Optimum Minimum Wages can be calculated

[Wyatt earp]

Uhm because it's not 1935????

Bear513, yes, you're right, it's not now 1935. I also remember my mother being asked, 'Do you remember when steak was less than a quarter per pound"? She replied, “Yes, and no one had the quarter”.

The Staten Island ferry ride was a nickel and grade school desks had special inkwell bottle compartment.

So what's your point? Respectfully, Supposn

Your telling me now you have been retired for years and don't know how times have changed in the working world..

 

[dblack]

People assume minimum wage laws require employers to pay people more money. But they really don't. They simply prohibit employees from working for less - even if they want to.

 

[Wyatt earp]

People assume minimum wage laws require employers to pay people more money. But they really don't. They simply prohibit employees from working for less - even if they want to.

That and minimum wage laws were racist from the start, not to mention it's trickle up poor.

 

[Supposn]

… Andylusion, more people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down and poverty will be greatly increasing.

If only you had proof.

... Let me know when you have proof that eliminating the MW would trigger a deflationary depression.

ToddsterPatriot, that may some time. While your waiting, try to prove that pure libertarian governing policies won't induce another great economic depression in the USA.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nobody earns a median wage, they earn a wage.
Do you feel eliminating the minimum wage would reduce your wages? Why?
Do you feel eliminating the minimum wage would be inflationary? Why?

and increase the incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

If you're worth $10/hour, why would eliminating the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 harm you?

You don't seem to appreciate what competitive markets can or cannot do.

You don't seem to appreciate what government mandates can or cannot do.

ToddsterPatriot, the nation's population has both an average and a median wage. I assume you know the meaning of the mathematical term, “median”. You just want to upset me by pretending you're ignorant. I suppose you are well aware that for most applications, the “median” rather than the “average” provides us with a much more “usual” or “typical” number.

Eliminating or reducing the purchasing power of the legally mandated minimum wage would reduce the purchasing power of the nation's median wage, which would indicate that most employed wage earners were experiencing a loss of purchasing power.

I believe eliminating the federal minimum wage rate would more than otherwise be deflationary rather than inflationary.

Eliminating our current minimum wage of $7.25 while there was no shortage of unskilled labor, would have a devastating effect upon USA's economy. States would attempt, but couldn't save their own economies.

More people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down. The state's public assistance programs would be unable to handle their increased numbers of employed people's families that would be unable to financially sustain themselves.
A substantial portion of those now earning $10/per hour would be unemployed, additionally, a substantial portion of those employed would also be in need of public assistance.

Respectfully, Supposn

Eliminating or reducing the purchasing power of the legally mandated minimum wage would reduce the purchasing power of the nation's median wage

Unless you're talking about inflation, why do you keep using the term "purchasing power"?
You're making less sense than usual.

And again, the nation doesn't have a median wage.
Try this thought experiment. One million new workers are hired at the minimum wage.
Everyone above the current median gets a 10% raise. No one else does.
Has the "purchasing power of the nation's median wage" been reduced?
Is the nation better off than before?

You didn't answer the first time.
Is it because you don't understand median?
Do you not know the answer?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

… Andylusion, more people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down and poverty will be greatly increasing.

If only you had proof.

... Let me know when you have proof that eliminating the MW would trigger a deflationary depression.

ToddsterPatriot, that may some time. While your waiting, try to prove that pure libertarian governing policies won't induce another great economic depression in the USA.

Respectfully, Supposn

Eliminating the MW would make the US a pure libertarian government?

 

[Andylusion]

Every automated job should subsidize a poor person.

If that happened, then they would simply leave the country.

Ironically, I was just reading about Puerto Rico, and one of the big problems was that raising the minimum wage, caused manufacturing jobs to leave.

In fact.... and this is very ironic..... Obama himself, actually passed the PROMESA bill, which among other things, allowed them to lower the minimum wage, to keep jobs in Puerto Rico.

The idea that you can force business to subsidize people.... is ridiculous. It never works.

You just jack up the minimum wage, so they automate. You tax automation, so they leave the country.

