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

[hadit]

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

yes, it would. it will increase demand in the long run, since the poor will be spending at the new minimum wage level.

The poor that have jobs, that is. There would be fewer that actually have jobs at the higher wage.

There would be fewer working for slave wages if the minimum wage is higher.

There would be fewer working, period. The only question is how many fewer. Obviously, a higher MW kills jobs. Doubt it? Set it to $100/hr and ask what would happen. Now, you CAN have a MW that doesn't kill too many jobs all at once, but you have to keep it low enough that it really doesn't make much of a difference. We have already lost a lot of low end jobs to higher costs, but as long as the pace is gradual enough, not too many complain.

who cares, if those not employed can opt for unemployment compensation?

Anyone with two functioning brain cells cares, because we're making it harder for the unexperienced and unskilled to get jobs at all. There was a time when a teenager could get a job at a gas station pumping gas. Not any more. Soon they won't be able to get a job flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant. As we drive the MW higher, we lose the kinds of jobs these kids need to break into the job market.

 

[hadit]

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?

It is about Individual Liberty. Unintended consequences can be handled via the common law.

"Individual liberty"? Explain that concept on its actual, real world, meaning.

it means, you are no longer a wage slave. you don't have to work for money; you just have to work if you want to "get rich".

That's a socialist utopia that doesn't exist. It's been tried multiple times and it never works. The truth is that individual liberty means you are free to be responsible for yourself and to take the consequences of your choices. If you don't want to work, you don't, but you also don't expect to force someone else to work to support you. That's a real wage slave.

 

[hadit]

and lets never forget that a libcommie wants a higher minimum wage and 1001 other interventions in the economy too becuase he lacks the IQ to understand how capitalism works!!

Capitalism Only works because it is constantly bailed out by socialism.

Raising the minimum wage will have the effect of improving our Standard of living to that extent. Along with solving simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

So why not just eliminate poverty altogether by raising the MW to $100/hr?

because you need to solve simple poverty somehow; regardless of any right Right to Work in any right to work States.

Do you believe we would eliminate poverty if we set the MW to $100/hr tomorrow?

no; you still asking that question is why I don't take the right seriously about economics.

Than you are acknowledging that a higher MW costs jobs. The only question is how many and who gets hurt the most.

The ones who get hurt the most are the ones who need the low end jobs that are killed by the higher MW. You're hurting the very ones you claim you want to help.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it would. it will increase demand in the long run, since the poor will be spending at the new minimum wage level.

The poor that have jobs, that is. There would be fewer that actually have jobs at the higher wage.

There would be fewer working for slave wages if the minimum wage is higher.

There would be fewer working, period. The only question is how many fewer. Obviously, a higher MW kills jobs. Doubt it? Set it to $100/hr and ask what would happen. Now, you CAN have a MW that doesn't kill too many jobs all at once, but you have to keep it low enough that it really doesn't make much of a difference. We have already lost a lot of low end jobs to higher costs, but as long as the pace is gradual enough, not too many complain.

who cares, if those not employed can opt for unemployment compensation?

Anyone with two functioning brain cells cares, because we're making it harder for the unexperienced and unskilled to get jobs at all. There was a time when a teenager could get a job at a gas station pumping gas. Not any more. Soon they won't be able to get a job flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant. As we drive the MW higher, we lose the kinds of jobs these kids need to break into the job market.

reading comprehension not your strong suit?

who cares, if those not employed can opt for unemployment compensation?

they won't need to care about a job until they are ready for one. it really is that simple.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

It is about Individual Liberty. Unintended consequences can be handled via the common law.

"Individual liberty"? Explain that concept on its actual, real world, meaning.

it means, you are no longer a wage slave. you don't have to work for money; you just have to work if you want to "get rich".

That's a socialist utopia that doesn't exist. It's been tried multiple times and it never works. The truth is that individual liberty means you are free to be responsible for yourself and to take the consequences of your choices. If you don't want to work, you don't, but you also don't expect to force someone else to work to support you. That's a real wage slave.

a work or die ethic is unnecessary in modern, corporate welfare times.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism Only works because it is constantly bailed out by socialism.

