Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/03/gov-brown-abandons-15-minimum-wage-proposal/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social Surprise WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Yeah I don't know how they couldn't see that small businesses would have been screwed and large businesses would have dialed back their work force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 State-wide is pointless, for the reasons outlined. Needs to be national. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Minimum wage is not enough to live on but it is not meant for that. Minimum wage jobs are starting points for students in high schools or college students on summer break. Many people start out at minimum wage then work their way up the ladder. Minimum wage jobs are usually starting point jobs. Probably the best proposal I have seen is a 2 tier minimum wage where those working and are depending on minimum wage as a living wage get a higher dollar amount versus the part time and students living at home making minimum wage. Although I see the negative effects of higher minimum wage I also see negative effects with companies that should pay their employees a higher wage but don't. Then the employees who don't make enough to live on get food stamps and other government assistance programs to supplement and employers let taxpayers foot the bill for it instead of paying a living wage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Minimum wage is not enough to live on but it is not meant for that. Minimum wage jobs are starting points for students in high schools or college students on summer break. Many people start out at minimum wage then work their way up the ladder. Probably the best proposal I have seen is a 2 tier minimum wage where those working and are depending on minimum wage as a living wage get a higher dollar amount versus the part time and students living at home making minimum wage. Because students deserve less? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/characteristics-of-minimum-wage-workers-2014.pdf It's a myth that minimum wage workers are all young. Minimum wage employees make up 2.5% of all workers at hourly rates. That breaks down to 0.9% under 25 and 1.6% over 25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 64% of those on minimum wage are part time - presumably either actually working part time around college/school, or it's because that's all the hours they can get. Meaning, 36% of those on minimum wage work full time. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-minimum-wage/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Because students deserve less? No because there are negative effects to having a higher minimum wage such as job losses. Most people who start at minimum wage work their way up the ladder to higher paying jobs. If there are situations where people are depending on minimum wage to live on and have families then I see the wisdom of a 2 tier minimum wage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 So yes, students deserve less because they might earn more in the future? That's assuming there isn't yet another economic crisis that drives mass unemployment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Because students deserve less? Deserve? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Deserve? WSS Are worth? Should earn? However you care to phrase it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Are worth? Should earn? However you care to phrase it.Actually I was wondering why somebody deserves more or less. If people are crying about not being able to take care of family with one person earning a minimum wage that would be a different situation than a kid working part time, woulldnt it? Is the idea that minimum wage should support one person or four people? Not to mention the fact that a job weeks or months or years to learn should be worth more than one you can begin today from square one. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 BTW, there's no correlation between minimum wage and unemployment, across the US. If you take the minimum wage and unemployment percent and run a correlation, you actually get weak negative correlation, but that is in large part due to some states having no minimum wage. So take that out and you get a correlation figure of 0.06. For context, it can go from -1 to +1, strong negative to strong positive correlation. A figure of 0 means no correlation. See the graph below for a visual demonstration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Uh okay. So what's your point again with the graph? And why does it make what I just said right or wrong? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Uh okay. So what's your point again with the graph? And why does it make what I just said right or wrong? WSS Didn't read what you said, was in response to the idea that higher minimum wage means higher unemployment. To your point, you would have cal up in arms about such an idea - that you could earn more money just by squirting out kids, how very liberal of you. For me, I don't think it should be tied to how many people you need to support, it should be enough to comfortably support one person when working 40 hours per week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Didn't read what you said, was in response to the idea that higher minimum wage means higher unemployment. To your point, you would have cal up in arms about such an idea - that you could earn more money just by squirting out kids, how very liberal of you. For me, I don't think it should be tied to how many people you need to support, it should be enough to comfortably support one person when working 40 hours per week. No problem Chris. I thought you were responding to me. I would guess, however, that if I owned a shop and needed a little bit of help raising my cost by 50% would be something of a hardship. