Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Labor contracts are often tied to the law—and it reduces the competition for lower-paying jobs.
Organized labor's instantaneous support for President Obama's recent proposal to hike the minimum wage doesn't make much sense at first glance. The average private-sector union member—at least one who still has a job—earns $22 an hour according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's a far cry from the current $7.25 per hour federal minimum wage, or the $9 per hour the president has proposed. Altruistic solidarity with lower-paid workers isn't the reason for organized labor's cheerleading, either.
The real reason is that some unions and their members directly benefit from minimum wage increases—even when nary a union member actually makes the minimum wage.
The Center for Union Facts analyzed collective-bargaining agreements obtained from the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards. The data indicate that a number of unions in the service, retail and hospitality industries peg their base-line wages to the minimum wage.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
All you are saying really is that prices need to come down. Lower taxes and reduce strangling regulation.
Why is there no mention of the real reason for this push to increase the minimum wage?
Labor contracts are often tied to the law—and it reduces the competition for lower-paying jobs.
Organized labor's instantaneous support for President Obama's recent proposal to hike the minimum wage doesn't make much sense at first glance. The average private-sector union member—at least one who still has a job—earns $22 an hour according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's a far cry from the current $7.25 per hour federal minimum wage, or the $9 per hour the president has proposed. Altruistic solidarity with lower-paid workers isn't the reason for organized labor's cheerleading, either.
The real reason is that some unions and their members directly benefit from minimum wage increases—even when nary a union member actually makes the minimum wage.
The Center for Union Facts analyzed collective-bargaining agreements obtained from the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards. The data indicate that a number of unions in the service, retail and hospitality industries peg their base-line wages to the minimum wage.
Richard Berman: Why Unions Want a Higher Minimum Wage - WSJ.com
This isn't about helping the less fortunate, it's about buying support from those already doing pretty well.
So if the minimum wage stays at $7.25, the price of milk and bread won't go up? The price of cars won't go up?
The situation is not cut-and-dried.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
Why is there no mention of the real reason for this push to increase the minimum wage?
Labor contracts are often tied to the lawand it reduces the competition for lower-paying jobs.
Organized labor's instantaneous support for President Obama's recent proposal to hike the minimum wage doesn't make much sense at first glance. The average private-sector union memberat least one who still has a jobearns $22 an hour according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's a far cry from the current $7.25 per hour federal minimum wage, or the $9 per hour the president has proposed. Altruistic solidarity with lower-paid workers isn't the reason for organized labor's cheerleading, either.
The real reason is that some unions and their members directly benefit from minimum wage increaseseven when nary a union member actually makes the minimum wage.
The Center for Union Facts analyzed collective-bargaining agreements obtained from the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards. The data indicate that a number of unions in the service, retail and hospitality industries peg their base-line wages to the minimum wage.
Richard Berman: Why Unions Want a Higher Minimum Wage - WSJ.com
This isn't about helping the less fortunate, it's about buying support from those already doing pretty well.
Pretty ridiculous that some people here are actually suggesting that minimum wage be $100 an hour. Makes this thread not worth reading.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
All you are saying really is that prices need to come down. Lower taxes and reduce strangling regulation.
So if the minimum wage stays at $7.25, the price of milk and bread won't go up? The price of cars won't go up?
The situation is not cut-and-dried.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
If you are looking for a specific number of jobs that are going to be lost because of raising the minimum wage you are not going to find it. No one can pin down something so specific in such a complex entity. It will cost jobs though.
The real question is not how many jobs it is going to cost but rather what would you accomplish for that loss. In all honesty, I dont think you are going to accomplish anything as the price of everything rises to meet the new higher wages. Those wages represent the value of the work provided. As the value of that work has not changed, increasing the number of pieces of paper that you gave the person is not going to change the real pay that they earned after the market stabilizes.
The D.C. Council began the year by trying to pass a minimum wage hike intended to bring to Walmart to heel. It is ending the year by pushing a minimum wage increase that would likely benefit Walmart. Such are the tangled politics and economics of the minimum wage issue.
What changed is that the council, frustrated in its effort to pass a hike that singled out the retail giant and left most other businesses untouched, decided to instead push an across-the-board increase. That will likely happen.
At this point the real question is how much higher D.C.'s minimum will go. The council voted unanimously Dec. 3 to make it $11.50 an hour by 2016, up from its current $8.25. Mayor Vincent Gray has counter-proposed $10. The council must vote a second time before sending it to Gray, but the initial vote suggests it will be able to override any mayoral veto.
Either version would have the unintended effect of helping to insulate D.C.s six new Walmarts from economic competition. The chain will be able to pay the new higher wage in many cases, it already does but local mom-and-pop stores may not.
That probably wasnt the councils intention when it introduced the Large Retailer Accountability Act in January. That would have required large retail businesses to pay at least $12.50 an hour.
Only a handful of businesses other than Walmart, like Macy's and Home Depot, qualified. All others would have been free to pay just $8.25, giving them a serious economic edge because their labor costs would be lower.
