Alan
Alan
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 582
TheBigPaybak
TheBigPaybak
Joined: May 14, 2012
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 437
January 30th, 2014 at 7:52:38 AM permalink
Maybe someone can provide some insight for me on this issue:
1. If you raise the minimum wage to $50/hour, I would think everyone would agree(although maybe I'm wrong!) there would be significant job losses and catastrophic economic effects from all of the business closings.
2. If you raise the minimum wage to $30/hour, it seems likely that most people would also agree there would be a tremendous amount of job losses.
3. If you raise the minimum wage to $20/hour, it also seems likely that most people would agree there would be a large number of job losses and business closings.
4. At $15: I still think we'd get a large number of job losses and business closings, although likely not Armageddon, at least.

So do people think there's some "sweet spot" where a raise won't result in job losses, or that job losses just to be accepted somehow?
Lack of prior planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on my part.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 231
  • Posts: 12756
January 30th, 2014 at 8:01:15 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Which would have happened anyway... do you think that these technical innovations would not have occurred if minimum wage was reduced to $6/hour?



They might or they might not have. For sure if wage rates were lower then adoption would have been slower as the IRR was not there to justify the purchase. What is for sure is if you hike the cost of employees who are not giving an equal return in productivity the employer will find ways to eliminate them as fast as possible.

Quote: boymimbo

What a load of crap.



Why? Do you believe people are actually trying to raise a family on minimum wage?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
mcallister3200
mcallister3200
Joined: Dec 29, 2013
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 3169
January 30th, 2014 at 8:01:41 AM permalink
Yes, like $10 per hour. It's not a living wage either. But if a company really can't afford $10 an hour an be profitable, either they need to find a way to be more efficient or they're going in the direction of going out of business anyways sooner or later.
TheBigPaybak
TheBigPaybak
Joined: May 14, 2012
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 437
January 30th, 2014 at 8:13:09 AM permalink
Quote: mcallister3200

Yes, like $10 per hour. It's not a living wage either. But if a company really can't afford $10 an hour an be profitable, either they need to find a way to be more efficient or they're going in the direction of going out of business anyways sooner or later.



So why $10 and not $15, and why won't it be $15 in 5 years?

In many cases, one way to become more efficient is to reduce employees and put more work on the existing employees' shoulders: to be clear, it would depend on the situation, but it's many times an option.

As most small businesses ultimately "fail", does the process really need to helped along? Is it better to run a pizza joint for 20 years paying minimum wage versus 10 years paying above minimum wage?

As a general comment, i wish all of our law-makers would at one time in their lives have run a small business, even if unsuccessfully.
Lack of prior planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on my part.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 231
  • Posts: 12756
January 30th, 2014 at 8:13:40 AM permalink
Quote: mcallister3200

Yes, like $10 per hour. It's not a living wage either. But if a company really can't afford $10 an hour an be profitable, either they need to find a way to be more efficient or they're going in the direction of going out of business anyways sooner or later.



But it isn't $10 an hour they are paying. It is closer to $15. Meaning the employee needs to give $100 or so in productivity to be profitable.

Anyone who makes a statement such as you are saying probably has not been on the managing side of a business.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
January 30th, 2014 at 8:36:42 AM permalink
Small business owners would disagree with you

58% of Repulbicans support a minimum wage increase.

Bill O'Reilly also does not agree with you, among a number of other prominent conservatives and economists, many of which use the same argument I do:

(1) Most small business employers (85%) pay more than the minimum wage anyway.
(2) Making more means that they will spend more.
(3) Making more means more people will attempt to work than stay off welfare, reducing welfare spending.
(4) Inflation will only be marginally impacted and will not lead to across the board increases. Show me the bump in inflation when Bush raised the minimum wage in 2009.
(5) Jobs are jobs. Automation will occur no matter if a worker makes $7.25 an hour or $10/hour.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
January 30th, 2014 at 8:43:44 AM permalink
Quote: TheBigPaybak

Maybe someone can provide some insight for me on this issue:
1. If you raise the minimum wage to $50/hour, I would think everyone would agree(although maybe I'm wrong!) there would be significant job losses and catastrophic economic effects from all of the business closings.
2. If you raise the minimum wage to $30/hour, it seems likely that most people would also agree there would be a tremendous amount of job losses.
3. If you raise the minimum wage to $20/hour, it also seems likely that most people would agree there would be a large number of job losses and business closings.
4. At $15: I still think we'd get a large number of job losses and business closings, although likely not Armageddon, at least.

So do people think there's some "sweet spot" where a raise won't result in job losses, or that job losses just to be accepted somehow?



A gradual increase to $12 / hour over five years would be something that I think would have no catastrophic impact. Reduce corporate and small business taxes from 35% to 25% and/or provide a tax credit to small employers that exempt the first 100,000 in income. And then pass a law that raises minimum wage with inflation. And then tighten up welfare programs across the board to make it far more worthwhile to work than to sit at home. Pay bonuses to people who learn job skills or who volunteer while collecting welfare. This should have the effect of lowering government costs.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 231
  • Posts: 12756
January 30th, 2014 at 9:15:14 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Small business owners would disagree with you

58% of Repulbicans support a minimum wage increase.

Bill O'Reilly also does not agree with you, among a number of other prominent conservatives and economists, many of which use the same argument I do:

(1) Most small business employers (85%) pay more than the minimum wage anyway.
(2) Making more means that they will spend more.
(3) Making more means more people will attempt to work than stay off welfare, reducing welfare spending.
(4) Inflation will only be marginally impacted and will not lead to across the board increases. Show me the bump in inflation when Bush raised the minimum wage in 2009.
(5) Jobs are jobs. Automation will occur no matter if a worker makes $7.25 an hour or $10/hour.




Any small business owner who wants to raise wages is free to do so. Raising minimum punishes them even if they pay more. The guy who pays more has to pay EVEN MORE after an increase.

The welfare argument is old. The way to get people off welfare is to limit welfare. Work is a requirement, not an option.

BTW: Bill O'Reilly is not a conservative. No idea where people get that.

Inflation may not have went up in 2009 but we sure as heck had a collapse in employment numbers.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
Sabretom2
Sabretom2
Joined: Mar 3, 2013
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 718
January 30th, 2014 at 9:32:30 AM permalink
The minimum wage argument has less to do with economies and more to do with a dependable wedge issue brought up by demagogues. The Democratic Party has one message and one message only, "Vote for me and I'll get you more money." Sadly, it works.

Is the Democrat base such a population of losers that they find themselves incapable of asking the boss for a raise and need the POTUS to ask for them?

  • Jump to: