Minimum Wage Increase: They Never Talks About the SALES

[paulitician]

Still not seeing how the Minimum Wage has ever hurt the U.S. Economy. We have more Millionaires and Billionaires than ever before in our history. Paying struggling workers a decent wage isn't gonna break the bank. Seriously, it's true. Anyway, have a good Saturday. See ya.

Well, minimum wage laws don't result in paying struggling workers a decent wage. But maintaining a dependent underclass is central to the money masters' long term plans, and such laws are crucial to that effort.

Probably true, but i'd rather seem them making a survivable living, paying taxes, and spending money into the economy. That's better than them mooching off Entitlements their entire lives. In the end, we'll all benefit from more Citizens working and being productive.

You have yet to provide evidence that raising minimum wage results in more people working. Rational analysis suggests the opposite.

I never claimed that. But most People wanna work and be productive. They don't wanna live on Welfare forever. Pay em a decent wage so they can pay some taxes and spend some disposable income back into the economy. That's the wise way to go.

Otherwise, you'll pay much much more for the masses who can only survive on Entitlements. We need to think long term. If you're bitching about high taxes now, just wait. If we continue down this road, you ain't seen nothin yet.

 

[paulitician]

Don't pay workers a survivable wage, and watch millions more become solely dependent on Government Entitlements. My advice would be to pay up. A productive tax-paying citizen is the much wiser alternative. Think logically. Don't allow your greed & hate to consume you.

 

[LOki]

Still not seeing how the Minimum Wage has ever hurt the U.S. Economy.

This has been explained to you. You offer no contest; just denial of well established economic realities.

We have more Millionaires and Billionaires than ever before in our history.

Not relevant. Just another distracting appeal to emotion.

Paying struggling workers a decent wage isn't gonna break the bank. Seriously, it's true. Anyway, have a good Saturday. See ya.

Patently wrong for OBVIOUS reasons.

No one has presented any evidence proving the Minimum Wage has ever hurt the U.S. Economy.

This has been explained to you. You offer no contest; just denial of well established economic realities. Again.

Businesses have not only survived it, they've thrived like never before. More Millionaires and Billionaires are being created then ever before in our history.

Not relevant. Just another distracting appeal to emotion. Again.

So when you guys predict the sky falling over raising Minimum Wage, you'll be proven wrong. Just like you've been proven wrong the other numerous times you predicted the sky falling.

This strawman indicts you.

You guys just don't have much credibility on this one. Sorry, but it is what it is.

Patently wrong for OBVIOUS reasons.

 

[SwimExpert]

Rational analysis proves that raising wages creates more jobs. Try looking at countries with higher minimum wages.

No, it does not. What you meant to say is that you have a hypothesis that it will happen, based on expectations that reasonably follow from the premises. The problem is that your premises fail to account for additional factors. The United States is not other countries. Businesses in the United States do not operate the way businesses do in other countries. You're comparing entirely different societies and cultures where values are not necessarily shared, nor are priorities necessarily the same.

Sure, it makes perfect sense that better wages for working people would lead to a stronger economy. The more money they have the more money they can spend. But this is a superficial analysis that confuses propositions with statements. When you say "raising wages creates more jobs" what you really mean is that more jobs would exist if working people had a larger share of wealth with which they could engage in more commerce. That is the your real goal. And admirably so.

What you're not taking into account is that by and large, those who operate the businesses aren't going to simply and over a larger share of the wealth. Sure, it works in other countries, but those countries didn't set this up last year. They've become their circumstances by employing a different set of values and priorities for decades whereas the United States diverged long ago. Decades ago we embraced different priorities that placed higher value on allowing a small proportion of wealthier people to collect a higher portion of wealth. And they happen to be the people who have the greatest leverage over how the wealth will be distributed. They aren't going to simply absorb higher wages by taking a pay cut for themselves. They are going to pass those costs on to the consumers and maintain their own margins and their own share of the wealth, which will result in inflation that renders the increased wages on par value wise with the previous wages. If businesses are run by people whose greed borders on evil, it makes no sense to simply trust them to surrender their greed just because a new law raises the minimum wage. They will respond in accordance with the same greed.