You can not make business pay for something that they don't want. Your system doesn't work. Every single time you guys try this, you end up with devastation.

Then you raise tariffs.

Raising tariffs doesn't harm companies that leave. It harms the companies that stay.

Just think about it.... if I'm a company that needs metal.... I move half my operations out of the country. Which half of the company is going to be harmed by tariffs? The half outside the country, that doesn't have to pay the cost of the tariff, because they are not in the US? Or the half that is in the US?

That would make me move the entire company out of the US.

I have never understood the "we will punish others by taxing us" theory of economics. That makes no sense at all.

 

[Supposn]

Eliminating the MW would make the US a pure libertarian government?

ToddsterPatriot, if we should believe libertarians, it would be a great start toward their goals.
Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Wyatt earp]

Every automated job should subsidize a poor person.

If that happened, then they would simply leave the country.

Ironically, I was just reading about Puerto Rico, and one of the big problems was that raising the minimum wage, caused manufacturing jobs to leave.

In fact.... and this is very ironic..... Obama himself, actually passed the PROMESA bill, which among other things, allowed them to lower the minimum wage, to keep jobs in Puerto Rico.

The idea that you can force business to subsidize people.... is ridiculous. It never works.

You just jack up the minimum wage, so they automate. You tax automation, so they leave the country.

You can not make business pay for something that they don't want. Your system doesn't work. Every single time you guys try this, you end up with devastation.

Then you raise tariffs.

Raising tariffs doesn't harm companies that leave. It harms the companies that stay.

Just think about it.... if I'm a company that needs metal.... I move half my operations out of the country. Which half of the company is going to be harmed by tariffs? The half outside the country, that doesn't have to pay the cost of the tariff, because they are not in the US? Or the half that is in the US?

That would make me move the entire company out of the US.

I have never understood the "we will punish others by taxing us" theory of economics. That makes no sense at all.

You do know geography don't you? That's as stupid as saying Trump being an isolationist will leave us in the dust.. we only live on one world..

 

[Andylusion]

ToddsterPatriot, although the elimination of the federal minimum wage would greatly reduce our unemployment rate, and significantly reduce the purchasing power of our median wage and increase the incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

Your proposal to prohibit the importation of bananas is much less detrimental to our nation. It would not reduce our trade deficit by any perceivable extent and would have little effect upon our numbers of jobs or our median family incomes, but to the extents that it affects could be perceived, the proposal's net effects are more likely to be detrimental than beneficial to our nation.

You don't seem to appreciate what competitive markets can or cannot do. You're not (to the extent that you believe), a conservative.

Respectfully, Supposn

and significantly reduce the purchasing power of our median wage

Nobody earns a median wage, they earn a wage.
Do you feel eliminating the minimum wage would reduce your wages? Why?
Do you feel eliminating the minimum wage would be inflationary? Why?

and increase the incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

If you're worth $10/hour, why would eliminating the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 harm you?

You don't seem to appreciate what competitive markets can or cannot do.

You don't seem to appreciate what government mandates can or cannot do.

Do some research proof in the pudding is UBER rates. They are contractors and thus don't have to pay the minimum wage. Rates used to be $1.60 a mile but now drop below 0.70 cents per mile. The government estimates that 0.70 per mile is what it cost to run your car so they are operating in the negative income. When I reported my income, doing Uber back at $1.60 a mile I would report negative income on my yearly income. Foreign immigration, not just illegals, get drivers licenses and work 20 hours a day in their cars for pennies on the dollar, doing their own mechanical work (no way they can afford someone else to do it) and drove the prices down to the point I couldn't even make enough money to make the car payment in an 8 hour day. When I started I sometimes made $300 in a single day. Now I'm lucky to make $25.00 in an 8 hour day. Now someone pings you from 15 minutes away, you drive to them and they pay a 5 minute minimum fare of 4 bucks which cost you close to 30 minutes of total driving time and you only get to keep $1.70 of that $4 after paying Ubers share, insurance, etc. which has to go to vehicle upkeep. One mistake, one single problem, and your homeless without a car working those conditions. And it's because of immigrants both legal and illegal.

