Minimum Wage Increase: They Never Talks About the SALES

[Skull Pilot]

So you're saying that labor costs have nothing to do with the price of goods and services?

So why don't you open a popcorn business and pay everyone 15 an hour and only sell your popcorn for 50 cents a bag?

Let's see how long you last.

If you can't pay someone Minimum Wage, either do the work yourself, or close up shop. No one forces anyone to hire workers.

I agree; Only the Right likes to complain about Individual Responsibility, but Only when it is about the least wealthy.

Spot On. And i swear, i'll never get why angry white Republican dudes especially, are so angry. I mean they've always had it much better than non-white Americans have. They're so upset and panicked because someone at McDonalds might get $15. It's ridiculous. Such greedy hateful little wankers.

Which brings up racism. That's right; the minimum wage is racist. In this country minimum wage means being white is worth no less than $7.25/hr. How does this work? Like this: If 2 prospective employees--one black, one white, but otherwise equal--apply for a minimum wage job, Mr. AryanFront employer can hire white guy with a crew cut and golf shirt at no financial cost--none. He doesn't even have to worry about his competitors picking up the aspiring black worker for less, because they too have to pay him $7.25/hr. If this black worker were allowed to contract his labor for $5.00/hr, or $7.24 even, choosing the white guy would cost RacistJackass $2.25/hr (or $0.01 depending). Moreover, his competitors, if not racist, have the opportunity to hire the black worker at a cost advantage.

If you think this is not the case, you should check out how the white dominated unions in apartheid South Africa complained that the lack of minimum wage regulations led employers to hire cheap black laborers over better trained and better paid white folks. Which, coincidentally was exactly the same argument (check the congressional record) used by Robert Bacon when he wrote the Davis-Bacon Act (the first minmum wage law) in response to Southern contractors bringing black labor to a federal project in his Long Island district; a labor regulation which forces contractors engaged in government contracts to pay employees union wage scale (unions, which incidently were, at the time, usually exclusively white); effectively barring Southern blacks and immigrants from working on plush, government funded construction projects.

Minimum wage doesn't neccessarily have to be racist; on it's best day, minimum wage is only a state sponsored protection for older, higher paid workers from the competition of anyone who would accept less pay for the same work. The surprise for me was that though I understood that minimum wage and Davis-Bacon were, in observable and measurable effect, racist policies--I just had no idea that they were racist in intent.

So why is it that proponents for statutory minimum wage object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what the worker's work is worth? Why won't they explain their objection to us? Why don't they tell us the reason for refusing to explain their objection?

Maybe the answer is that they're racists. Maybe the're just ashamed to be outed so. Seems legit.

Angry greedy white Republican dudes are just plain ole assholes. Who cares if a McDonalds worker gets $15? Good for them. All the bitchin & moanin coming from the angry white dudes is ridiculous. Get a life for God's sake.

Entitled whiny libs want to be paid top dollar even when they have ZERO skills and can be replaced in about 10 seconds

Why don't all you burger baggers aspire to bigger and better things?

 

[Care4all]

Overall, a good portion of the economy would have more disposable income, so yeah, business in general would see an increase in demand.

And the increase still leaves them less profitable.

It would initially, yes, but over time the huge boom in consumer spending would change that.

Yea, it would make it better. People with money buy stuff. Who doesn't know that?

When the purchasing power of those already making the proposed wage see all thier costs rise they will not be able to buy as much will they?

So you make it possible for a few people to buy more (maybe) and you reduce the purchasing power of everyone else.

You people are so goddamn thick. The price increase would be slight and would not nearly be enough to offset the extra few hundred bucks someone would make a month. Over time the the boost to consumer demand would help the economy and lower prices anyway. Give it a rest. You're wrong. Accept it.

You keep saying the price increase would be slight... but historically it hasn't been slight. In 2006, the price of a burrito at Chipotle, was $4.75. Today, it's $6.50. That's not "slight".

And while the employee might only earn a few hundred extra a month, the cost to business is significantly more.

And there would be absolutely no increase in demand in the economy. No country anywhere in the world, that has increased the minimum wage, as had any documented increase in economic demand. In fact, normally the exact opposite. Most of the time, there is a decrease in demand.

For every one employee that gets paid a slightly higher wage, there is another employee that is laid off, and now earns zero. Between two employees earning $10, and one employee earning $15, while the other earns zero, that's not an increase in economic demand. It's a loss.