This is why the minimum wage in our country has become an ineffective tool for regulating commerce and protecting the country from unhealthy degrees of wealth inequality. The burden for improving people's wages needs to fall on individuals, every individual has the capacity to take charge of their own situation and advocate for their own improved wages through negotiation. The best tool that can be provided is a renewed emphasis on educational opportunities and more effective educational structures that improve technical skills for non college educated workers and better access to higher education for those who seek it, so that workers will be able to leverage better skills and greater opportunities to their advantage when they pursue better wage opportunities.

 

[LOki]

Still not seeing how the Minimum Wage has ever hurt the U.S. Economy. We have more Millionaires and Billionaires than ever before in our history. Paying struggling workers a decent wage isn't gonna break the bank. Seriously, it's true. Anyway, have a good Saturday. See ya.

Well, minimum wage laws don't result in paying struggling workers a decent wage. But maintaining a dependent underclass is central to the money masters' long term plans, and such laws are crucial to that effort.

Probably true, but i'd rather seem them making a survivable living, paying taxes, and spending money into the economy.

Statutory minimum wage undermines all of this. Devaluing wages and increasing inflation conspire to destroy the buying power of the bigger paycheck.

If this were not ALWAYS true, then statutory minimum wage proponents would not demand that the statutory minimum be increased again, and AGAIN!

That's better than them mooching off Entitlements their entire lives. In the end, we'll all benefit from more Citizens working and being productive.

Statutory minimum wage makes wages below the statutory minimum illegal; the higher the minimum, the more wages made illegal--the necessary consequence is MORE folks collecting greater "entitlement" checks, not fewer.

Why do you object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what that worker's work is worth?

 

[LOki]

Yet businesses in America have managed to survive and thrive for many many years. The sky never fell, like you guys predicted. There is no evidence proving any business in America has ever gone out of business due to the Minimum Wage. If you can't pay Minimum Wage, than it's time for you to close up shop. It wasn't meant to be for you. It is what it is.

So never mind all the evidence that hiking the minimum wage hurts the very people it's supposed to help? Never mind that hiking the minimum wage ignores the crucial difference between people who work low-income jobs to get through school or for other temporary reasons and people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis and to support or help support a family?

Just never mind fact and reality, right? Just blindly insist on hiking the minimum wage over and over again--and then scratch your head and wonder why our economy continues to have weaker and weaker recoveries, more and more long-term unemployed, and more jobs shipped overseas because companies understandably don't want to pay someone $15 an hour and benefits to do simple jobs like operate a cash register, wash dishes, or clean tables.

Hiking the EITC is an infinitely smarter and better way to help people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis, especially if they're supporting or helping to support a family. It targets those who need the help, distributes the cost more broadly, and doesn't cause employers to cut back on low-income jobs.

Yes. It is essential to ignore the economic realities of statutory minimum wage in order claim it benefits everyone and harms no one.

Have you not been paying attention to these chuckleheads?

When someone pays taxes and has disposable income to spend back into the economy, everyone does benefit. As opposed to depending on Entitlements to survive.

People like you especially, better hope & pray citizens start getting paid better. You're the ones who bitch the most about their taxes being raised. More citizens depending on Entitlements, is gonna cost you much more in the end. It would be wise to pay them more and allow them to pay taxes and have some disposable income.

OK. Let's assume we are just talking about someone who really wants to work, and not some glue-huffing retard who thinks his dedication to wearing black fingernail polish, rather than work is merit enough for a rock star's paycheck. Lets also say that "welfare" pays the equvalent of $6.50/hr. What statutory minimum wage says is that even if this guy who wants to work, wanted to work for $7.00/hr, it would be a crime to do so.

That despite the agreement between him and the employer that the job is worth $7.00/hr, the government rolls in and declares (in the name of social justice) that this worker's efforts are worth nothing--so much so in fact, that they are willing to pay him $6.50/hr to do nothing!