So I have a couple of problems, and some thoughts on this, because I actually worked as a contractor for a delivery company.

I worked at this company, doing deliveries out of my own car, and I was paid comparable rates to Uber.

After doing it for about a year, I realized that the pay sucked. The amount of work, verses the pay, verse the cost, was not good in my estimation.

So I started talking to some of the other drivers, to figure out if perhaps I was doing something wrong.

What I found was, several of the other drivers were retirees. They had already earned their money in life, and this was a lax laid back job that allowed them to drive around, and still make a few dollars.

Another 2 of them, were married people, whose spouses earned a decent living, and they were just doing this to get out of the house.

A few said they knew the pay was not great, but they loved the freedom, and the lack of a 'boss' person.

This is the problem with people like you, saying that you don't like how the market works.
If you don't like the pay.... then don't do that job.

And this stupidity of "One mistake, one single problem, and your homeless without a car working those conditions."

Whose fault is that? Whose is responsible for you taking a job that doesn't pay enough, that one mistake means you are homeless without a car?

Isn't that YOUR job to take care of you?

Because I assumed that it was my job to take care of me, which is why when I determined the pay was simply too low for me, that I moved to find a new job.

And I got a new job that paid more.

But I did not assume that somehow it was government's job to prevent people from having jobs that they liked. Those retirees loved what they were doing. Those married people, loved what they were doing. Even the few people that were making a living off that job, liked what they were doing.

It's not up to you, to determine what jobs others should have.

If the job doesn't pay enough for you..... SHUT UP.... AND A GET NEW JOB.

I'm tired of this 'whine and cry' defacto American response when people don't like their job. If you don't like the pay.... MOVE ON..... This isn't the USSR, and you are not required to work there. Find somewhere else. I did. Didn't leave me homeless without a car. Seriously, some people need to start taking responsibility for themselves, and whine and cry a lot less.

 

[Andylusion]

Every automated job should subsidize a poor person.

If that happened, then they would simply leave the country.

Ironically, I was just reading about Puerto Rico, and one of the big problems was that raising the minimum wage, caused manufacturing jobs to leave.

In fact.... and this is very ironic..... Obama himself, actually passed the PROMESA bill, which among other things, allowed them to lower the minimum wage, to keep jobs in Puerto Rico.

The idea that you can force business to subsidize people.... is ridiculous. It never works.

You just jack up the minimum wage, so they automate. You tax automation, so they leave the country.

You can not make business pay for something that they don't want. Your system doesn't work. Every single time you guys try this, you end up with devastation.

Then you raise tariffs.

Raising tariffs doesn't harm companies that leave. It harms the companies that stay.

Just think about it.... if I'm a company that needs metal.... I move half my operations out of the country. Which half of the company is going to be harmed by tariffs? The half outside the country, that doesn't have to pay the cost of the tariff, because they are not in the US? Or the half that is in the US?

That would make me move the entire company out of the US.

I have never understood the "we will punish others by taxing us" theory of economics. That makes no sense at all.

You do know geography don't you? That's as stupid as saying Trump being an isolationist will leave us in the dust.. we only live on one world..

That response to my post, didn't make any sense either.

 

[Andylusion]

That's ridiculous.

Every single country that has ever lowered it's minimum wage, has seen employment go up. Greece lowered their minimum wage, and employment immediately went up.
And shockingly, if more people are working and producing, the economy recovers.

This is bonkers. you are economically illiterate.​

... Eliminating or reducing the purchasing power of the legally mandated minimum wage would reduce the purchasing power of the nation's median wage, which would indicate that most employed wage earners were experiencing a loss of purchasing power.
I believe eliminating the federal minimum wage rate would more than otherwise be deflationary rather than inflationary.
Eliminating our current minimum wage of $7.25 while there was no shortage of unskilled labor, would have a devastating effect upon USA's economy. States would attempt, but couldn't save their own economies.

