What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

[danielpalos]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

OK so how does a company make a better product at a lower cost when an artificial raise in wages will make everything more expensive to produce?

What you don't understand that if labor costs are raised across the board for all industries that all the raw materials needed to produce products will also go up in price. All the products used by a service business will go up in price. The employers FICA, Wokers' Comp,SUTA and FUTA taxes go up it will cost more to heat and cool the buildings more to have trash removed etc etc

all those cost increases will be passed on to the consumer

the simple answer is; all management is not created equal. some are simply overpaid. Hostess management was one example.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Jobs would be cut, investment diminished.

It's the value of the work that determines the pay.

LMAO General statements such as these ^^^ have no value whatsoever. A struggling business may cut jobs, a thriving business may make adjustments. A government which raises the minimum wage, may provide targeted tax incentives.

I think we should pay unemployment compensation at one dollar an hour less than the minimum wage, simply for the sake of employment at will.

Policy changes such as the one you're recommended have consequences beyond those intended.

like what? solving for simple poverty on an at-will basis?

Unintended consequences are not easily predicted, or they would be vetted before changing a policy or activity. Isn't that obvious?

 

[Eloy]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

 

[Wry Catcher]

like what? solving for simple poverty on an at-will basis?

what does it mean to solve for poverty on at-will basis? Is this strange English or what?

it only seems strange if you have lousy reading comprehension.

it means we don't need as much welfare, as we currently know it.

Do you know TANF replaced AFDC decades ago? If you don't know about the differences you have no business discussing the issue of aid, or as you call it, welfare.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

OK so how does a company make a better product at a lower cost when an artificial raise in wages will make everything more expensive to produce?

What you don't understand that if labor costs are raised across the board for all industries that all the raw materials needed to produce products will also go up in price. All the products used by a service business will go up in price. The employers FICA, Wokers' Comp,SUTA and FUTA taxes go up it will cost more to heat and cool the buildings more to have trash removed etc etc

all those cost increases will be passed on to the consumer

the simple answer is; all management is not created equal. some are simply overpaid. Hostess management was one example.

By who's opinion yours and your lazy ass socialist snowflake friends?




.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

Why can't they save? Oh yea they are liberals, don't know math, economics , finances and who not to vote for... High tax democrats



.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There's a rather simple answer to this.

Person A makes $9.50 an hour. Person B makes $14 an hour. Person C makes $25 an hour.

Person A Gross Pay = $380
Person B Gross Pay = $560
Person C Gross Pay = $1000.

Person A will get a $4.50/hour raise, persons B&C will get a $0.00/hour raise while prices double. So more people will be making minimum wage than ever. Nearly 50% of the population actually. I barely know anyone who makes more than $14 an hour...

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

A simple answer which is a lie of omission, and thus a half-truth. Left out of the equation are those who still live with a parent, live with a spouse who is the bread winner, and others whose main support is provided for by others.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

Why can't they save? Oh yea they are liberals, don't know math, economics , finances and who not to vote for... High tax democrats



.

Food, clothing, shelter and transportation. Only a callous conservative would ask such a question.

 

[Wyatt earp]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

only the right has no use for Capitalism. it is about consolidating and re-tooling for greater efficiency, like Henry Ford.

only the right has no use for Capitalism.

Only the left totally misunderstands economics.

it is about consolidating and re-tooling for greater efficiency

After your mandatory $15 minimum wage, the surviving businesses will be much more efficient.....
after they learn how to exist without $15/hour unskilled labor.

Of course unemployment will be much, much higher.
At least the surviving business owners will make more money.

Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages as a form of competition. The right is claiming they can't do it, due to excessive corporate welfare and too many tax holidays.

Who claims they can't do it?


The question always remains the same...its their money, they live in america the right of freedom, the right to choose.


.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

Why can't they save? Oh yea they are liberals, don't know math, economics , finances and who not to vote for... High tax democrats



.

Food, clothing, shelter and transportation. Only a callous conservative would ask such a question.

Again I can live on $20 bucks a week in food if I wanted too. Well I hunt and fish




Shelter... Again Chicago 1 bedroom apt $1,000 a red state like SC $400



Soo as you were saying?



.

 

[Skull Pilot]

show me where in the constitution it says you have a right to a job

dear, employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer. it is simple, theft from the poor so the rich can get richer, faster.

Sweety, the employer owns the job. it is his to give or take away.

so what; why so much litigation about for-cause and at-will, if it is so simple?

only the right wing, never gets it. and, they wonder why it costs so much to do business.

What litigation?
Not too many people who get laid off go to court

I've owned businesses have you? It seems to me you do not understand the costs involved in running a business not me

it is a major expense for the employment sector. for-cause and at-will would not be so litigious, with unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis.

Sorry Bub but there is no such thing as a free lunch
Where do you think the money will come from to pay all those people like you who want to be unemployed at will?