Not only does this guy get less than he could earn, we don't even get the benefit of his services--the job is not being done, or if it is, it's being done by some poor schlep who's desperately trying hard to merit his $15k/year job so he doesn't have to be a $11k/year welfare recipient himself--or, this work being done by someone, like you perhaps, who is getting paid well in excess of the minimum wage because your effort merits it, but now your productivity suffers because you are scrubbing the men's room urinals instead of the actual job you were hired for. Then you wonder why you get no raise despite the fact that you're doing both your job and that of the janitor.

Why do you object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what that worker's work is worth?

 

[LOki]

Rational analysis proves that raising wages creates more jobs. Try looking at countries with higher minimum wages.

They don't have the extreme poverty (by first world standards) that you see in America.

Canada's minimum wage is nearly $11 per hour and MacDonalds still does a thriving business and they're NOT moving to automation.

Last but not least, the last two times the minimum wage was increased, unemployment went down and poverty decreased.

Sweden, Norway, Germany, Finland, Denmark, and Austria have no statutory minimum wage. Your comparisons are meaningless.

Why do you object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what that worker's work is worth?

 

[SwimExpert]

If this were not ALWAYS true, then statutory minimum wage proponents would not demand that the statutory minimum be increased again, and AGAIN!

That's a false cause, equating correlation with causation. There are many causes for inflation; raising the minimum wage is not required, nor does it have to necessarily cause any inflation at all. In many countries, and in periods of our own history, raising the minimum wage has not led to inflation. Inflation only attributes to inflation in an environment where human values and priorities are sufficiently aligned as to enable the same.

We should not make oversimplified arguments that present minimum wage regulation as inherently evil or problematic, because if we do we end up overlooking the true driving factors that cause our problems, and we fail to adequately grasp the problem so as to arrive at meaningful solutions.

 

[LOki]

If this were not ALWAYS true, then statutory minimum wage proponents would not demand that the statutory minimum be increased again, and AGAIN!

That's a false cause, equating correlation with causation.

Nope.

There are many causes for inflation; raising the minimum wage is not required,...

Of course. I made no claim otherwise.

... nor does it have to necessarily cause any inflation at all.

Wrong. For obvious reasons.

When you make $1/hr work cost $15/hr via statutory fiat, devaluation of wages is an inescapable consequence.

Artificially devaluing the rewards for productive capacity (by artificially making $1.00/hr worth of work pay any amount more, say $15/hr, for instance) requires more money to be printed because buyers and sellers still know what shit is worth regardless of what the government says about the dollars or the wages. Printing more money, without also increasing productivity must lead inevitably to inflation. It does so because there is just more money around--printing new money is not the same thing as creating new wealth.

In many countries, and in periods of our own history, raising the minimum wage has not led to inflation.

When you provide the data that supports this assertion, make sure it has been corrected for all the anti-inflation policies implemented (and other confounding variables in action) at the same time. Good luck.

Inflation only attributes to inflation in an environment where human values and priorities are sufficiently aligned as to enable the same.

Haha! Wut?

We should not make oversimplified arguments that present minimum wage regulation as inherently evil or problematic, because if we do we end up overlooking the true driving factors that cause our problems, and we fail to adequately grasp the problem so as to arrive at meaningful solutions.

OK. No "oversimplification." No over-complicating either. Go!

 

[dblack]

If this were not ALWAYS true, then statutory minimum wage proponents would not demand that the statutory minimum be increased again, and AGAIN!

That's a false cause, equating correlation with causation. There are many causes for inflation; raising the minimum wage is not required, nor does it have to necessarily cause any inflation at all. In many countries, and in periods of our own history, raising the minimum wage has not led to inflation. Inflation only attributes to inflation in an environment where human values and priorities are sufficiently aligned as to enable the same.

We should not make oversimplified arguments that present minimum wage regulation as inherently evil or problematic, because if we do we end up overlooking the true driving factors that cause our problems, and we fail to adequately grasp the problem so as to arrive at meaningful solutions.

