Analyzing A Practical Minimum Wage

[Tom Sweetnam]

the middle class was strongest, when unions were also at their strongest.

correlation/causality??

Even Henry Ford was smart enough to know that he had to pay his workers enough to afford the product they were building. Union or no union.

So that means if I build space shuttles I ought to be able to afford one?

 

[Jackinthebox]

100% stupid as always. You think Harvard and Yale MBA's running big companies didn't think of that simple strategy, and they need you to suggest it??

You assume too much. You assume that they are interested in what is good for small business and the middle class, when clearly that is not the agenda on the table as we shift to a socialized labor force. Welfare labor is not an accident.

 

[Jackinthebox]

For Ford didn’t raise wages so that his workers could afford his cars. What actually happened is that he hired and then lost some 52,000 workers a year in order to have a stable workforce of 14,000. This obviously had vast costs in trying to hire and then train all of these workers: as well as the costs when they walked off the assembly line disrupting production. The doubling of wages to $5 a day reduced those costs by more than the extra pay cost him. Which is why he did it.

Okay, so he didn't do it out of some hippie lovesfest notion of fairness and morality. He still did it. Same here. I am not arguing for a living wage for workers because I give two craps about them. I am doing it because I want to see more profits.

 

[Jackinthebox]

model t $575
new ford $20,000

5 dollars a day versus $600 today!!

In 1950, the Federal minimum wage in the United States was set at 75-cents per hour. This meant that no matter what a person did for a living, according to national productivity standards for workers, their work was worth a minimum of 75 pennies for an hour worked, $30 for an average work week, or a little over $1560 a year. At that time, this was a bit more than the average cost of a brand new automobile.A worker could work all year, save every penny, and buy a brand new mid-grade car without taking out a loan.

In 2012, the average cost for an automobile was $30,748, slightly more than double what a minimum wage worker would be paid, before taxes, working full time.

Read more: 90 of Americans Earn Less Than 1950 Minimum Wage Standard Minimum Wage Workers Union of America

 

[Jackinthebox]

the middle class was strongest, when unions were also at their strongest.

correlation/causality??

Even Henry Ford was smart enough to know that he had to pay his workers enough to afford the product they were building. Union or no union.

So that means if I build space shuttles I ought to be able to afford one?

Space shuttles were not a product marketed to the middle class. But I will say this. Anyone who builds space shuttles should be able to afford a Lamborghini, or otherwise paid top dollar to build such an exclusive product.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course you can. As I said before you can share rent with people to reduce housing costs. You can pool food money to buy in bulk or at a co op, You might not need a car, you certainly don't need money for video games or hitting the strip clubs.

There is nothing in that budget for video games and strip clubs.

Finding ways to cut corners is a band aid, not a solution. There can be any number of reasons why a person can't live with someone else. Pooling food money is actually welfare fraud, illegal. Living like a Mexican may be a good idea to get through college or something, but it should not be considered a practical standard for Americas working class.

That made up budget of yours has some needs confused with wants.

People need SOME form of recreation. A few wants are actually needs, for mental health reasons. Now I am not saying everyone deserves a week vacation in Vegas. But basic cable is hardly a unreasonable luxurious expenditure for the average working stiff. In fact without it, officials would likely label a person a "social outcast" who was "likely" to become domestic terrorist or some crap.

And why is it you people only think you have to work for someone else to make money?

Being a business owner and working for yourself just gives you a whole new set of problems. Again, that is no solution to the artificially depressed wage standard in this country. We need grocery clerks, we need shoe salesman, we need burgermeisters, we need janitors, we need EMT's, we need security guards. It is completely impractical to expect everyone to work for themselves, and contrary to the fundamentals of civilization as a whole. If everyone only worked for themselves we would each be living alone in some cave somewhere.

do you really think anyone here believes you are employing anyone?

What makes you think I care? You know what they say about leading a horse to water.

IF you are why aren't you paying everyone who works for you 25 an hour? After all according to you labor costs have absolutely no effect on prices so you should be able to pay people even more than 25 an hour and still make money

Why do you need the government to force you to do what you think is right?