Look at the picture above of all the McDonald's kiosks. Tell me how much demand all those cashiers are creating with the new higher minimum wage? Answer? Zero. They are unemployed. Game over.

And you don't think this was the rise in gasoline taking hold on the market and freight costs or the ethanol mandate making corn fed cows much more expensive or the deepest recession and banking crisis that this nation has had since the great Depression which affected all business's capability to get a loan and fund their business?

 

[paulitician]

Minimum Wage has never caused more Unemployment. You don't have any evidence supporting otherwise. If you do, let's have it. I'm an open-minded individual.

I have submitted and explained to you the well established economic principles that describe how statutory minimum wage is necessarily harmful to the economy.

I have examined plenty of data... yet none of it was corrected for the anti-inflation, and counter unemployment policies (and other confounding externalities) that are active in the same time periods.

An injured athlete pumped full of pain-killers and cortisone feels and functions just fine... would you still say he was not harmed?

Of course not.

Do you have such data--corrected for the anti-inflation, and counter unemployment policies (and other confounding externalities)--that would so soundly refute the points I submitted? If so, please present them so we can examine them together.

So you have no actual facts or evidence proving Minimum Wage has ever caused Unemployment to rise. Thanks. That's what i've been saying all along. You guys are so wrong, so often. Why should anyone believe you?

I also told you this:

No proof whatsoever Minimum Wage causes Unemployment to rise. Unemployment goes up, Unemployment goes down. There are other numerous variables involved. Minimum Wage has little, if any impact at all.

You have been presented with the logically valid argument that making low wage jobs illegal through statutory minimum wage, results in the loss of low wage jobs--unemployment

You have been presented with well established economic principles that state statutory minimum wage causes unemployment.

You have been presented with evidence that supports both the argument, and the well established economic principles that statutory minimum wage results in unemployment.

Yet you still require "proof." You require the real world to overcome your obtuse denial of reality.

This, can't happen. It is a logical impossibility!

So instead, bring proof that statutory minimum wage is some kind of solution, or relief, for poverty. And I mean PROOF, Pumpkin. No bullshit anecdotes; no ad-hominerm arguments; no mawkish appeals to emotion.

Explain to us why you object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what that worker's work is worth.

Do the work yourself. Don't hire workers. Problem solved. You're welcome.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

if only 4-6% of the workers in this nation are paid minimum wage, then they are only producing about 6% of the Nations GDP, 94% is produced by mostly much higher paid workers....

And if 50% of those making minimum wage, work in the fast food/restaurant business, then only 2-3% of all minimum wage workers produce other things.

Even with having to raise those additional people making close to the $10 an hour that Congress wants to raise the minimum wage to, we will see very little, if any rise at all in inflation. Numbers talk.

And this is why, if done in increments, raising the minimum wage HAS NEVER had a measurable effect on inflation.

All of these wild examples and wild speculations is simply B.S.

There are exceptions for small businesses with 50-100 employees or less, where they can take several more years to raise their minimum wage earners.

If a company has as many as 100 employees as Skull Pilot mentioned, it is a fairly large company and not all of their employees are at minimum wage...they probably have very few people at minimum wage, unless they have a huge turn over rate in employees and pay out the kazoo for constant training of new employees, and unless this multi million dollar company has no upper management and no middle management and no comptroller and no accountant and no administrative assistants and no receptionist, and no other workers than the new hires they hire off the street at minimum. This is HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

I am not denying that there will be some exceptions, where a pizzeria that is not performing profitably as they sit, and an increase in minimum wage could lead to their going out of business EARLIER than they would have eventually gone out of business....BUT the customers who were going to the hurting Pizzeria, will end up going to the other Pizzeria a few blocks or a mile away, and THAT business will have an increase in sales and have the need to hire more people....the very people that lost their jobs at the hurting Pizzeria could be hired by the Pizzeria down the road....

This is not the end of the world, this is not an inflation breaker, and this is not an unemployment increaser, and this is not a business breaker either....with very few exceptions.

Sorry, the low skilled bottom 6% of the workforce is responsible for much less than 6% of GDP.

Which only proves my point Todd...It's not a big enough portion of the economy to cause inflation, it will not hurt the overall economy to raise the minimum to $10.10 which Congress is suggesting.

It will cause some businesses to go under. It will cause more to reduce head count. People who think it will be a boost to the economy are morons. Especially the op.

 

[danielpalos]

right, just print a few more trillions of $, wtf not just make the $ completely worthless? it's only worth 1.5c now.

Only bad Capitalists can't make more money with an official Mint at heir disposal.

The "Capitalists" are responsible for the minimum wage scam in the first place. It makes them money. It hampers competition and devalues the currency

so, we just need a better scam or scheme, via public policy.

 

[paulitician]

If you can't pay someone Minimum Wage, either do the work yourself, or close up shop. No one forces anyone to hire workers.

I agree; Only the Right likes to complain about Individual Responsibility, but Only when it is about the least wealthy.

Spot On. And i swear, i'll never get why angry white Republican dudes especially, are so angry. I mean they've always had it much better than non-white Americans have. They're so upset and panicked because someone at McDonalds might get $15. It's ridiculous. Such greedy hateful little wankers.

Which brings up racism. That's right; the minimum wage is racist. In this country minimum wage means being white is worth no less than $7.25/hr. How does this work? Like this: If 2 prospective employees--one black, one white, but otherwise equal--apply for a minimum wage job, Mr. AryanFront employer can hire white guy with a crew cut and golf shirt at no financial cost--none. He doesn't even have to worry about his competitors picking up the aspiring black worker for less, because they too have to pay him $7.25/hr. If this black worker were allowed to contract his labor for $5.00/hr, or $7.24 even, choosing the white guy would cost RacistJackass $2.25/hr (or $0.01 depending). Moreover, his competitors, if not racist, have the opportunity to hire the black worker at a cost advantage.

If you think this is not the case, you should check out how the white dominated unions in apartheid South Africa complained that the lack of minimum wage regulations led employers to hire cheap black laborers over better trained and better paid white folks. Which, coincidentally was exactly the same argument (check the congressional record) used by Robert Bacon when he wrote the Davis-Bacon Act (the first minmum wage law) in response to Southern contractors bringing black labor to a federal project in his Long Island district; a labor regulation which forces contractors engaged in government contracts to pay employees union wage scale (unions, which incidently were, at the time, usually exclusively white); effectively barring Southern blacks and immigrants from working on plush, government funded construction projects.

Minimum wage doesn't neccessarily have to be racist; on it's best day, minimum wage is only a state sponsored protection for older, higher paid workers from the competition of anyone who would accept less pay for the same work. The surprise for me was that though I understood that minimum wage and Davis-Bacon were, in observable and measurable effect, racist policies--I just had no idea that they were racist in intent.

So why is it that proponents for statutory minimum wage object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what the worker's work is worth? Why won't they explain their objection to us? Why don't they tell us the reason for refusing to explain their objection?

Maybe the answer is that they're racists. Maybe the're just ashamed to be outed so. Seems legit.

Angry greedy white Republican dudes are just plain ole assholes. Who cares if a McDonalds worker gets $15? Good for them. All the bitchin & moanin coming from the angry white dudes is ridiculous. Get a life for God's sake.

Entitled whiny libs want to be paid top dollar even when they have ZERO skills and can be replaced in about 10 seconds

Why don't all you burger baggers aspire to bigger and better things?

That's especially hilarious coming from entitled fat greedy old white Republican dude. No one in this country is more entitled than you. So quit your bitchin and pay up.

 

[paulitician]

if only 4-6% of the workers in this nation are paid minimum wage, then they are only producing about 6% of the Nations GDP, 94% is produced by mostly much higher paid workers....

And if 50% of those making minimum wage, work in the fast food/restaurant business, then only 2-3% of all minimum wage workers produce other things.

Even with having to raise those additional people making close to the $10 an hour that Congress wants to raise the minimum wage to, we will see very little, if any rise at all in inflation. Numbers talk.

And this is why, if done in increments, raising the minimum wage HAS NEVER had a measurable effect on inflation.

All of these wild examples and wild speculations is simply B.S.

There are exceptions for small businesses with 50-100 employees or less, where they can take several more years to raise their minimum wage earners.