Raising the minimum wage will have the effect of improving our Standard of living to that extent. Along with solving simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

So why not just eliminate poverty altogether by raising the MW to $100/hr?

because you need to solve simple poverty somehow; regardless of any right Right to Work in any right to work States.

Do you believe we would eliminate poverty if we set the MW to $100/hr tomorrow?

no; you still asking that question is why I don't take the right seriously about economics.

Than you are acknowledging that a higher MW costs jobs. The only question is how many and who gets hurt the most.

The ones who get hurt the most are the ones who need the low end jobs that are killed by the higher MW. You're hurting the very ones you claim you want to help.

solving simple poverty means we should be growing the size of the pie by circulating capital.

 

[Eloy]

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.

Yes, it is simple economics that when wages are kept low, such as in the United States, the working class do not earn enough to pay much income tax, thus denying revenue for the government, and they have little or no discretionary spending power since the money goes on necessities which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers. (Political Economy 101)

it is simple economics that when wages are kept low

Kept low? Now what evil fellow has the power to do that?

which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers.

Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

Wages are kept low by employers who see wages as a factor of production that is a cost against their profits.
American workers deserve more than slave wages whereas corporations like ExxonMobil, for example, by paying living wages put more buying power into the families of working people who can then buy from the small businesses you ask about. (Economics 101)

 

[Eloy]

Yes, it is simple economics that when wages are kept low, such as in the United States, the working class do not earn enough to pay much income tax, thus denying revenue for the government, and they have little or no discretionary spending power since the money goes on necessities which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers. (Political Economy 101)

it is simple economics that when wages are kept low

Kept low? Now what evil fellow has the power to do that?

which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers.

Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

the Boss.

The Boss has the power to keep national, hell, global wages, low?

Public policy does that, merely to have the poor work harder so the rich can get richer faster.

Public policy does that

Public policy keeps wages low? How? Why? Please explain further.

The government can set the legal amount for a living wage.

 

[Eloy]

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

yes, it would. it will increase demand in the long run, since the poor will be spending at the new minimum wage level.

The poor that have jobs, that is. There would be fewer that actually have jobs at the higher wage.

There would be fewer working for slave wages if the minimum wage is higher.

There would be fewer working, period. The only question is how many fewer. Obviously, a higher MW kills jobs. Doubt it? Set it to $100/hr and ask what would happen. Now, you CAN have a MW that doesn't kill too many jobs all at once, but you have to keep it low enough that it really doesn't make much of a difference. We have already lost a lot of low end jobs to higher costs, but as long as the pace is gradual enough, not too many complain.

Politicians who care more about their working class families than corporation executive salaries and stockholders dividends will make a minimum wage a living wage by law.

 

[hadit]

The poor that have jobs, that is. There would be fewer that actually have jobs at the higher wage.

There would be fewer working for slave wages if the minimum wage is higher.

There would be fewer working, period. The only question is how many fewer. Obviously, a higher MW kills jobs. Doubt it? Set it to $100/hr and ask what would happen. Now, you CAN have a MW that doesn't kill too many jobs all at once, but you have to keep it low enough that it really doesn't make much of a difference. We have already lost a lot of low end jobs to higher costs, but as long as the pace is gradual enough, not too many complain.

who cares, if those not employed can opt for unemployment compensation?

Anyone with two functioning brain cells cares, because we're making it harder for the unexperienced and unskilled to get jobs at all. There was a time when a teenager could get a job at a gas station pumping gas. Not any more. Soon they won't be able to get a job flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant. As we drive the MW higher, we lose the kinds of jobs these kids need to break into the job market.

reading comprehension not your strong suit?

who cares, if those not employed can opt for unemployment compensation?

they won't need to care about a job until they are ready for one. it really is that simple.

Apparently, you're not reading things very well. Everyone with two functioning brain cells cares very much that society not be saddled with the burden of supporting able bodied people perfectly capable of performing a useful job but who decide not to do so.

 

[hadit]

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

yes, it would. it will increase demand in the long run, since the poor will be spending at the new minimum wage level.

The poor that have jobs, that is. There would be fewer that actually have jobs at the higher wage.

There would be fewer working for slave wages if the minimum wage is higher.