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 For instance I've considered hiring a guy for fifty bucks a night to help me set up run sound etc, stuff that I do myself now. I'd be hard pressed to pay the 50 bux but wouldn't even think about 75. But even that is a smaller jump than from 7:50 up to 15. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 To be fair, a jump from $7.50 to $15 is crazy. The problem is, $15 (or $12, or $18 or whatever) is where it should be now, and the problem is it hasn't been raised for a long time. If there were a law that stated national minimum wage would increase with cost of living year on year, starting from somewhere everyone agreed was acceptable, this wouldn't even be a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Didn't read what you said, was in response to the idea that higher minimum wage means higher unemployment. To your point, you would have cal up in arms about such an idea - that you could earn more money just by squirting out kids, how very liberal of you. For me, I don't think it should be tied to how many people you need to support, it should be enough to comfortably support one person when working 40 hours per week. I'm not the one beating the drum for the idea that you should be able to take care of a family on minimum wage.But Cal is a good example, however many tomatoes he sells is his salary. With his bad knee he might choose to hire somebody to help but that means his salary is decreased by that much. So I assume he will get his teeth and limp through the tomato patch. But realistically we give out food stamps and medical care to people who would earn only minimum wage, so there's a perk. And depending where your living expenses vary by a wide margin. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 And if cal were to go out of business for not being able to sell enough tomatoes, we would all mourn for him, but that's the capitalist model that the US and UK are built on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 FWIW, I would certainly not be against farmers receiving some kind of stipend from the government to see them through the hard times. We will always need food and we need that job to pay well enough that people want to do it, while not pumping up the cost of living at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Having the job skills of existing and having functioning hands should make people want to gain skills that make them capable of earning more than a minimum wage. The problem is that we do have a lot of people with zero ambition to get out of that type of work and then complain when they aren't paid how they feel they should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 I think this will just push more towards automation. You are already seeing it in places where food ordering etc. is covered by a kiosk and not a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Not everyone can rise to the top. Society will always need people to clean toilets, flip burgers, mop floors, stack shelves. Someone needs to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 And if cal were to go out of business for not being able to sell enough tomatoes, we would all mourn for him, but that's the capitalist model that the US and UK are built on. It is. Should it be otherwise? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 I think this will just push more towards automation. You are already seeing it in places where food ordering etc. is covered by a kiosk and not a person. Yep there are a few chain restaurants with those electronic pads on the tables. I refuse to use them and if the manager says I have no choice I will go somewhere else. I'm not Che Guevara but... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 I'm all on board with automation of anything possible (without downgrading functionality) btw. We're trying to move here towards driverless trains on the underground, and a 24-hour system (currently 6am to 12am, roughly), and you should see the ridiculous fuss kicked up by drivers. Sorry, but it's a business and I'd rather the whole system not be subject to people going on strike, people being ill, and I'd rather the cost be lowered so that the money can be invested elsewhere. The unions here though are so powerful that we have to reach these compromises, which is why after tapping in with my travel card, I still have some jobsworth checking if I've tapped in. It's a real pain in the arse and people are just afraid of losing their cushy jobs. Drivers on the underground earn £50k; it's a closed market, you can only apply to be a driver if you already work for the company in some way (ticket office or whatever) as the unions insisted jobs be posted internally initially; they have insisted on endless 'training' for pushing a stop/start button, which in turn means they can demand more wages; and they claim more wages because they work in the dark (tunnels) for however many hours a day. Well sorry, but all that is solved if we use driverless trains. But the government, even the supposedly right wing government, is kowtowing to their demands at every turn. 'Night tube' was supposed to be live in September. It's still not live, and they're still striking to stop it happening. </rant> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Sounds like we are in agreement on our opinion of the labor unions. But in non union situations I'm glad to pay an extra nickel a gallon of gas or a few bucks in a tip for human service. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 I am surprised the subways in London, a major league city, don't run all night WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Minimum wage needs to be higher, but $15 maybe too much. We mainly need more full time jobs with benefits rather than part time jobs. A flat tax plan that removes all incentives for offering those said benefits seems like a good way to go. (Pink font) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.