If a company has as many as 100 employees as Skull Pilot mentioned, it is a fairly large company and not all of their employees are at minimum wage...they probably have very few people at minimum wage, unless they have a huge turn over rate in employees and pay out the kazoo for constant training of new employees, and unless this multi million dollar company has no upper management and no middle management and no comptroller and no accountant and no administrative assistants and no receptionist, and no other workers than the new hires they hire off the street at minimum. This is HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

I am not denying that there will be some exceptions, where a pizzeria that is not performing profitably as they sit, and an increase in minimum wage could lead to their going out of business EARLIER than they would have eventually gone out of business....BUT the customers who were going to the hurting Pizzeria, will end up going to the other Pizzeria a few blocks or a mile away, and THAT business will have an increase in sales and have the need to hire more people....the very people that lost their jobs at the hurting Pizzeria could be hired by the Pizzeria down the road....

This is not the end of the world, this is not an inflation breaker, and this is not an unemployment increaser, and this is not a business breaker either....with very few exceptions.

Sorry, the low skilled bottom 6% of the workforce is responsible for much less than 6% of GDP.

Which only proves my point Todd...It's not a big enough portion of the economy to cause inflation, it will not hurt the overall economy to raise the minimum to $10.10 which Congress is suggesting.

It will cause some businesses to go under. It will cause more to reduce head count. People who think it will be a boost to the economy are morons. Especially the op.

Yet you 'Sky is Falling' whiners have yet to present even one example of a business going under due to the Minimum Wage. So, once again you'll be proven wrong. Just like all the other times you predicted the sky falling over the Minimum Wage. You guys just don't have the credibility to make such predictions.

 

[paulitician]

If you can't afford to pay someone Minimum Wage, you don't belong in business. It's real simple in the end, either you do the work yourself, or shut it down.

That's exactly what MW laws are all about.

Workers don't exist to be personal slaves.

Of course not. Workers whose work is worth more than the statutory minimum wage should not have their productivity taken at gunpoint to subsidize the wages of those whose work is worth less than the statutory minimum.

And no one is forced to hire workers.

Of course not.

And no one should be forced to pay an employee more than what their work is worth... after all no one is forcing workers to work either.

You don't wanna pay em, do the work yourself. Or get family members to volunteer their time to better your business.

No one is talking about not paying workers for their work, Princess.

Workers are people too.

Not in dispute.

They have bills and families to support.

How will your "statutory minimum wage or nothing" be of help to those who don't get the statutory minimum?

Where two consenting adults voluntarily and mutually agree to what some bit of work is worth; upon what moral authority do you declare such an agreement illegal if it says the work is worth less than what you think it's worth?

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

Workers don't exist to make you wealthier. They're not slaves. So, pay em a survivable wage or simply do the work yourself. It's as simple as that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

if only 4-6% of the workers in this nation are paid minimum wage, then they are only producing about 6% of the Nations GDP, 94% is produced by mostly much higher paid workers....

And if 50% of those making minimum wage, work in the fast food/restaurant business, then only 2-3% of all minimum wage workers produce other things.

Even with having to raise those additional people making close to the $10 an hour that Congress wants to raise the minimum wage to, we will see very little, if any rise at all in inflation. Numbers talk.

And this is why, if done in increments, raising the minimum wage HAS NEVER had a measurable effect on inflation.

All of these wild examples and wild speculations is simply B.S.

There are exceptions for small businesses with 50-100 employees or less, where they can take several more years to raise their minimum wage earners.

If a company has as many as 100 employees as Skull Pilot mentioned, it is a fairly large company and not all of their employees are at minimum wage...they probably have very few people at minimum wage, unless they have a huge turn over rate in employees and pay out the kazoo for constant training of new employees, and unless this multi million dollar company has no upper management and no middle management and no comptroller and no accountant and no administrative assistants and no receptionist, and no other workers than the new hires they hire off the street at minimum. This is HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

I am not denying that there will be some exceptions, where a pizzeria that is not performing profitably as they sit, and an increase in minimum wage could lead to their going out of business EARLIER than they would have eventually gone out of business....BUT the customers who were going to the hurting Pizzeria, will end up going to the other Pizzeria a few blocks or a mile away, and THAT business will have an increase in sales and have the need to hire more people....the very people that lost their jobs at the hurting Pizzeria could be hired by the Pizzeria down the road....

This is not the end of the world, this is not an inflation breaker, and this is not an unemployment increaser, and this is not a business breaker either....with very few exceptions.

Sorry, the low skilled bottom 6% of the workforce is responsible for much less than 6% of GDP.

Which only proves my point Todd...It's not a big enough portion of the economy to cause inflation, it will not hurt the overall economy to raise the minimum to $10.10 which Congress is suggesting.