There would be fewer working, period. The only question is how many fewer. Obviously, a higher MW kills jobs. Doubt it? Set it to $100/hr and ask what would happen. Now, you CAN have a MW that doesn't kill too many jobs all at once, but you have to keep it low enough that it really doesn't make much of a difference. We have already lost a lot of low end jobs to higher costs, but as long as the pace is gradual enough, not too many complain.

Politicians who care more about their working class families than corporation executive salaries and stockholders dividends will make a minimum wage a living wage by law.

No, they will not, and here is why.

1. They do hear from economists, and know that a MW raised that high that fast would kill the economy.
2. ANY MW that's supposed to be a "living wage" will end up simply chasing an ideal that can never be reached. First, jacking the MW increases inflation and within a short period of time erases any benefit. Secondly, those who got big raises and didn't lose their jobs and those who benefit politically from their votes will, in VERY short order, decide that whatever they set the MW to just isn't enough, and will insist on raising it yet again.
3. There is a significant number of people who would like to work and who would benefit from working, but don't need to be paid a lot to do so. Jacking the MW too high simply prices them out of the market, leaving them unemployed. You graduated from high school and want to start working? Great, just wait a few years until something opens up or enough experienced workers die to give you a spot.

 

[Skull Pilot]

OK let me know when you make your first million collecting welfare

anyone can learn how to invest in the stock market, on unemployment.

And you think what you have left over after you pay for rent, food, utilities and other misc things from your welfare check will allow you to become a millionaire in the stock market?

Wow

the Only problem with EBT cards now, is they can't be used with financial planners. Only the right, never gets it.

Really why use a financial planner I thought you could learn to do it on your own?
And how much will be left a month on your welfare card to invest in the market?

$10?

depends; i could rent a room with someone and go to school.

And of course you want us to pay your tuition

 

[Skull Pilot]

Hey you don't have to work for anyone else.

You are free to live in a shack and be a subsistence farmer and be 100% self supporting

It's not up to me to pay your bills for you

how well did that work during the Great Depression? in any case, you make it seem like you are ok with public policy that enables the rich to get richer faster, by letting the poor starve to death.

You do realize that the rich don't pay into SS don't you?

It is funded on the backs of those making less than 106K a year

good for the rich; they appreciate your help getting richer, faster.

Hey I don't pay into SS because most of my income comes from business profits and rents

I'm on my payroll for 30K a year and I put most of that into retirement savings so I defer income taxes on it

It's not my fault you can't run your own business

it isn't for everyone. i prefer to grow plants and work at the speed of plants growing.

yeah slow and lazy

Which is why you want everyone else who isn't slow and lazy to support you

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

it is simple economics that when wages are kept low

Kept low? Now what evil fellow has the power to do that?

which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers.

Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

the Boss.

The Boss has the power to keep national, hell, global wages, low?

Public policy does that, merely to have the poor work harder so the rich can get richer faster.

Public policy does that

Public policy keeps wages low? How? Why? Please explain further.

Having a "work or die" ethic that merely tramples Individual Liberty and natural rights and equality; merely so the rich can get richer faster, is one egregious example. the right wing probably doesn't even recognize it simply Because, it is not about guns and gun equality.

Having a "work or die" ethic that merely tramples Individual Liberty and natural rights and equality;

Having a "sit at home on your ass and collect a paycheck" hasn't worked out too well.
The left wing probably doesn't even recognize it simply because they don't care about results.

 

[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.

The people on minimum wages could eat cake.

i love Hostess cupcakes.

Yea they taste better non union made

 

[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.

Yes, it is simple economics that when wages are kept low, such as in the United States, the working class do not earn enough to pay much income tax, thus denying revenue for the government, and they have little or no discretionary spending power since the money goes on necessities which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers. (Political Economy 101)

it is simple economics that when wages are kept low

Kept low? Now what evil fellow has the power to do that?

which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers.

Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

Wages are kept low by employers who see wages as a factor of production that is a cost against their profits.
American workers deserve more than slave wages whereas corporations like ExxonMobil, for example, by paying living wages put more buying power into the families of working people who can then buy from the small businesses you ask about. (Economics 101)

Wages are kept low by employers

Why do you feel they have the power to do that?
Is there an Employers Union I haven't heard about?

who see wages as a factor of production that is a cost against their profits.

Only because IT IS A COST AGAINST THEIR PROFITS.
What do you see wages as, if not that?

