Yeah, wow, it's $8.00. Still not even half of Australia's. Nice try.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
$10.10 Minimum Wage Could Lift About 5 Million Out Of Poverty
- Thread starter Protein
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, wow, it's $8.00. Still not even half of Australia's. Nice try.
Black Mamba
Member
You clearly missed my point. I was using Wal-Mart as an example of greed after explaining to you why 1/3 opposed the hike.
If you're so concerned about small business, you should support a hike. It will increase their profits on average.
Who's comparing it to Australia's? I certainly wasn't. I was correcting the other person's post since he was giving inaccurate information. Plus, in San Francisco, the minimum wage is $10.74.
King Cobra
Banned
A gallon of gas in Austrailia is on average over $6.50. Yeah not much to brag about when you put more costs into perspective.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
For the record, I was responding to your earlier post, in which you set willingness as the mark of value, and pointing out why it's a shite measure - precisely because willingness is pretty damn difficult to determine and is context-dependent on a vast number of other variables. If we're going to get really technical, then 'value' can't even be measured in absolute terms such as a dollar value, but instead only by use of the comparative and whether you prefer one particular state of the world to any other particular state of the world, and even then you have aggregation problems (are my valuation and your valuation comparable?). However, at this point you descend into intellectual sophistry and get away from the main problem, which is that there are people who don't have sufficient money to give their kids a decent education, meet their medical bills, and so on. Perhaps your time would be better dedicated towards providing some reasonable answers to that.
Ok, now how about rent, food, college costs, healthcare etc.?
Sorry, I misread the thread.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Cost of living is higher than the USAs, but it would be 1:1 with the USA if we payed 12 an hour. Not to mention they also get healthcare.
shadowsdarknes
Member
So? Does that mean it doesn't work or its not better than the wage situation in the US?
It means it's not nearly the same situation as the US. Having a minimum wage that scales on age helps alleviate the problems of both raising and keeping the wages as is. It's a very good solution that would help both parties. For one group in America to just look at the max minimum wage and say "see, higher minimum wage works fine!" is a trick that hides the truth behind the matter to serve their motive.
EDIT: I'll post my previous comment last page.
CyclopsRock
Member
Aaah, but you see, when it comes to "my" system of value, you don't actually need to put a number of it. Or, rather, we don't need a global number. There can be infinite context-dependent values - and, indeed, there are. That's how all prices are formed for basically everything.
As for your last sentence, I don't really know what you mean. I assume you're not asking me to outline my entire political philosophy, and I don't come from a country where one cannot afford healthcare or education so I'll leave that topic to others, eh?
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Did you ask them what their reasons are or are you just assuming? 1/3rd is not a small number to make assumptions like that.
I'm not saying it's not higher, I'm saying it's not "super-high" as it might look at first impression. It's not a livable wage. It's slightly higher than America's. See the image posted in the last page.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
...look, I mean. There's an answer to this, but I'd have to go through price-theory and the first and second theorems of welfare economics, and why they're not applicable in this circumstance, and that'd be a tedious post for me to write because it's quite technical in the level of detail you'd require, which is more than most. I think the problem is you know enough economics to make an argument but not enough economics to understand why your argument is wrong, and I mean that as a compliment because assuming you haven't had further education on things like price theory you know much more on the subject than most.
If you have the time and the commitment, then rather listen to me explaining, then I'd suggest two books in particular, which will do a much better and clearer job than I'd do in the context of a NeoGAF post. Both are text-books but I'm pretty sure that won't bother you. Boadway and Bruce's Welfare Economics, and Gravelles and Rees Microeconomics, both cover welfare economics (obviously) and how we can use valuations to achieve optimal end-states. The topic is pretty uncontroversial, so I'm not feeding you one particular side.
The minimum wage obviously isn't a silver bullet, but if you're expecting the market to achieve an 'optimal' world, it really isn't, and there are a large number of reasons why that isn't the case. Given that, we're left with the problem of how exactly we can paper up the cracks. The minimum wage is a possible policy, if not the only one one, and there are certain particular benefits to it and particular costs to it, just as there are to other policies. More useful than engaging in debates about whether the market works as a perfect signaller or allocator (it doesn't except under extremely specific circumstances which are never met in real life) is engaging in debates about which policy has benefits we want more and costs we mind the least.
entremet
Member
How much is the wage going up?
Black Mamba
Member
What do I need to ask them for? Only 15% of small businesses pay minimum wage or less. Among those, how many are food service and would continue to pay under minimum wage even with a minimum wage hike?