It will cause some businesses to go under. It will cause more to reduce head count. People who think it will be a boost to the economy are morons. Especially the op.

Yet you 'Sky is Falling' whiners have yet to present even one example of a business going under due to the Minimum Wage. So, once again you'll be proven wrong. Just like all the other times you predicted the sky falling over the Minimum Wage. You guys just don't have the credibility to make such predictions.

Yeah, higher costs, whether raw materials, energy or wages never put a business under. LOL!
You're such a fuck wit.

 

[LOki]

Why don't you explain to us why you object to simply basing a worker's wages upon what that worker's work is worth?

I agree with you that people should just be paid what they are worth. That would be the obvious motivation for people to put the effort into improving themselves and their skillset. Fundamental human dignity. It's an obvious point, and still there are many who will simply refuse to have that conversation. And if you feel that business is being unfairly targeted and penalized here, I'd agree with that, too.

Unfortunately, as with anything else, we have to deal with the reality of the situation. And here is the reality:

First, we have raised at least one full generation of young people, the Selfie Generation, who are terribly self-centered and entitled. We've given them participation medals just for showing up and we've avoided hurting their feelings in class. We've told them how special and wonderful they are while they're in school, knowing full well that the real world would not be nearly so kind. (Confident Idiots American Students Growing More Confident Less Capable)

Second, because these young people are entering the work force with far more phony "self esteem" than actual skills or proper attitude, they simply don't have as much value in the free market as they could have. So, bottom line, either American business "takes care" of them or they end up on the public dole, and we already know that this has become an inter-generational culture now.

And third, automation has eliminated the need for many, many people who have chosen not to increase their skill set, and our economy is clearly in a period of transition as we try to balance massively increased (and increasing) productivity with the skills and size of the labor force.

Bottom line is, we have little choice. It's going to fall on the backs of American business to "take care" of these people, at least until we efficiently find a way to deal with the boom in productivity and automation. If ever, and that's debatable. This, I strongly suspect, is a significant part of the reason for the terribly dishonest "you didn't build that" culture into which we have fallen. Business just has to give it up, tough shit.

I don't like it either, but it is what it is.

.

Ok. Now that you've offered some kind of crap rationalization for why a worker's work is not based upon what that worker's work is worth; upon what moral authority do you determine for everybody what their work (either offered or performed for wages) is worth?

 

[paulitician]

I also told you this:

Are you trying to be laughed out of this thread, or what ? You point to the '08 recession, and then try to pin it on the minimum wage. HA HA HA.. You can go home now.

They're desperate now. In the end, they're just greedy old fat white Republicans trying to blame everything on struggling workers. Same ole same ole.

 

[LOki]

So you're saying that labor costs have nothing to do with the price of goods and services?

So why don't you open a popcorn business and pay everyone 15 an hour and only sell your popcorn for 50 cents a bag?

Let's see how long you last.

If you can't pay someone Minimum Wage, either do the work yourself, or close up shop. No one forces anyone to hire workers.

I agree; Only the Right likes to complain about Individual Responsibility, but Only when it is about the least wealthy.

Spot On. And i swear, i'll never get why angry white Republican dudes especially, are so angry. I mean they've always had it much better than non-white Americans have. They're so upset and panicked because someone at McDonalds might get $15. It's ridiculous. Such greedy hateful little wankers.

Which brings up racism. That's right; the minimum wage is racist. In this country minimum wage means being white is worth no less than $7.25/hr. How does this work? Like this: If 2 prospective employees--one black, one white, but otherwise equal--apply for a minimum wage job, Mr. AryanFront employer can hire white guy with a crew cut and golf shirt at no financial cost--none. He doesn't even have to worry about his competitors picking up the aspiring black worker for less, because they too have to pay him $7.25/hr. If this black worker were allowed to contract his labor for $5.00/hr, or $7.24 even, choosing the white guy would cost RacistJackass $2.25/hr (or $0.01 depending). Moreover, his competitors, if not racist, have the opportunity to hire the black worker at a cost advantage.

If you think this is not the case, you should check out how the white dominated unions in apartheid South Africa complained that the lack of minimum wage regulations led employers to hire cheap black laborers over better trained and better paid white folks. Which, coincidentally was exactly the same argument (check the congressional record) used by Robert Bacon when he wrote the Davis-Bacon Act (the first minmum wage law) in response to Southern contractors bringing black labor to a federal project in his Long Island district; a labor regulation which forces contractors engaged in government contracts to pay employees union wage scale (unions, which incidently were, at the time, usually exclusively white); effectively barring Southern blacks and immigrants from working on plush, government funded construction projects.

