How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

[Supposn]

How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

If the theoretical indefinite U.S. markets' determined minimum wage rate is $5/per Hr,
If X = $5/per Hr; ($7.25 -X)/per Hr. = is the difference between the federal and market's minimum rates.
Difference between the federal and market's minimum rates = $2.25
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $17.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

If X = $2/ per Hr., the indefinite minimum wage rate would be $2/per Hr.
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $14.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

When the purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is increased, employers are not legally required to modify all other wage rates, but in aggregate they actually do so.

Due to the economic concept of wage differential, if an employer fails to update their other wage rates, they will have difficulties recruiting and retaining employees. Employers are generally compelled to react immediately in the cases of their lower-wage rates, and slower in cases of higher wage rates.

Although in reaction to the minimum rate increase, higher wage rates will generally receive greater extents of increases, the increases for lower-rates will actually be proportionally greater, and for higher wage rates proportionally lesser increases of their employees' wage rates.
The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage is of maximum benefit to the working poor, and of some, but extremely lesser benefit to higher wage rates.

The federal minimum wage rate reduces USA's incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor.
Respectfully, Supposn

 

[mudwhistle]

How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

If the theoretical indefinite U.S. markets' determined minimum wage rate is $5/per Hr,
If X = $5/per Hr; ($7.25 -X)/per Hr. = is the difference between the federal and market's minimum rates.
Difference between the federal and market's minimum rates = $2.25
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $17.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

If X = $2/ per Hr., the indefinite minimum wage rate would be $2/per Hr.
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $14.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

When the purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is increased, employers are not legally required to modify all other wage rates, but in aggregate they actually do so.

Due to the economic concept of wage differential, if an employer fails to update their other wage rates, they will have difficulties recruiting and retaining employees. Employers are generally compelled to react immediately in the cases of their lower-wage rates, and slower in cases of higher wage rates.

Although in reaction to the minimum rate increase, higher wage rates will generally receive greater extents of increases, the increases for lower-rates will actually be proportionally greater, and for higher wage rates proportionally lesser increases of their employees' wage rates.
The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage is of maximum benefit to the working poor, and of some, but extremely lesser benefit to higher wage rates.

The federal minimum wage rate reduces USA's incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor.
Respectfully, Supposn

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

 

[Dekster]

Cut hours and cut jobs, raise prices, or some combination thereof. All raising the minimum wage does is devalue the currency and take downward pressure off prices in the end. There is an upside to that, but we shouldn't pretend that THIS time, it will make a difference on poverty..

 

[Mac1958]

How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

If the theoretical indefinite U.S. markets' determined minimum wage rate is $5/per Hr,
If X = $5/per Hr; ($7.25 -X)/per Hr. = is the difference between the federal and market's minimum rates.
Difference between the federal and market's minimum rates = $2.25
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $17.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

If X = $2/ per Hr., the indefinite minimum wage rate would be $2/per Hr.
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $14.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

When the purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is increased, employers are not legally required to modify all other wage rates, but in aggregate they actually do so.

Due to the economic concept of wage differential, if an employer fails to update their other wage rates, they will have difficulties recruiting and retaining employees. Employers are generally compelled to react immediately in the cases of their lower-wage rates, and slower in cases of higher wage rates.

Although in reaction to the minimum rate increase, higher wage rates will generally receive greater extents of increases, the increases for lower-rates will actually be proportionally greater, and for higher wage rates proportionally lesser increases of their employees' wage rates.
The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage is of maximum benefit to the working poor, and of some, but extremely lesser benefit to higher wage rates.

The federal minimum wage rate reduces USA's incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor.
Respectfully, Supposn

It's complicated as hell, because the effects of low-end wage increases are not linear. It's mostly an industry-specific issue, because wages represent significantly different percentages of overall business expense, based on the type of business we're talking about.

PLUS, minimum wage increases would also necessarily increase the wages and associated costs of those above minimum wage job descriptions, so the domino effect would be most likely be another significant piece of this puzzle.

At the same time, we have forces pushing in the opposite direction: It's impossible to (honestly) justify paying government benefits to someone who also has a full time job. That's effectively a government subsidy to employers, incentivizing them to keep wages low. And more critical and timely is the increasing wealth disparities in this country, which are only making the job easier for those who want higher and higher minimum wages. And their constituents vote.

As usual, both ends of this issue are keeping their arguments at about a third-grade level because they absolutely refuse to acknowledge the complexities inherent in it. Until we can -- if we can, at this point -- demonstrate that we fully understand the big picture, we'll just keep flopping around like we are.
.