I am not going to pay $25 an hour while my competitor is allowed to exploit socialist labor to pad their profits. Besides, it will take EVERYONE being paid a living wage, not just my workers, to create market liquidity in the national economy from which I can derive greater profits that would actually support my additional labor costs. And THAT is where I would get the money to pay them, not from raising prices.

But you said that labor costs have nothing to do with the price of your product.

That you refuse to do what you think is right because someone else won't just means you are putting profit over people.

So what if another guy make more profit than you why do you use what someone else does as an excuse not to do what you say is right?

The simple reason you won't do it is because increasing your labor costs that much will put you out of business if you are indeed in business at all.

And this market liquidity you talk about does not necessarily mean people will have more to spend just that they will be spending more on the same shit. And indeed the people already making near your utopian wage will see a decrease in their purchasing power

If everyone pays 25 an hour then all your costs of manufacture from materials, supplies and utilities will rise and you will be forced to raise the prices of your goods and/or services to compensate. Chances are your profit margin will not change that much you'll just have higher expenses that you will offset by increasing your prices

 

[Jackinthebox]

But you said that labor costs have nothing to do with the price of your product.

They don't. Min wage just went up in my state, but I did not raise prices. McD's went through 8 min wage hikes before they raised the price of a double cheeseburger, by a much smaller percentage than the cumulative wage increase. Remember the nice Applebees pic I showed you?

That you refuse to do what you think is right because someone else won't just means you are putting profit over people.

I never said otherwise.

So what if another guy make more profit than you why do you use what someone else does as an excuse not to do what you say is right?

So you would pay your workers $20 an hour, while I pay them 5 and let taxpayers make up the other 15? That seems reasonable to you?

The simple reason you won't do it is because increasing your labor costs that much will put you out of business if you are indeed in business at all.

If a person can't afford to be in business without welfare subsidized labor, they aren't a capitalist.

And this market liquidity you talk about does not necessarily mean people will have more to spend just that they will be spending more on the same shit. And indeed the people already making near your utopian wage will see a decrease in their purchasing power

That is just a bunch of nonsense you spouted off there. People won't have more money to spend but they will spend more? You are just talking in circles. Try to stay focused. There is no decrease in purchasing power either.

If everyone pays 25 an hour then all your costs of manufacture from materials, supplies and utilities will rise and you will be forced to raise the prices of your goods and/or services to compensate. Chances are your profit margin will not change that much you'll just have higher expenses that you will offset by increasing your prices

Once AGAIN. Wage increases have no bearing on the market value of a product. Once AGAIN, all historical data shows the exact opposite. That is not an opinion, that is an entire factual data set that you continually ignore and spout off contradictory nonsense.

 

[dblack]

I smell a Starkey.

 

[Mac1958]

.

The whole conversation seems moot.

We have - through lowered standards, political correctness and the soft bigotry of reduced expectations - created an entire underclass of people who simply do not yet have the capacity to take care of themselves to a decent degree. It we don't take care of them this way, we'll end up taking care of them via public assistance, which would be even worse on a macro level.

I put the word "yet" in bold and underline, because anyone can improve their own condition if others would quit trying to "help" them.

Establish a minimum and let each state decide, each has its own conditions. This is a self-inflicted wound, we have to pay some people significantly more than they are worth, and there are no other short-term fixes. It is what it is: Confident Idiots American Students Growing More Confident Less Capable

Establish some national minimum, and allow each state to increase it as its own conditions dictate.

.

 

[ChrisL]

model t $575
new ford $20,000

5 dollars a day versus $600 today!!

In 1950, the Federal minimum wage in the United States was set at 75-cents per hour. This meant that no matter what a person did for a living, according to national productivity standards for workers, their work was worth a minimum of 75 pennies for an hour worked, $30 for an average work week, or a little over $1560 a year. At that time, this was a bit more than the average cost of a brand new automobile.A worker could work all year, save every penny, and buy a brand new mid-grade car without taking out a loan.

In 2012, the average cost for an automobile was $30,748, slightly more than double what a minimum wage worker would be paid, before taxes, working full time.