Minimum wage doesn't neccessarily have to be racist; on it's best day, minimum wage is only a state sponsored protection for older, higher paid workers from the competition of anyone who would accept less pay for the same work. The surprise for me was that though I understood that minimum wage and Davis-Bacon were, in observable and measurable effect, racist policies--I just had no idea that they were racist in intent.

So why is it that proponents for statutory minimum wage object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what the worker's work is worth? Why won't they explain their objection to us? Why don't they tell us the reason for refusing to explain their objection?

Maybe the answer is that they're racists. Maybe the're just ashamed to be outed so. Seems legit.

Angry greedy white Republican dudes are just plain ole assholes.

And proponents for statutory minimum wage are racist assholes.

Who cares if a McDonalds worker gets $15? Good for them.

Indeed.

All the bitchin & moanin coming from the angry white dudes is ridiculous. Get a life for God's sake.

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

 

[LOki]

I also told you this:

Are you trying to be laughed out of this thread, or what ? You point to the '08 recession, and then try to pin it on the minimum wage. HA HA HA.. You can go home now.

They're desperate now. In the end, they're just greedy old fat white Republicans trying to blame everything on struggling workers. Same ole same ole.

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

 

[Andylusion]

I also told you this:

Are you trying to be laughed out of this thread, or what ? You point to the '08 recession, and then try to pin it on the minimum wage. HA HA HA.. You can go home now.

No, that's actually what happened. It's always amazing to me how dogmatic church like the left is.

"Are you trying to be laughed out of the church?? You point to your evidence and then claim the Earth is round? HAHAHA You can go home now.

"


How many decades have we said that the minimum wage causes jobloss.... and then how many posts warned that raising the minimum wage in the late 00s would cause people to lose their jobs? I specifically know of at least a dozen posts I made back in the 2000s warning of this.

Then..... it happened. And what do you do? You blame banks?

Question: How many jobs are lost because of a bank merger? Answer, none other than the bank itself that merged.

I was listening to EconTalk back in 2009, and the economists were trying to figure out how a problem in the mortgage market, could possibly cause job loss at the low-income range.

Yes, people who build houses would lose their jobs, because too many homes were built because of the bubble.

But even the lowest home builder position, say drywall installer, makes $45K a year. (double my income). But most of the job losses were in the low income range.

When unemployment was 10%, it wasn't a bunch of middle class that were unemployed, but low-wage workers.

How does a bank going bankrupt, cause people at McDonalds and Chipotle to lose their jobs? Answer.... it doesn't.

What does cause people at the low-income range to lose their jobs, is the government driving up the minimum wage.

Which is EXACTLY what we saw.

 

[LOki]

I have submitted and explained to you the well established economic principles that describe how statutory minimum wage is necessarily harmful to the economy.

I have examined plenty of data... yet none of it was corrected for the anti-inflation, and counter unemployment policies (and other confounding externalities) that are active in the same time periods.

An injured athlete pumped full of pain-killers and cortisone feels and functions just fine... would you still say he was not harmed?

Of course not.

Do you have such data--corrected for the anti-inflation, and counter unemployment policies (and other confounding externalities)--that would so soundly refute the points I submitted? If so, please present them so we can examine them together.

So you have no actual facts or evidence proving Minimum Wage has ever caused Unemployment to rise. Thanks. That's what i've been saying all along. You guys are so wrong, so often. Why should anyone believe you?

I also told you this:

No proof whatsoever Minimum Wage causes Unemployment to rise. Unemployment goes up, Unemployment goes down. There are other numerous variables involved. Minimum Wage has little, if any impact at all.

You have been presented with the logically valid argument that making low wage jobs illegal through statutory minimum wage, results in the loss of low wage jobs--unemployment

You have been presented with well established economic principles that state statutory minimum wage causes unemployment.

You have been presented with evidence that supports both the argument, and the well established economic principles that statutory minimum wage results in unemployment.

Yet you still require "proof." You require the real world to overcome your obtuse denial of reality.

This, can't happen. It is a logical impossibility!

So instead, bring proof that statutory minimum wage is some kind of solution, or relief, for poverty. And I mean PROOF, Pumpkin. No bullshit anecdotes; no ad-hominerm arguments; no mawkish appeals to emotion.