You never answered my question:
Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

it is simple economics that when wages are kept low

Kept low? Now what evil fellow has the power to do that?

which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers.

Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

the Boss.

The Boss has the power to keep national, hell, global wages, low?

Public policy does that, merely to have the poor work harder so the rich can get richer faster.

Public policy does that

Public policy keeps wages low? How? Why? Please explain further.

The government can set the legal amount for a living wage.

The government can set the legal amount for a living wage.

Yes, the government can do lots of stupid things. Doesn't mean they should though.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

how well did that work during the Great Depression? in any case, you make it seem like you are ok with public policy that enables the rich to get richer faster, by letting the poor starve to death.

You do realize that the rich don't pay into SS don't you?

It is funded on the backs of those making less than 106K a year

good for the rich; they appreciate your help getting richer, faster.

Hey I don't pay into SS because most of my income comes from business profits and rents

I'm on my payroll for 30K a year and I put most of that into retirement savings so I defer income taxes on it

It's not my fault you can't run your own business

it isn't for everyone. i prefer to grow plants and work at the speed of plants growing.

yeah slow and lazy

Which is why you want everyone else who isn't slow and lazy to support you

Dude, you're harshing his buzz.

 

[Eloy]

yes, it would. it will increase demand in the long run, since the poor will be spending at the new minimum wage level.

The poor that have jobs, that is. There would be fewer that actually have jobs at the higher wage.

There would be fewer working for slave wages if the minimum wage is higher.

There would be fewer working, period. The only question is how many fewer. Obviously, a higher MW kills jobs. Doubt it? Set it to $100/hr and ask what would happen. Now, you CAN have a MW that doesn't kill too many jobs all at once, but you have to keep it low enough that it really doesn't make much of a difference. We have already lost a lot of low end jobs to higher costs, but as long as the pace is gradual enough, not too many complain.

Politicians who care more about their working class families than corporation executive salaries and stockholders dividends will make a minimum wage a living wage by law.

No, they will not, and here is why.

1. They do hear from economists, and know that a MW raised that high that fast would kill the economy.
2. ANY MW that's supposed to be a "living wage" will end up simply chasing an ideal that can never be reached. First, jacking the MW increases inflation and within a short period of time erases any benefit. Secondly, those who got big raises and didn't lose their jobs and those who benefit politically from their votes will, in VERY short order, decide that whatever they set the MW to just isn't enough, and will insist on raising it yet again.
3. There is a significant number of people who would like to work and who would benefit from working, but don't need to be paid a lot to do so. Jacking the MW too high simply prices them out of the market, leaving them unemployed. You graduated from high school and want to start working? Great, just wait a few years until something opens up or enough experienced workers die to give you a spot.

Economists did not see the crash coming and cannot be trusted with predictions.

 

[Eloy]

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.

Yes, it is simple economics that when wages are kept low, such as in the United States, the working class do not earn enough to pay much income tax, thus denying revenue for the government, and they have little or no discretionary spending power since the money goes on necessities which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers. (Political Economy 101)

it is simple economics that when wages are kept low

Kept low? Now what evil fellow has the power to do that?

which means that local businesses in working class areas do not have enough paying customers.

Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

Wages are kept low by employers who see wages as a factor of production that is a cost against their profits.
American workers deserve more than slave wages whereas corporations like ExxonMobil, for example, by paying living wages put more buying power into the families of working people who can then buy from the small businesses you ask about. (Economics 101)

Wages are kept low by employers

Why do you feel they have the power to do that?
Is there an Employers Union I haven't heard about?

who see wages as a factor of production that is a cost against their profits.

Only because IT IS A COST AGAINST THEIR PROFITS.
What do you see wages as, if not that?

You never answered my question:
Do you feel that a small business with $10,000 in extra wage expenses and $10,000 in extra sales sees a net benefit?

I did answer your question by suggesting that small businesses will benefit when working class people have more money to spend.
Employers do control wages and in a country where people fear for their jobs, wages will be low. Wages are more than a factor of production because they represent the living people can make. People before profit and when American workers are treated right, our own people will not have to be in sweatshops like those in Bangladesh, Vietnam, The Northern Marianas, and so on. American workers deserve better than that.