 

[Eloy]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

Why can't they save? Oh yea they are liberals, don't know math, economics , finances and who not to vote for... High tax democrats.

The people on minimum wages could eat cake.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It's right after the section on your right to have your condoms paid for by the taxpayer. You know, in the section written in crayon.

nothing but diversion while claiming equality for pay purposes in the non-porn sector, gentlemen?

it is about, equal protection of the law.

Which we have. You don't have a right to a job, and if you voluntarily leave a job, you don't have the right to force someone else to continue paying you. It's equal.

I guess we could give you what you want and eliminate UI altogether.

do you always argue in a vacuum of special pleading?

we have paying paying for War on Poverty for over a generation, with no end in sight.

we could be solving simple poverty on an at-will basis, but for right wing fantasy.

Yeah we have the richest poor people on the fucking planet right here
Tell me if people can get paid not to work like you want where will all the money come from to pay them?

simple, a more efficient economy. we don't need a War on Drugs. and welfare will not be so expensive if people can go on unemployment compensation instead.

so you want to rename welfare to unemployment and have more people collecting and you think it will cost less

wow

 

[Wry Catcher]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

Why can't they save? Oh yea they are liberals, don't know math, economics , finances and who not to vote for... High tax democrats



.

Food, clothing, shelter and transportation. Only a callous conservative would ask such a question.

Again I can live on $20 bucks a week in food if I wanted too. Well I hunt and fish




Shelter... Again Chicago 1 bedroom apt $1,000 a red state like SC $400



Soo as you were saying?



.

I didn't say anything, I wrote something you can't seem to comprehend. You seem to argue based on both biases and ignorance, and thus are unable or unwilling to consider reality.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

Why can't they save? Oh yea they are liberals, don't know math, economics , finances and who not to vote for... High tax democrats



.

Food, clothing, shelter and transportation. Only a callous conservative would ask such a question.

Again I can live on $20 bucks a week in food if I wanted too. Well I hunt and fish




Shelter... Again Chicago 1 bedroom apt $1,000 a red state like SC $400



Soo as you were saying?



.

I didn't say anything, I wrote something you can't seem to comprehend. You seem to argue based on both biases and ignorance, and thus are unable or unwilling to consider reality.

Bullshit you said food, clothing and shelter...yet you Dont want to mention the elephant's in the room


The poor always voting for high tax democrats, you guys always want to ignore that.


And it slipped my mind...now they have to pay for health care before food, shelter and clothing..besides again any body can save money if they really wanted too.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

how many jobs are there, with a natural rate of unemployment?

we have full employment at 4.3 % so no worries about that.

that is not, full employment. full employment means wages are outpacing inflation.

They are.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

UI is means tested welfare. It gives a person who lost his job through no fault of his own something to live on until he gets another one. If society decides to pay people who are not working (for whatever reason), then society will bear the costs of that decision, whether through higher taxes or higher prices and inflation. You can't avoid it.

no, it isn't. it is a social correction to capitalism's laissez-fair laziness regarding full employment. There is no means testing as a condition, only employment.

Solving for simple poverty means capitalism will be better not worse. The right wing Only has fantasy, not any form of solutions.

It's a matter of terminology. What you are advocating is quite simply welfare for when you are not working for whatever reason. That means that a large number of people will decide that they prefer collecting a paycheck but not working a job and society will bear that cost.

not at all; what I am advocating is improving the efficiency of our economy, in favor of the general welfare instead of a private profit motive.

Yeah, because profit is bad. DERP!

profit is good, but a good economy is better. Derp!

Less profit = better economy?

No profit (Venezuela) = awesome economy!!!
DERP!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

only the right has no use for Capitalism. it is about consolidating and re-tooling for greater efficiency, like Henry Ford.

only the right has no use for Capitalism.

Only the left totally misunderstands economics.

it is about consolidating and re-tooling for greater efficiency

After your mandatory $15 minimum wage, the surviving businesses will be much more efficient.....
after they learn how to exist without $15/hour unskilled labor.

Of course unemployment will be much, much higher.
At least the surviving business owners will make more money.

Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages as a form of competition. The right is claiming they can't do it, due to excessive corporate welfare and too many tax holidays.

Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages as a form of competition.

Voluntarily, because it made sense for his business model.
Raising it, across the board, by government fiat, does not make sense.

The right is claiming they can't do it,

It can be done.
It would be stupid.
Obama's 2 terms are proof that stupid things that should not be done sometimes are done.
Even when they make things worse.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

Exactly! Kill all the business owners who pay less than $20/hour, eh comrade?

We have the largest economy in the world and a first world economy. That costs; only the right wants it cheap.

We have the largest economy in the world and a first world economy.

Yup.

That costs; only the right wants it cheap.

You have to look at cost versus benefit. Libs never(can't) think that deeply.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Since people on minimum wages, unable to save, spend it all. So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

So, it would be good for business were the wages raised.

If it weren't for bad math, liberals would have no math at all.