Explain to us why you object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what that worker's work is worth.

Do the work yourself. Don't hire workers. Problem solved. You're welcome.

Bring proof that statutory minimum wage is some kind of solution, or relief, for poverty. And I mean PROOF, Pumpkin. No bullshit anecdotes; no ad-hominerm arguments; no mawkish appeals to emotion.

Explain to us why you object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what that worker's work is worth.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I also told you this:

Are you trying to be laughed out of this thread, or what ? You point to the '08 recession, and then try to pin it on the minimum wage. HA HA HA.. You can go home now.

They're desperate now. In the end, they're just greedy old fat white Republicans trying to blame everything on struggling workers. Same ole same ole.

Waah, liberal whiny economic illiterate whining.

 

[paulitician]

Workers don't exist to be personal slaves. And no one is forced to hire workers. You don't wanna pay em, do the work yourself. Or get family members to volunteer their time to better your business. Workers are people too. They have bills and families to support.

Yeah I hear ya. The idea is to temporarily jack up labor costs for leaner businesses to shut them down.

You can't pay someone Minimum Wage, you're out. Sorry, but it just wasn't meant to be for you. No one is forced to hire workers. That's a choice. Don't wanna pay, just shut up and do the work yourself. Quit ya bitchin.

Eventually there will be only large, wealthy corporations, deeply embedded with government, and 'employees'. And you talk about slavery.

I'm afraid that's already the case for the most part. That ship has sailed. But the Corporations can afford to pay Minimum Wage. They'll be fine. I assure you, the Walton Family will still be able to afford their 20th luxury yacht this year.

Why do you want to ensure the Walton Family can afford yachts? Not everyone serves the corporations. Some are still fighting the good fight. And fools like you are selling them out for a pat on the head.

Done-deal. The Corporations own it all, including the Government. Now it's just a matter of surviving in the mess. It's gonna take paying workers at least $10-$12 an hr. just for them to survive. And even at that, they'll struggle mightily. But it's a just & decent start.

I mean let's be real, Rents & Utilities aren't going down anytime soon. In fact, they'll only be going up. Everything has gone up, except for wages. It's time to adjust and do right.

 

[LOki]

I agree; Only the Right likes to complain about Individual Responsibility, but Only when it is about the least wealthy.

Spot On. And i swear, i'll never get why angry white Republican dudes especially, are so angry. I mean they've always had it much better than non-white Americans have. They're so upset and panicked because someone at McDonalds might get $15. It's ridiculous. Such greedy hateful little wankers.

Which brings up racism. That's right; the minimum wage is racist. In this country minimum wage means being white is worth no less than $7.25/hr. How does this work? Like this: If 2 prospective employees--one black, one white, but otherwise equal--apply for a minimum wage job, Mr. AryanFront employer can hire white guy with a crew cut and golf shirt at no financial cost--none. He doesn't even have to worry about his competitors picking up the aspiring black worker for less, because they too have to pay him $7.25/hr. If this black worker were allowed to contract his labor for $5.00/hr, or $7.24 even, choosing the white guy would cost RacistJackass $2.25/hr (or $0.01 depending). Moreover, his competitors, if not racist, have the opportunity to hire the black worker at a cost advantage.

If you think this is not the case, you should check out how the white dominated unions in apartheid South Africa complained that the lack of minimum wage regulations led employers to hire cheap black laborers over better trained and better paid white folks. Which, coincidentally was exactly the same argument (check the congressional record) used by Robert Bacon when he wrote the Davis-Bacon Act (the first minmum wage law) in response to Southern contractors bringing black labor to a federal project in his Long Island district; a labor regulation which forces contractors engaged in government contracts to pay employees union wage scale (unions, which incidently were, at the time, usually exclusively white); effectively barring Southern blacks and immigrants from working on plush, government funded construction projects.

Minimum wage doesn't neccessarily have to be racist; on it's best day, minimum wage is only a state sponsored protection for older, higher paid workers from the competition of anyone who would accept less pay for the same work. The surprise for me was that though I understood that minimum wage and Davis-Bacon were, in observable and measurable effect, racist policies--I just had no idea that they were racist in intent.

So why is it that proponents for statutory minimum wage object to simply basing a worker's wage upon what the worker's work is worth? Why won't they explain their objection to us? Why don't they tell us the reason for refusing to explain their objection?