If minimum wage were raised, presumably many people's wages would be bumped at least a little. Even though only a small percentage of workers earn minimum wage, the people who started out at minimum wage and got raises would get upset if brand new employees suddenly got as much as they did, so lots of wages would go up.
So how many jobs would be created or saved by this move -- for instance because of the increase in spending money available for local spending?
And how many jobs would be lost -- for instance because the increase in American wages would make offshore labor look more appealing, or because business owners' profit margin wouldn't support a 20% hike in labor costs so they would let a small portion of their workforce go and hope for more productivity from the rest?
Lets just say for example that the new living minimum wage is double the current federal minimum wage: $7.25 x 2= $14.5/hr (+-$30,160 per year). The people who would supposedly benefit the most would be low skilled workers right? Now what about the moderate skilled workers who were making $15/hr already? Would they sweat in the hot sun all day as a construction worker if they knew they could make the same stocking shelves at Wal-Mart? Would they freeze in the winter as an HVAC repairman crawling under peoples houses if they could make the same amount sweeping the floors as a janitor? Would you? Employers dealing in construction, heating/air, plumbing, etc., will need to considerably increase wages to keep their staff on board. Indeed, all skilled labor employers would need to increase the wages of their workers in order to remain competitive in the market for skilled labor, or else, their competitors will grab them. Moreover, high skilled labor would need to increase their pay and benefits.
If you mandated a living wage you would only create a new poverty line with the same amount of poverty as you started off with, if not more, after the market settles down. There is indeed a reason why service stations no longer hire teenagers to service the cars of travelers.
If minimum wage were raised, presumably many people's wages would be bumped at least a little. Even though only a small percentage of workers earn minimum wage, the people who started out at minimum wage and got raises would get upset if brand new employees suddenly got as much as they did, so lots of wages would go up.
So how many jobs would be created or saved by this move -- for instance because of the increase in spending money available for local spending?
And how many jobs would be lost -- for instance because the increase in American wages would make offshore labor look more appealing, or because business owners' profit margin wouldn't support a 20% hike in labor costs so they would let a small portion of their workforce go and hope for more productivity from the rest?
Lets just say for example that the new living minimum wage is double the current federal minimum wage: $7.25 x 2= $14.5/hr (+-$30,160 per year). The people who would supposedly benefit the most would be low skilled workers right? Now what about the moderate skilled workers who were making $15/hr already? Would they sweat in the hot sun all day as a construction worker if they knew they could make the same stocking shelves at Wal-Mart? Would they freeze in the winter as an HVAC repairman crawling under peoples houses if they could make the same amount sweeping the floors as a janitor? Would you? Employers dealing in construction, heating/air, plumbing, etc., will need to considerably increase wages to keep their staff on board. Indeed, all skilled labor employers would need to increase the wages of their workers in order to remain competitive in the market for skilled labor, or else, their competitors will grab them. Moreover, high skilled labor would need to increase their pay and benefits.
If you mandated a living wage you would only create a new poverty line with the same amount of poverty after the market settles down.
Yes, I'm assuming that wages for skilled labor would also rise.
With millions being paid more, there would be more tax revenue.
I am curious about what the new standards would be for public assistance -- would the poverty line just be arbitrarily bumped up in accordance with the rise in minimum wage? As you say, it seems likely it would.
But more taxes would be going into the coffer, so there would be more money for public projects. That could mean more jobs.
If minimum wage were raised, presumably many people's wages would be bumped at least a little. Even though only a small percentage of workers earn minimum wage, the people who started out at minimum wage and got raises would get upset if brand new employees suddenly got as much as they did, so lots of wages would go up.
So how many jobs would be created or saved by this move -- for instance because of the increase in spending money available for local spending?
And how many jobs would be lost -- for instance because the increase in American wages would make offshore labor look more appealing, or because business owners' profit margin wouldn't support a 20% hike in labor costs so they would let a small portion of their workforce go and hope for more productivity from the rest?
Lets just say for example that the new living minimum wage is double the current federal minimum wage: $7.25 x 2= $14.5/hr (+-$30,160 per year). The people who would supposedly benefit the most would be low skilled workers right? Now what about the moderate skilled workers who were making $15/hr already? Would they sweat in the hot sun all day as a construction worker if they knew they could make the same stocking shelves at Wal-Mart? Would they freeze in the winter as an HVAC repairman crawling under peoples houses if they could make the same amount sweeping the floors as a janitor? Would you? Employers dealing in construction, heating/air, plumbing, etc., will need to considerably increase wages to keep their staff on board. Indeed, all skilled labor employers would need to increase the wages of their workers in order to remain competitive in the market for skilled labor, or else, their competitors will grab them. Moreover, high skilled labor would need to increase their pay and benefits.
If you mandated a living wage you would only create a new poverty line with the same amount of poverty as you started off with, if not more, after the market settles down. There is indeed a reason why service stations no longer hire teenagers to service the cars of travelers.
Bingo.