 

[Oddball]

How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

If the theoretical indefinite U.S. markets' determined minimum wage rate is $5/per Hr,
If X = $5/per Hr; ($7.25 -X)/per Hr. = is the difference between the federal and market's minimum rates.
Difference between the federal and market's minimum rates = $2.25
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $17.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

If X = $2/ per Hr., the indefinite minimum wage rate would be $2/per Hr.
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $14.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

When the purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is increased, employers are not legally required to modify all other wage rates, but in aggregate they actually do so.

Due to the economic concept of wage differential, if an employer fails to update their other wage rates, they will have difficulties recruiting and retaining employees. Employers are generally compelled to react immediately in the cases of their lower-wage rates, and slower in cases of higher wage rates.

Although in reaction to the minimum rate increase, higher wage rates will generally receive greater extents of increases, the increases for lower-rates will actually be proportionally greater, and for higher wage rates proportionally lesser increases of their employees' wage rates.
The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage is of maximum benefit to the working poor, and of some, but extremely lesser benefit to higher wage rates.

The federal minimum wage rate reduces USA's incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor.
Respectfully, Supposn

A lot of technocratic smoke, with the underlying supposition that the feds have any business setting prices for anything, up to and including labor.....They do not.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Min wage was NEVER intended to be a “living wage” it was intended for part timers, students, retirees, who needed extra cash.

Disrespectfully

Azog

 

[Supposn]

Cut hours and cut jobs, raise prices, or some combination thereof. All raising the minimum wage does is devalue the currency and take downward pressure off prices in the end. There is an upside to that, but we shouldn't pretend that THIS time, it will make a difference on poverty..

Dekster, the federal minimum wage rate of insufficient purchasing power is hindered from accomplishing its task.
Respectfully, Supposn

How inflationary is the federal minimum wage rate?

Although labor contributes a substantial portion, labor is only a portion of aggregate products' costs; (this is true even among service products). The federal minimum wage rate effects Low-wage labor and has extremely little proportional effect upon higher wage rates, it is not among the primary cause for U.S. dollar's losses of purchasing power.
The federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power's much less a cause and much more a victim of U.S. Dollar's inflation.

Federal minimum wage rate's purchasing power's purpose is to reduce incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor. Respectfully, Supposn

​

 

[Supposn]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

 

[mudwhistle]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

This works if you live in a high tax state.
Prices are intentionally inflated by goverent thru tax increases. Those on fixed incomes have to leave the state or file for government assistance. This is how blue states control voters. Raising the MW causes inflation. It's a never ending cycle.

 

[Dekster]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

This works if you live in a high tax state.
Prices are intentionally inflated by goverent thru tax increases. Those on fixed incomes have to leave the state or file for government assistance. This is how blue states control voters. Raising the MW causes inflation. It's a never ending cycle.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars and therefore makes it easier to service past debt.

 

[Supposn]

... At the same time, we have forces pushing in the opposite direction: It's impossible to (honestly) justify paying government benefits to someone who also has a full-time job. That's effectively a government subsidy to employers, incentivizing them to keep wages low. ....

Mac1958, most of the working-poor do not qualify for public assistance, but as the title working-poor implies, although they work full-time or part-time, they're poor. What's the point of this paragraph?

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Mac1958]

... At the same time, we have forces pushing in the opposite direction: It's impossible to (honestly) justify paying government benefits to someone who also has a full-time job. That's effectively a government subsidy to employers, incentivizing them to keep wages low. ....

Mac1958, most of the working-poor do not qualify for public assistance, but as the title working-poor implies, although they work full-time or part-time, they're poor. What's the point of this paragraph?

Respectfully, Supposn

There have been stories of people working full time and still qualifying for assistance while working full time. Most of them? No. The point is that needing public assistance while working full is a clear indication that something in the system is wrong. And it's a bad idea politically.
.

 

[mudwhistle]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

This works if you live in a high tax state.
Prices are intentionally inflated by goverent thru tax increases. Those on fixed incomes have to leave the state or file for government assistance. This is how blue states control voters. Raising the MW causes inflation. It's a never ending cycle.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars and therefore makes it easier to service past debt.

I remember the late 70s under Carter.
Weakest economy since the Great Depression.

 

[Supposn]

There have been stories of people working full time and still qualifying for assistance while working full time. Most of them? No. The point is that needing public assistance while working full-time is a clear indication that something in the system is wrong. And it's a bad idea politically.
.