More people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down. The state's public assistance programs would be unable to handle their increased numbers of employed people's families that would be unable to financially sustain themselves.
A substantial portion of those now earning $10/per hour would be unemployed, additionally, a substantial portion of those employed would also be in need of public assistance.

Andylusion, more people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down and poverty will be greatly increasing.
Respectfully, Supposn

​

As opposed to not having a job at all?

Further, that isn't even entirely true. The market adjusts to demand. During the 2008 crash, the price of automobiles drastically fell. In fact, prices across the entire country fell.

Regardless, if you have a job that is low-value, say that is only worth $5/hour.... You can claim that people with that job have a low purchasing power.... but the fact is, if the minimum wage is $6/hour, then that job doesn't exist. If the job doesn't exist, then the purchasing power of hte people not employed, is ZERO.

So which purchasing power is lower? Zero, or $5/hour?

 

[Wyatt earp]

ToddsterPatriot, although the elimination of the federal minimum wage would greatly reduce our unemployment rate, and significantly reduce the purchasing power of our median wage and increase the incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

Your proposal to prohibit the importation of bananas is much less detrimental to our nation. It would not reduce our trade deficit by any perceivable extent and would have little effect upon our numbers of jobs or our median family incomes, but to the extents that it affects could be perceived, the proposal's net effects are more likely to be detrimental than beneficial to our nation.

You don't seem to appreciate what competitive markets can or cannot do. You're not (to the extent that you believe), a conservative.

Respectfully, Supposn

and significantly reduce the purchasing power of our median wage

Nobody earns a median wage, they earn a wage.
Do you feel eliminating the minimum wage would reduce your wages? Why?
Do you feel eliminating the minimum wage would be inflationary? Why?

and increase the incidences and extents of poverty in our nation.

If you're worth $10/hour, why would eliminating the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 harm you?

You don't seem to appreciate what competitive markets can or cannot do.

You don't seem to appreciate what government mandates can or cannot do.

Do some research proof in the pudding is UBER rates. They are contractors and thus don't have to pay the minimum wage. Rates used to be $1.60 a mile but now drop below 0.70 cents per mile. The government estimates that 0.70 per mile is what it cost to run your car so they are operating in the negative income. When I reported my income, doing Uber back at $1.60 a mile I would report negative income on my yearly income. Foreign immigration, not just illegals, get drivers licenses and work 20 hours a day in their cars for pennies on the dollar, doing their own mechanical work (no way they can afford someone else to do it) and drove the prices down to the point I couldn't even make enough money to make the car payment in an 8 hour day. When I started I sometimes made $300 in a single day. Now I'm lucky to make $25.00 in an 8 hour day. Now someone pings you from 15 minutes away, you drive to them and they pay a 5 minute minimum fare of 4 bucks which cost you close to 30 minutes of total driving time and you only get to keep $1.70 of that $4 after paying Ubers share, insurance, etc. which has to go to vehicle upkeep. One mistake, one single problem, and your homeless without a car working those conditions. And it's because of immigrants both legal and illegal.

So I have a couple of problems, and some thoughts on this, because I actually worked as a contractor for a delivery company.

I worked at this company, doing deliveries out of my own car, and I was paid comparable rates to Uber.

After doing it for about a year, I realized that the pay sucked. The amount of work, verses the pay, verse the cost, was not good in my estimation.

So I started talking to some of the other drivers, to figure out if perhaps I was doing something wrong.

What I found was, several of the other drivers were retirees. They had already earned their money in life, and this was a lax laid back job that allowed them to drive around, and still make a few dollars.

Another 2 of them, were married people, whose spouses earned a decent living, and they were just doing this to get out of the house.

A few said they knew the pay was not great, but they loved the freedom, and the lack of a 'boss' person.

This is the problem with people like you, saying that you don't like how the market works.
If you don't like the pay.... then don't do that job.

And this stupidity of "One mistake, one single problem, and your homeless without a car working those conditions."

Whose fault is that? Whose is responsible for you taking a job that doesn't pay enough, that one mistake means you are homeless without a car?