Read more: 90 of Americans Earn Less Than 1950 Minimum Wage Standard Minimum Wage Workers Union of America

Wow, that is fascinating. I wonder how and why the price of a car has risen SO much. And it's the same with homes and rents too. The going rate for a 1-bedroom apartment here in Massachusetts is probably about $800 a month.

 

[Skull Pilot]

But you said that labor costs have nothing to do with the price of your product.

They don't. Min wage just went up in my state, but I did not raise prices. McD's went through 8 min wage hikes before they raised the price of a double cheeseburger, by a much smaller percentage than the cumulative wage increase. Remember the nice Applebees pic I showed you?

That you refuse to do what you think is right because someone else won't just means you are putting profit over people.

I never said otherwise.

So what if another guy make more profit than you why do you use what someone else does as an excuse not to do what you say is right?

So you would pay your workers $20 an hour, while I pay them 5 and let taxpayers make up the other 15? That seems reasonable to you?

No one in my employ gets less than 16 an hour because that's what their skill is worth in relation to market prices for my products and services. All my positions require extensive skill. But from what you say I could quadruple their pay and not have to charge more.

It amazes me that you can't smell the shit that is coming out of your own mouth

The simple reason you won't do it is because increasing your labor costs that much will put you out of business if you are indeed in business at all.

If a person can't afford to be in business without welfare subsidized labor, they aren't a capitalist.

Then I guess I'm not a capitalist.

And this market liquidity you talk about does not necessarily mean people will have more to spend just that they will be spending more on the same shit. And indeed the people already making near your utopian wage will see a decrease in their purchasing power

That is just a bunch of nonsense you spouted off there. People won't have more money to spend but they will spend more? You are just talking in circles. Try to stay focused. There is no decrease in purchasing power either.

If they have more income and everything costs more they will not necessarily have more and all those people who were already making your utopian wage will not see their wages go up and will see a drop in their purchasing power because they have no more money but everything will cost more.

If everyone pays 25 an hour then all your costs of manufacture from materials, supplies and utilities will rise and you will be forced to raise the prices of your goods and/or services to compensate. Chances are your profit margin will not change that much you'll just have higher expenses that you will offset by increasing your prices

Once AGAIN. Wage increases have no bearing on the market value of a product. Once AGAIN, all historical data shows the exact opposite. That is not an opinion, that is an entire factual data set that you continually ignore and spout off contradictory nonsense.

[/QUOTE]

So you tell me how I can triple everyone of my employees' pay and not have to raise prices.

 

[Iceweasel]

Min wage just went up in my state, but I did not raise prices. McD's went through 8 min wage hikes before they raised the price of a double cheeseburger, by a much smaller percentage than the cumulative wage increase. Remember the nice Applebees pic I showed you?

Which means nothing. You need to know how many burgers they are selling and what the profit margin is. Comparing sales to percentages of wage hikes tells you nothing. For all you know they use even cheaper ingredients to make ends meet.

People won't have more money to spend but they will spend more? You are just talking in circles. Try to stay focused. There is no decrease in purchasing power either.

Once AGAIN. Wage increases have no bearing on the market value of a product. Once AGAIN, all historical data shows the exact opposite. That is not an opinion, that is an entire factual data set that you continually ignore and spout off contradictory nonsense.

Your assertion is missing any support. And for obvious reasons.

 

[dblack]

That is just a bunch of nonsense you spouted off there. People won't have more money to spend but they will spend more? You are just talking in circles. Try to stay focused. There is no decrease in purchasing power either.

This was your 'tell', Jake. In case you're taking notes.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

For Ford didn’t raise wages so that his workers could afford his cars. What actually happened is that he hired and then lost some 52,000 workers a year in order to have a stable workforce of 14,000. This obviously had vast costs in trying to hire and then train all of these workers: as well as the costs when they walked off the assembly line disrupting production. The doubling of wages to $5 a day reduced those costs by more than the extra pay cost him. Which is why he did it.