Mac1958, that the minimum wage rate's purchasing power is so low as to enable some full-time wage-earners to qualify for public assistance, is both poor economic and political policy. Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

If the theoretical indefinite U.S. markets' determined minimum wage rate is $5/per Hr,
If X = $5/per Hr; ($7.25 -X)/per Hr. = is the difference between the federal and market's minimum rates.
Difference between the federal and market's minimum rates = $2.25
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $17.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

If X = $2/ per Hr., the indefinite minimum wage rate would be $2/per Hr.
What's now a $20 per Hr rate was increased from $14.75 indefinite market-determined rate.

When the purchasing power of the federal minimum wage rate is increased, employers are not legally required to modify all other wage rates, but in aggregate they actually do so.

Due to the economic concept of wage differential, if an employer fails to update their other wage rates, they will have difficulties recruiting and retaining employees. Employers are generally compelled to react immediately in the cases of their lower-wage rates, and slower in cases of higher wage rates.

Although in reaction to the minimum rate increase, higher wage rates will generally receive greater extents of increases, the increases for lower-rates will actually be proportionally greater, and for higher wage rates proportionally lesser increases of their employees' wage rates.
The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage is of maximum benefit to the working poor, and of some, but extremely lesser benefit to higher wage rates.

The federal minimum wage rate reduces USA's incidences and extents of poverty among USA's working-poor.
Respectfully, Supposn

It's complicated as hell, because the effects of low-end wage increases are not linear. It's mostly an industry-specific issue, because wages represent significantly different percentages of overall business expense, based on the type of business we're talking about.

PLUS, minimum wage increases would also necessarily increase the wages and associated costs of those above minimum wage job descriptions, so the domino effect would be most likely be another significant piece of this puzzle.

At the same time, we have forces pushing in the opposite direction: It's impossible to (honestly) justify paying government benefits to someone who also has a full time job. That's effectively a government subsidy to employers, incentivizing them to keep wages low. And more critical and timely is the increasing wealth disparities in this country, which are only making the job easier for those who want higher and higher minimum wages. And their constituents vote.

As usual, both ends of this issue are keeping their arguments at about a third-grade level because they absolutely refuse to acknowledge the complexities inherent in it. Until we can -- if we can, at this point -- demonstrate that we fully understand the big picture, we'll just keep flopping around like we are.
.

It's impossible to (honestly) justify paying government benefits to someone who also has a full time job. That's effectively a government subsidy to employers, incentivizing them to keep wages low.\

I've read that these benefits actually raise the cost of the employers.
If your benefits are the equivalent of $8 an hour, would you accept a job at $9 an hour?
Or would it take $10, $11 or more an hour to get you to give up your work-free benefits?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.

If a higher minimum wage is an obviously good thing, why stretch it out?
Is it because there are negative consequences?

If there are negative consequences, why is your 1968 target a good idea?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

This works if you live in a high tax state.
Prices are intentionally inflated by goverent thru tax increases. Those on fixed incomes have to leave the state or file for government assistance. This is how blue states control voters. Raising the MW causes inflation. It's a never ending cycle.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars and therefore makes it easier to service past debt.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars

Federal taxes are indexed for inflation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There have been stories of people working full time and still qualifying for assistance while working full time. Most of them? No. The point is that needing public assistance while working full-time is a clear indication that something in the system is wrong. And it's a bad idea politically.
.

Mac1958, that the minimum wage rate's purchasing power is so low as to enable some full-time wage-earners to qualify for public assistance, is both poor economic and political policy. Respectfully, Supposn

the minimum wage rate's purchasing power is so low as to enable some full-time wage-earners to qualify for public assistance

How many full-time minimum wage workers are there again?

 

[Dekster]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

This works if you live in a high tax state.
Prices are intentionally inflated by goverent thru tax increases. Those on fixed incomes have to leave the state or file for government assistance. This is how blue states control voters. Raising the MW causes inflation. It's a never ending cycle.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars and therefore makes it easier to service past debt.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars

Federal taxes are indexed for inflation.

We weren't discussing federal income tax. We were discussing blue states.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Congressional Budget Office predicted that as many as 3.7 million jobs could be lost if they raise the MW to $15/hr.
So Democrats start calling for it.
Any questions?

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.
In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn​

This works if you live in a high tax state.
Prices are intentionally inflated by goverent thru tax increases. Those on fixed incomes have to leave the state or file for government assistance. This is how blue states control voters. Raising the MW causes inflation. It's a never ending cycle.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars and therefore makes it easier to service past debt.

But inflation reduces the burden of public debt which is why they really do it--it generates more tax revenue in terms of just less valuable dollars

Federal taxes are indexed for inflation.

We weren't discussing federal income tax. We were discussing blue states.

California raises the minimum wage to create inflation to make it easier to pay down their debt?

Sounds complicated.