This is also the reason we no longer have neighborhood grocery stores that offer free delivery, or that bookstore where you could talk to someone who actually read books. People love to blame the big box stores for the demise of the friendly neighborhood market, but the real culprit is the government policies that make it impossible for small business to compete.
Exactly.......If raising the minimum wage would end poverty, poverty would have been eradicated when the MW went from 75 cents an hour to $1.25 an hour.
Poverty is relative. Pay people $100.00 an hour and they will still be poor.
Even if the minimum wage went to $100 per hour.
Then a gallon of milk would cost $50 and a loaf of bread would be $25 at the grocery store.
Like Katzndogz said......it's all relative. ..
So if the minimum wage stays at $7.25, the price of milk and bread won't go up? The price of cars won't go up?
The situation is not cut-and-dried.
Lets just say for example that the new living minimum wage is double the current federal minimum wage: $7.25 x 2= $14.5/hr (+-$30,160 per year). The people who would supposedly benefit the most would be low skilled workers right? Now what about the moderate skilled workers who were making $15/hr already? Would they sweat in the hot sun all day as a construction worker if they knew they could make the same stocking shelves at Wal-Mart? Would they freeze in the winter as an HVAC repairman crawling under peoples houses if they could make the same amount sweeping the floors as a janitor? Would you? Employers dealing in construction, heating/air, plumbing, etc., will need to considerably increase wages to keep their staff on board. Indeed, all skilled labor employers would need to increase the wages of their workers in order to remain competitive in the market for skilled labor, or else, their competitors will grab them. Moreover, high skilled labor would need to increase their pay and benefits.
If you mandated a living wage you would only create a new poverty line with the same amount of poverty after the market settles down.
Yes, I'm assuming that wages for skilled labor would also rise.
With millions being paid more, there would be more tax revenue.
I am curious about what the new standards would be for public assistance -- would the poverty line just be arbitrarily bumped up in accordance with the rise in minimum wage? As you say, it seems likely it would.
But more taxes would be going into the coffer, so there would be more money for public projects. That could mean more jobs.
If increasing the minimum wage worked the way its proponents insist there wouldn't be a need to accompany it with an increase in the EIC and other benefits for poor people.
So if the minimum wage stays at $7.25, the price of milk and bread won't go up? The price of cars won't go up?
The situation is not cut-and-dried.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
Exactly.......
Even if the minimum wage went to $100 per hour.
Then a gallon of milk would cost $50 and a loaf of bread would be $25 at the grocery store.
Like Katzndogz said......it's all relative. ..
So if the minimum wage stays at $7.25, the price of milk and bread won't go up? The price of cars won't go up?
The situation is not cut-and-dried.
The price of milk is set by federal law. It would drop considerably if the government got out of the way.
Come to think of it, that is true of quite a few things we consider staple foods.
Did raising the minimum wage help anyone?
Right now the minimum wage is too high. It isn't low enough to attract first time workers. Make the minimum wage high enough to support a family and be a career then no one will be able to enter the work force. We'll be like parts of Europe with 30% youth unemployment.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
Rule of thumb.
Raising the minimum wage has little or no economic impact as long as you don't raise it higher than what businesses are already paying their workers. A $15 hour wage in North Dakota wouldn't make a dent in the economy, it would wipe out most businesses in Brownsville Texas.
Raising the minimum wage provides at least a burst of help. Not raising the minimum wage while prices are rising around everyone means standard of living lessens.
So yes, raising the minimum wage helps in some ways (and staves off hurt in some ways).
But it hurts in others.
There are trade-offs.
My question today is about the net effect -- specifically in numbers of jobs.
All you are saying really is that prices need to come down. Lower taxes and reduce strangling regulation.
Walmart's effective tax rate for 2012 was 0.01%. How much lower do you want it to go? OBTW, how much was yours?
Which 'strangling regulation'? Safety guards for meat slicers?
Lets just say for example that the new living minimum wage is double the current federal minimum wage: $7.25 x 2= $14.5/hr (+-$30,160 per year). The people who would supposedly benefit the most would be low skilled workers right? Now what about the moderate skilled workers who were making $15/hr already? Would they sweat in the hot sun all day as a construction worker if they knew they could make the same stocking shelves at Wal-Mart? Would they freeze in the winter as an HVAC repairman crawling under peoples houses if they could make the same amount sweeping the floors as a janitor? Would you? Employers dealing in construction, heating/air, plumbing, etc., will need to considerably increase wages to keep their staff on board. Indeed, all skilled labor employers would need to increase the wages of their workers in order to remain competitive in the market for skilled labor, or else, their competitors will grab them. Moreover, high skilled labor would need to increase their pay and benefits.
If you mandated a living wage you would only create a new poverty line with the same amount of poverty as you started off with, if not more, after the market settles down. There is indeed a reason why service stations no longer hire teenagers to service the cars of travelers.
Bingo.
This is also the reason we no longer have neighborhood grocery stores that offer free delivery, or that bookstore where you could talk to someone who actually read books. People love to blame the big box stores for the demise of the friendly neighborhood market, but the real culprit is the government policies that make it impossible for small business to compete.
Which government policies are you writing of?