Isn't that YOUR job to take care of you?

Because I assumed that it was my job to take care of me, which is why when I determined the pay was simply too low for me, that I moved to find a new job.

And I got a new job that paid more.

But I did not assume that somehow it was government's job to prevent people from having jobs that they liked. Those retirees loved what they were doing. Those married people, loved what they were doing. Even the few people that were making a living off that job, liked what they were doing.

It's not up to you, to determine what jobs others should have.

If the job doesn't pay enough for you..... SHUT UP.... AND A GET NEW JOB.

I'm tired of this 'whine and cry' defacto American response when people don't like their job. If you don't like the pay.... MOVE ON..... This isn't the USSR, and you are not required to work there. Find somewhere else. I did. Didn't leave me homeless without a car. Seriously, some people need to start taking responsibility for themselves, and whine and cry a lot less.

That reminds me when I was in between jobs as a taxi cab driver, it was a blast working the night shift, but the pay sucked..

 

[Andylusion]

That's ridiculous.
Every single country that has ever lowered it's minimum wage, has seen employment go up. Greece lowered their minimum wage, and employment immediately went up.
And shockingly, if more people are working and producing, the economy recovers.…

... Eliminating our current minimum wage of $7.25 while there was no shortage of unskilled labor, would have a devastating effect upon USA's economy. States would attempt, but couldn't save their own economies.

More people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down. The state's public assistance programs would be unable to handle their increased numbers of employed people's families that would be unable to financially sustain themselves. …

… Andylusion, more people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down and poverty will be greatly increasing.

If only you had proof.

ToddsterPatriot, I refer you to our nation's history between 1929 and the Second World War.
Respectfully, Supposn

Actually that evidence, directly contradicts your claims.

Hoover, if you didn't know, directly pushed to prevent wages from falling. That's one of the primary reasons the economy didn't recover. Because businesses did not lower their wages, under the pressure from Herbert Hoover and the government, they didn't employ more people.

Because they didn't employ more people, even if at a lower wage, the result was more people were simply... not employed.

This is bad for a number of reasons, most obvious. Obviously if you have people not working, they are not getting money to buy things. But also it's bad because with reduced production (because fewer people are producing goods and services, means that prices do not drop.

Supply and demand. The amount of supply goes down, because fewer people are working, the result is higher prices, when fewer of those that are working, can afford goods and services.

All of this leads to the economy going into a decade plus, long depression.

So pointing to the the 1929-WW2, does not support your case. In fact, it is the very defacto timeline that I would cite, to prove our case.

By the way, FDR did the same thing with wage controls. Again, this is why the depression lasted so long.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Eliminating the MW would make the US a pure libertarian government?

ToddsterPatriot, if we should believe libertarians, it would be a great start toward their goals.
Respectfully, Supposn

And if we believed liberals, we could make the minimum wage $50/hr with no ill effects.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

… Andylusion, more people would be employed but wage's purchasing powers would be spiraling down and poverty will be greatly increasing.

If only you had proof.

... Let me know when you have proof that eliminating the MW would trigger a deflationary depression.

ToddsterPatriot, that may some time. While your waiting, try to prove that pure libertarian governing policies won't induce another great economic depression in the USA.

Respectfully, Supposn

Aynal Randism

Also, the Lizardtarian utopia will quickly become a police state, "to protect Rugged Individualists from mob rule."

 

[Supposn]

As opposed to not having a job at all?

Further, that isn't even entirely true. The market adjusts to demand. During the 2008 crash, the price of automobiles drastically fell. In fact, prices across the entire country fell.

Regardless, if you have a job that is low-value, say that is only worth $5/hour.... You can claim that people with that job have a low purchasing power.... but the fact is, if the minimum wage is $6/hour, then that job doesn't exist. If the job doesn't exist, then the purchasing power of the people not employed is ZERO.

So which purchasing power is lower? Zero, or $5/hour?