Maybe the answer is that they're racists. Maybe the're just ashamed to be outed so. Seems legit.

Angry greedy white Republican dudes are just plain ole assholes. Who cares if a McDonalds worker gets $15? Good for them. All the bitchin & moanin coming from the angry white dudes is ridiculous. Get a life for God's sake.

Entitled whiny libs want to be paid top dollar even when they have ZERO skills and can be replaced in about 10 seconds

Why don't all you burger baggers aspire to bigger and better things?

That's especially hilarious coming from entitled fat greedy old white Republican dude. No one in this country is more entitled than you. So quit your bitchin and pay up.

Upon what moral authority do you determine for EVERYONE what their work (either offered or performed for wages) is worth?

 

[Andylusion]

if only 4-6% of the workers in this nation are paid minimum wage, then they are only producing about 6% of the Nations GDP, 94% is produced by mostly much higher paid workers....

And if 50% of those making minimum wage, work in the fast food/restaurant business, then only 2-3% of all minimum wage workers produce other things.

Even with having to raise those additional people making close to the $10 an hour that Congress wants to raise the minimum wage to, we will see very little, if any rise at all in inflation. Numbers talk.

And this is why, if done in increments, raising the minimum wage HAS NEVER had a measurable effect on inflation.

All of these wild examples and wild speculations is simply B.S.

There are exceptions for small businesses with 50-100 employees or less, where they can take several more years to raise their minimum wage earners.

If a company has as many as 100 employees as Skull Pilot mentioned, it is a fairly large company and not all of their employees are at minimum wage...they probably have very few people at minimum wage, unless they have a huge turn over rate in employees and pay out the kazoo for constant training of new employees, and unless this multi million dollar company has no upper management and no middle management and no comptroller and no accountant and no administrative assistants and no receptionist, and no other workers than the new hires they hire off the street at minimum. This is HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

I am not denying that there will be some exceptions, where a pizzeria that is not performing profitably as they sit, and an increase in minimum wage could lead to their going out of business EARLIER than they would have eventually gone out of business....BUT the customers who were going to the hurting Pizzeria, will end up going to the other Pizzeria a few blocks or a mile away, and THAT business will have an increase in sales and have the need to hire more people....the very people that lost their jobs at the hurting Pizzeria could be hired by the Pizzeria down the road....

This is not the end of the world, this is not an inflation breaker, and this is not an unemployment increaser, and this is not a business breaker either....with very few exceptions.

Neato.

Why don't you explain to us why you object to simply basing a worker's wages upon what that worker's work is worth?

Because most employers don't pay what the worker is worth, but what they can get away with paying. How can you not know that? It's so obvious.

The employer has no ability to determine what the worker is worth.

The customer determines what the worker is worth.

If the customer is not willing to pay $20 for a cheap fast food burger, then the employer can not pay the employee $20/hr.

That's how that works. If you try and force the employer to pay a higher wage, than how much the customer is willing to pay for the labor........ then he closes, and the employee now earns a new wage of ZERO.

Which is exactly what happens every single time people raise the minimum wage.

 

[LOki]

If you can't afford to pay someone Minimum Wage, you don't belong in business. It's real simple in the end, either you do the work yourself, or shut it down.

That's exactly what MW laws are all about.

Workers don't exist to be personal slaves.

Of course not. Workers whose work is worth more than the statutory minimum wage should not have their productivity taken at gunpoint to subsidize the wages of those whose work is worth less than the statutory minimum.

And no one is forced to hire workers.

Of course not.

And no one should be forced to pay an employee more than what their work is worth... after all no one is forcing workers to work either.

You don't wanna pay em, do the work yourself. Or get family members to volunteer their time to better your business.

No one is talking about not paying workers for their work, Princess.

Workers are people too.

Not in dispute.

They have bills and families to support.

How will your "statutory minimum wage or nothing" be of help to those who don't get the statutory minimum?

Where two consenting adults voluntarily and mutually agree to what some bit of work is worth; upon what moral authority do you declare such an agreement illegal if it says the work is worth less than what you think it's worth?

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

Workers don't exist to make you wealthier. They're not slaves. So, pay em a survivable wage or simply do the work yourself. It's as simple as that.

Where two consenting adults voluntarily and mutually agree to what some bit of work is worth; upon what moral authority do you declare such an agreement illegal if it says the work is worth less than what you think it's worth?

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