.
most people including myself are not clear when they are making incidental points. so i wasn't sure.

[Lena]

does anyone know if other developed countries pay a livable wage? I know the US doesn't, are they in the majority?

[Groo the Wanderer]

If we are gonna have a minimum wage that is supposed to provide for people, then it needs to be $40k/yr. Any less and the whole concept falls short. Either do it right and all the way or shut yer yaps about it.











Of course, most places would be out of business and prices would be sky-high.....









Oh yeah! Get off yer lazy duffs and work hard, earn raises, gain skillz, and stop making minimum wage! Worked for me......

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' post='1408413' date='Oct 24 2007, 09:42 AM']If we are gonna have a minimum wage that is supposed to provide for people, then it needs to be $40k/yr. Any less and the whole concept falls short.[/quote]

Why do high school kids bagging groceries need to make $40k a year? I'm not making that much as a college graduate with a business degree.

Capitalism works because it relies on the profit motive (i.e. selfishness) to benefit the greater good. For that same reason, it has to be controlled with reasonable government regulation, welfare and social security, and charities. A minimum wage is simply a reasonable law that prevents businesses from taking advantage of the unskilled labor force. It isn't intended to provide enough to raise a family. We also have to continue raising minimum wage as inflation reduces the dollar's value. If we did anything with the law, I would be in favor of automatic increases tied to the CPI.

It's also not necessarily true that raising the minimum wage will increase inflation. There are many more factors that affect inflation, including technology used to improve efficiency. One likely unseen benefit to the minimum wage is that it forces business to use technology for tasks they might otherwise have done with very cheap labor. In the long run, this helps improve efficiency and enables companies to afford the minimum wage along with more higher-paying jobs.

[JP2Iloveyou]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1408420' date='Oct 24 2007, 09:36 AM']Why do high school kids bagging groceries need to make $40k a year? I'm not making that much as a college graduate with a business degree.

Capitalism works because it relies on the profit motive (i.e. selfishness) to benefit the greater good. For that same reason, it has to be controlled with reasonable government regulation, welfare and social security, and charities. A minimum wage is simply a reasonable law that prevents businesses from taking advantage of the unskilled labor force. It isn't intended to provide enough to raise a family. We also have to continue raising minimum wage as inflation reduces the dollar's value. If we did anything with the law, I would be in favor of automatic increases tied to the CPI.

It's also not necessarily true that raising the minimum wage will increase inflation. There are many more factors that affect inflation, including technology used to improve efficiency. One likely unseen benefit to the minimum wage is that it forces business to use technology for tasks they might otherwise have done with very cheap labor. In the long run, this helps improve efficiency and enables companies to afford the minimum wage along with more higher-paying jobs.[/quote]


I'm not an economist, but for the time being, I am an assistant manager for a store in a major chain of grocery stores. I know in our case, when the minimum wage increases, we are just going to cut the hours of the kids it effects. The bottom line is we aren't going to pay a 14 or 15 year old kid $7.50 an hour to bag groceries. So, the end result is that the law will wind up hurting those it is intending to help. Furthermore, I have yet to meet a single person who is trying to support a family on minimum wage. Believe it or not, most places pay a livable wage. Perhaps "liveable" means just enough to make a house payment, buy groceries, gas, and insurance. If people want other perks (i.e. lakefront property, a nice car, a boat, a vacation, etc.) then they can either save or aquire the skills necessary to warrant that salary. Oh, but that's not fair, some will say. Well, like everything else, choices have consequences and we as a society often times have no interest in consequences. Someone decided to buy a car instead of saving for college. Someone else decided to have a child as a teenager. Someone else racked up thousands in credit card debt. Those of us who have been responsible in society should not have to pay for the mistakes of others. This includes a minimum wage hike which will accelerate the rise in inflation. Take my store for instance. After the hike, don't be surprised if the price of a gallon of milk goes up, a loaf of bread, whatever.

[fides quarens intellectum]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' post='1408413' date='Oct 24 2007, 07:42 AM']If we are gonna have a minimum wage that is supposed to provide for people, then it needs to be $40k/yr.[/quote]

I was making that much when i was 22, and i really think i was being paid way too much, considering i was only supporting two people with it.

When i was 17 and 18, though, i was making just above minimum wage, and i was able to support myself while going to school. You can be thrifty when needed (as long as the price of ramen noodles stays low), which is why it irks me when i hear people talk about minimum wage being too low, then complaining about their cell phone/internet/satellite bills.

i'm not saying everyone on a low income is like that, but what's the level we are trying to support here with a minimum wage? Anyone else think materialism has created a falsified sense of poverty in this country?

[fides quarens intellectum]

JP2Iloveyou, great post - sorry, i guess i was typing while you were posting.

[fides quarens intellectum]

sorry - double post - a first for me

Edited October 25, 2007 by fides quarens intellectum

[fides quarens intellectum]

weird - triple post - sorry

Edited October 25, 2007 by fides quarens intellectum

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='JP2Iloveyou' post='1408948' date='Oct 24 2007, 11:15 PM']I'm not an economist, but for the time being, I am an assistant manager for a store in a major chain of grocery stores. I know in our case, when the minimum wage increases, we are just going to cut the hours of the kids it effects. The bottom line is we aren't going to pay a 14 or 15 year old kid $7.50 an hour to bag groceries. So, the end result is that the law will wind up hurting those it is intending to help. Furthermore, I have yet to meet a single person who is trying to support a family on minimum wage. Believe it or not, most places pay a livable wage. Perhaps "liveable" means just enough to make a house payment, buy groceries, gas, and insurance. If people want other perks (i.e. lakefront property, a nice car, a boat, a vacation, etc.) then they can either save or aquire the skills necessary to warrant that salary. Oh, but that's not fair, some will say. Well, like everything else, choices have consequences and we as a society often times have no interest in consequences. Someone decided to buy a car instead of saving for college. Someone else decided to have a child as a teenager. Someone else racked up thousands in credit card debt. Those of us who have been responsible in society should not have to pay for the mistakes of others. This includes a minimum wage hike which will accelerate the rise in inflation. Take my store for instance. After the hike, don't be surprised if the price of a gallon of milk goes up, a loaf of bread, whatever.[/quote]


as for the inflation comment, please read how i addressed inflation. then address that point.

also, even if they are cutting hours, they could get two jobs if they have to. i doubt they have to. my point still stands that everywhere i look, there are plenty of minimum wage jobs out there.
plus, the people are are more permanent probably don't get cut as much. only the ones who are there short term anyway. so the people who really matter, they arent hurt as much. whatever teh case, they can get two jobs if they have to. i still see plenty of bottom jobs, so i'm sure they could if they wanted to.

also, two more bottomlines. one, if the minimum wage were adjusted for inflation and constant, employers wouldn't feel the need to makes cuts as they already have the pinch built into the pay. so they weren't feel the need to short shift. two, the minimum wage is in effect now, and people are not causing businnesses strife, other than what i just mentioned about making them feel like they have to cut when the raises are mandated arbitrarily. removing it would just cause people to fall back to mcdonald's pay.

the only problem is you present could easily be fixed by having wage minimum fixed to inflation etc.

Edited October 25, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c