AndyLusion, you don't appreciate our recent history. During the 1930's depression, a quarter of our nation was unemployed. Public assistance is not just for altruistic policy. There a public cost due to a nation's aggregate occurrences of private poverty and that cost severally increases if government fails to reduce the numbers and extents of such incidences.

Due to the “wage differentiation” concept, USA wages scales are based upon the reasonably effectively enforced minimum wage rate. When we permit the purchasing power of the minimum rate to be reduced, it induces the purchasing powers of all other USA wage scales to be reduced. If there's no reasonably enforced definite minimum wage rate, there's a market-determined, indefinite theoretical minimum rate. The indefinite minimum subject to market forces will continue to spiral down and force all other wage scales to follow it. Poverty will continually increase.

The short answer to your question, it is economically preferable to provide public assistance, rather than to permit the purchasing power of the minimum wage rate to be reduced. Eliminating the federal minimum wage rate will increase poverty in the USA.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Supposn]

I would suppose that every one of the world's 20 top ranking national economies has some laws similar to and performing the functions of our federal minimum wage rate. If any of this group's members are aware of any exceptions within those top 20 nations, please post a link so we may all be aware of it.

I suppose if any political faction within those 20 nations attempts to eliminate those minimum rate laws without replacing them with some other laws that would serve similar purposes, the faction's ability to influence their nation's policies would be reduced.
Eliminating the federal minimum wage rate would increase poverty in the USA.

No political party will succeed to eliminate and not replace the purposes of the federal minimum wage rate. In the future, (I expect within my lifetime), its purchasing power will be substantially increased and set in a manner to retain no less than that set purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Wyatt earp]

As opposed to not having a job at all?

Further, that isn't even entirely true. The market adjusts to demand. During the 2008 crash, the price of automobiles drastically fell. In fact, prices across the entire country fell.

Regardless, if you have a job that is low-value, say that is only worth $5/hour.... You can claim that people with that job have a low purchasing power.... but the fact is, if the minimum wage is $6/hour, then that job doesn't exist. If the job doesn't exist, then the purchasing power of the people not employed is ZERO.

So which purchasing power is lower? Zero, or $5/hour?

AndyLusion, you don't appreciate our recent history. During the 1930's depression, a quarter of our nation was unemployed. Public assistance is not just for altruistic policy. There a public cost due to a nation's aggregate occurrences of private poverty and that cost severally increases if government fails to reduce the numbers and extents of such incidences.

Due to the “wage differentiation” concept, USA wages scales are based upon the reasonably effectively enforced minimum wage rate. When we permit the purchasing power of the minimum rate to be reduced, it induces the purchasing powers of all other USA wage scales to be reduced. If there's no reasonably enforced definite minimum wage rate, there's a market-determined, indefinite theoretical minimum rate. The indefinite minimum subject to market forces will continue to spiral down and force all other wage scales to follow it. Poverty will continually increase.

The short answer to your question, it is economically preferable to provide public assistance, rather than to permit the purchasing power of the minimum wage rate to be reduced. Eliminating the federal minimum wage rate will increase poverty in the USA.

Respectfully, Supposn

That's the biggest crock of poop yet, once again where I live in south Carolina no factory pays minimum wage, it's way above it... look on the job boards and research it..the factory in the USA that pay close to their states minimum wage are the ones who raised it above national..

 

[Wyatt earp]

I would suppose that every one of the world's 20 top ranking national economies has some laws similar to and performing the functions of our federal minimum wage rate. If any of this group's members are aware of any exceptions within those top 20 nations, please post a link so we may all be aware of it.

I suppose if any political faction within those 20 nations attempts to eliminate those minimum rate laws without replacing them with some other laws that would serve similar purposes, the faction's ability to influence their nation's policies would be reduced.
Eliminating the federal minimum wage rate would increase poverty in the USA.

No political party will succeed to eliminate and not replace the purposes of the federal minimum wage rate. In the future, (I expect within my lifetime), its purchasing power will be substantially increased and set in a manner to retain no less than that set purchasing power.

Respectfully, Supposn

Minimum wage laws are racisist from the start, it doesn't do anything except screw people who make a few bucks more then minimum...