Okay, so he didn't do it out of some hippie lovesfest notion of fairness and morality. He still did it. Same here. I am not arguing for a living wage for workers because I give two craps about them. I am doing it because I want to see more profits.

dear,

1) Ford workers make as much today relative to the price of cars today!!
Do you understand?

2) 10.00/hour equals $41,000/year plus $10k in free health care plus EITC tax credits. The poor are rich today with cells phones and flat screen TV's Do you understand?

 

[RKMBrown]

the middle class was strongest, when unions were also at their strongest.

correlation/causality??

Even Henry Ford was smart enough to know that he had to pay his workers enough to afford the product they were building. Union or no union.

So that means if I build space shuttles I ought to be able to afford one?

Space shuttles were not a product marketed to the middle class. But I will say this. Anyone who builds space shuttles should be able to afford a Lamborghini, or otherwise paid top dollar to build such an exclusive product.

ROFL... million dollar super cars for everyone!!

 

[RKMBrown]

So you tell me how I can triple everyone of my employees' pay and not have to raise prices.

You are evil, so stop paying yourself, then take out a loan, when that one comes due take out a bigger loan, when that comes due take out a loan against your children's future income, when that comes due take out a loan against your grand-children's future income... when that crashes. Blame the republicans declare bankruptcy, and Obama will bail you out.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Anyone who builds space shuttles should be able to afford a Lamborghini,.

100% stupid and perfectly liberal. Anyone should be able to afford whatever he can buy with money he gets in free, peaceful, and voluntary exchange with others.

The last thing we need is a idiot libnazi soviet dictating what wage everyone should get based on his lib Nazi soviet central govt. guesses. Now perhaps the libnazi can understand why the USSR failed?

 

[Jackinthebox]

.

The whole conversation seems moot.

We have - through lowered standards, political correctness and the soft bigotry of reduced expectations - created an entire underclass of people who simply do not yet have the capacity to take care of themselves to a decent degree. It we don't take care of them this way, we'll end up taking care of them via public assistance, which would be even worse on a macro level.

I put the word "yet" in bold and underline, because anyone can improve their own condition if others would quit trying to "help" them.

Establish a minimum and let each state decide, each has its own conditions. This is a self-inflicted wound, we have to pay some people significantly more than they are worth, and there are no other short-term fixes. It is what it is: Confident Idiots American Students Growing More Confident Less Capable

Establish some national minimum, and allow each state to increase it as its own conditions dictate.

.

No one is worth less than what is needed to live on. I don't care what you do for a living, you should be paid enough to put food on the table.

When I was in college I worked as a security guard under state contract. At that time, I was paid DOUBLE the min wage to sit at a desk. That was it. No cooking, no cleaning, no making change, no learning how to break down a shake machine, no collecting carts in crappy weather... I just sat there, on my ass, for 8 or 16 hours a day, and collected DOUBLE the min wage. And somehow people still think that being a state officer is somehow more "respectable" than working in a burger factory.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Anyone who builds space shuttles should be able to afford a Lamborghini,.

100% stupid and perfectly liberal. Anyone should be able to afford whatever he can buy with money he gets in free, peaceful, and voluntary exchange with others.

The last thing we need is a idiot libnazi soviet dictating what wage everyone should get based on his lib Nazi soviet central govt. guesses. Now perhaps the libnazi can understand why the USSR failed?

If you are a specialized highly skilled technician, there is no reason you should not be paid enough to afford an exotic sportcar if you want one. I am not saying it should be mandated, but it certainly should be expected to be possible. Without hope, without the stick and carrot, capitalism fails.

While I am not saying sports cars should be a mandated reward, I do support a mandated MINIMUM wage, to keep people off of welfare. Either employers will pay people enough to live on, or the taxpayers will have to make up the difference. It's as simple as that. Do YOU want to pay for the rent to house WalMart workers, or should WalMart?

 

[Jackinthebox]

So you tell me how I can triple everyone of my employees' pay and not have to raise prices.

If you have triple the income you won't have to raise prices. If you raise prices, you will lose customers rather than gaining them. Next thing you know you will be paying min wage, have a socialized labor force, and no customers.