I think the causative elements have been pretty clearly spelled out. There are solid rational grounds for assuming that banning low-wage jobs would cause higher unemployment, higher inflation, or some combination of the two. I agree that data showing correlation without causation makes for a weak argument, but that's not really what's going on here. The more substantial task is to show that minimum wage laws produce some other result.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yet businesses in America have managed to survive and thrive for many many years. The sky never fell, like you guys predicted. There is no evidence proving any business in America has ever gone out of business due to the Minimum Wage. If you can't pay Minimum Wage, than it's time for you to close up shop. It wasn't meant to be for you. It is what it is.

So never mind all the evidence that hiking the minimum wage hurts the very people it's supposed to help? Never mind that hiking the minimum wage ignores the crucial difference between people who work low-income jobs to get through school or for other temporary reasons and people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis and to support or help support a family?

Just never mind fact and reality, right? Just blindly insist on hiking the minimum wage over and over again--and then scratch your head and wonder why our economy continues to have weaker and weaker recoveries, more and more long-term unemployed, and more jobs shipped overseas because companies understandably don't want to pay someone $15 an hour and benefits to do simple jobs like operate a cash register, wash dishes, or clean tables.

Hiking the EITC is an infinitely smarter and better way to help people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis, especially if they're supporting or helping to support a family. It targets those who need the help, distributes the cost more broadly, and doesn't cause employers to cut back on low-income jobs.

You guys have been proven wrong time after time. The sky doesn't fall over raising Minimum Wage. Businesses will once again survive, and thrive.

and everything will cost more and those who are already making the proposed MW will see their purchasing power drop

Last year the median hourly wage was 17 an hour

so more than half of all workers will not get a raise and will instead see their purchasing power diminish.

How does that help the economy?

 

[protectionist]

You simply cannot avoid devaluing wages when you make $1/hr work cost the same as $15/hr work. It's just not possible.
What is your objection to simply basing was worker's wages upon what that worker's work is worth?

Where do you get this ("the work is worth" ) idea ? You think wages should entirely be based from the perspective of the business owner ?

NewsFlash > business owners don't run the country. And where did you come up with this "$1/hr work". You just got off the boat from China ?

NewsFlash 2 - If you were a business owner, and every wage worker made $1/hour, can you guess about what your SALES would be like ?

 

[protectionist]

Yet businesses in America have managed to survive and thrive for many many years. The sky never fell, like you guys predicted. There is no evidence proving any business in America has ever gone out of business due to the Minimum Wage. If you can't pay Minimum Wage, than it's time for you to close up shop. It wasn't meant to be for you. It is what it is.

So never mind all the evidence that hiking the minimum wage hurts the very people it's supposed to help? Never mind that hiking the minimum wage ignores the crucial difference between people who work low-income jobs to get through school or for other temporary reasons and people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis and to support or help support a family?

Just never mind fact and reality, right? Just blindly insist on hiking the minimum wage over and over again--and then scratch your head and wonder why our economy continues to have weaker and weaker recoveries, more and more long-term unemployed, and more jobs shipped overseas because companies understandably don't want to pay someone $15 an hour and benefits to do simple jobs like operate a cash register, wash dishes, or clean tables.

Hiking the EITC is an infinitely smarter and better way to help people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis, especially if they're supporting or helping to support a family. It targets those who need the help, distributes the cost more broadly, and doesn't cause employers to cut back on low-income jobs.

You guys have been proven wrong time after time. The sky doesn't fall over raising Minimum Wage. Businesses will once again survive, and thrive.

and everything will cost more and those who are already making the proposed MW will see their purchasing power drop

Last year the median hourly wage was 17 an hour

so more than half of all workers will not get a raise and will instead see their purchasing power diminish.

How does that help the economy?

So you're saying sellers will raise their prices in response to a labor cost increase for them ?

 

[protectionist]

I think the causative elements have been pretty clearly spelled out. There are solid rational grounds for assuming that banning low-wage jobs would cause higher unemployment, higher inflation, or some combination of the two. I agree that data showing correlation without causation makes for a weak argument, but that's not really what's going on here. The more substantial task is to show that minimum wage laws produce some other result.

So you're saying that sellers will raise their prices in response to a labor cost increase for them ? And you're also saying that sellers will fire employees in response to a labor cost increase for them ?

 

[protectionist]

Yes. It is essential to ignore the economic realities of statutory minimum wage in order claim it benefits everyone and harms no one.

Have you not been paying attention to these chuckleheads?

How could it harm anyone ? (if the exemptions mentioned earlier, were given to the few companies who could show a hardship condition)

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yet businesses in America have managed to survive and thrive for many many years. The sky never fell, like you guys predicted. There is no evidence proving any business in America has ever gone out of business due to the Minimum Wage. If you can't pay Minimum Wage, than it's time for you to close up shop. It wasn't meant to be for you. It is what it is.

So never mind all the evidence that hiking the minimum wage hurts the very people it's supposed to help? Never mind that hiking the minimum wage ignores the crucial difference between people who work low-income jobs to get through school or for other temporary reasons and people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis and to support or help support a family?

Just never mind fact and reality, right? Just blindly insist on hiking the minimum wage over and over again--and then scratch your head and wonder why our economy continues to have weaker and weaker recoveries, more and more long-term unemployed, and more jobs shipped overseas because companies understandably don't want to pay someone $15 an hour and benefits to do simple jobs like operate a cash register, wash dishes, or clean tables.

Hiking the EITC is an infinitely smarter and better way to help people who work low-income jobs on a long-term basis, especially if they're supporting or helping to support a family. It targets those who need the help, distributes the cost more broadly, and doesn't cause employers to cut back on low-income jobs.

You guys have been proven wrong time after time. The sky doesn't fall over raising Minimum Wage. Businesses will once again survive, and thrive.

and everything will cost more and those who are already making the proposed MW will see their purchasing power drop

Last year the median hourly wage was 17 an hour

so more than half of all workers will not get a raise and will instead see their purchasing power diminish.

How does that help the economy?

So you're saying sellers will raise their prices in response to a labor cost increase for them ?

Of course they will.

When labor costs which for many business is the single largest expense rise then prices necessarily have to rise.

Tell me what do you think the average profit margin of a business is anyway?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think the causative elements have been pretty clearly spelled out. There are solid rational grounds for assuming that banning low-wage jobs would cause higher unemployment, higher inflation, or some combination of the two. I agree that data showing correlation without causation makes for a weak argument, but that's not really what's going on here. The more substantial task is to show that minimum wage laws produce some other result.

So you're saying that sellers will raise their prices in response to a labor cost increase for them ? And you're also saying that sellers will fire employees in response to a labor cost increase for them ?

Where did I say anything about firing anyone?

But if sales go down because prices rise it is an option

 

[protectionist]

Of course they will.

When labor costs which for many business is the single largest expense rise then prices necessarily have to rise.

Tell me what do you think the average profit margin of a business is anyway?

So you haven't read this thread, where it was established long ago that price hikes are impossible. You haven't read the thread, have you.

 

[protectionist]

Where did I say anything about firing anyone?

But if sales go down because prices rise it is an option

Of course it's not an option. That was explained 100s of posts ago. You haven't read this thread.
See Page 8, Post # 80.

 

[LOki]

You simply cannot avoid devaluing wages when you make $1/hr work cost the same as $15/hr work. It's just not possible.
What is your objection to simply basing was worker's wages upon what that worker's work is worth?

Where do you get this ("the work is worth" ) idea ? You think wages should entirely be based from the perspective of the business owner ?

No.

Why do you statists always presume this?

Oh, riiight... you all think that you have the authority to determine what work is woth for EVERYBODY else.

Sorry I don't conform to your bullshit paradigm.

Not really.

NewsFlash > business owners don't run the country.

You should acquaint yourself with the terms "regualtory capture" and "rent seeking behavior."

And where did you come up with this "$1/hr work". You just got off the boat from China ?

It's a number. I can accept the possibility that somewhere, someone figures their work is worth $1/hr. I have no moral authority to get judgmental about it.

NewsFlash 2 - If you were a business owner, and every wage worker made $1/hour, can you guess about what your SALES would be like ?

That's a pretty vague strawman you're beating up.

What is your objection to simply basing a worker's wages upon what that worker's work is worth?