Very few small businesses would pay more under a minimum wage hike. Among that small number, many will not be harmed badly. Why do I care that a lot of small businesses who will unknowingly benefit from a minimum wage hike are against it because of derpiness from libertarians or the GOP?
You said you're fearful for small businesses. I demonstrated to you that the overwhelming majority of small businesses support a minimum wage hike. I also showed you 85% of small businesses pay more already.
If you're one of the very few small businesses that would be put out of business by a min wage hike, i got news for you. You were going under really soon, regardless.
It's not even a dollar. It's literally a 75 cent increase. As in three quarters an hour more than before. If you have to lay someone off because of that you aren't doing a very good job running your business.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Your report shows that 15% of businesses pay minimum wage, what it doesn't say is the number of businesses that are between the minimum wage and a proposed hike.
Your poll didn't show by how much a minimum wage would be raised, so you can't say that they won't be affected. If we raise it from $7 to $12 or $15, I would wager that a large number would be affected.
We've still yet to hear why a full 1/3rd of small businesses, who employ a large number of people, would be against any proposed hike. It doesn't really matter what the 66% think, if they want to see a raise in minimum wage maybe they can start by paying their workers more *crickets*. They want other businesses to pay their workers the same, they want all the prices from all the stores to be the same, they want struggling businesses to leave the market so there'd be less competition. I can assume negative reasons too.
Effort is a tool, not a guarantee. Some people get somewhere with little to no effort, while others put in as much as they can and struggle to afford to live. The poor spend more time working than anyone with more money than they, and the majority die in poverty. When you have zero dollars, you'll put a lot of that effort in to obtaining the $3 you seem to think people are undeserving of.
Man the level of ignorance being perpetuated about this topic from a whole range of posters is astounding!
I don't even think I have the time to address all the fallacies in one sitting.
1.) There is not a 1:1 conversion of consumer cost increases for every $1 the minimum wage is raised. In some cases costs may not raise at all!
2.) It will increase unemployment.
3.) most minimum wage earners are young.
I don't even think I have the time to address all the fallacies in one sitting.
1.) There is not a 1:1 conversion of consumer cost increases for every $1 the minimum wage is raised. In some cases costs may not raise at all!
Why? Because that false assumption tends to assume a number of things. Such as that all businesses are operating in perfect demand elasticity and can and will actually raise prices without losing demand to alternatives or substitutes. It assumes the natural course of a business in response to a wage increase is always to raise prices and historical evidence in America with past wage increases shows us that isn't true. It also assumes businesses are running at maximum efficiency and thus have no other avenues to offset an increase in labor costs. the vast majority aren't running at max efficiency and can and do offset labor costs in other ways.
2.) It will increase unemployment.
Some pretty extensive studies have begun to disprove this myth. Heres a few links to get people started that aren't just wanting to parrot more bullshit:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-16/u-s-minimum-wage-lower-than-in-lbj-era-needs-a-raise.html
http://ideas.repec.org/p/dkn/econwp/eco_2008_14.html
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage-2013-02.pdf
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-16/u-s-minimum-wage-lower-than-in-lbj-era-needs-a-raise.html
http://ideas.repec.org/p/dkn/econwp/eco_2008_14.html
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage-2013-02.pdf
3.) most minimum wage earners are young.
Actually its only about half according to the BLS. But what those numbers don't account for are the countless workers that make only slightly above the minimum wage and are still in abject poverty.
Neglible raise in prices.
I love how lightly people who do not run a business or deal with customers always say things like this.
Not having to listen day in and day out how hairless monkey fleshbags will fight and nag for every penny things go up and flip their shit for every rise and fall of pricing and how quickly this would be the final nail in the coffin for many local and small businesses.
Or the man was a borderline charity case and now is officially costing more than more productive alternative options.
The definition of running a good business.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Now if only I could find work.
Again, not every answer to a labor increase needs to be a raise in prices. That is unless the business is operating at max efficiency and has no other avenues to keep consumer prices stable(and there are many) and no ability to take a small hit in profits to offset the cost. And frankly if you are in a position where prices would have to be raised and you have done everything else you could, most likely your competition will have to do the same.
Also most small business's these days don't exactly dabble in the cutthroat pricing game that large competitors engage in because they can't compete. At least the small companies that employ a large number of minimum wage workers. So I think you are slightly overselling your argument.
Simply adjusting minimum wage for inflation is misleading. The purchasing power of minimum wage right now is the same as it was in 1960. The *highest* purchasing power of $7.89 in today's dollars was $10.74 in 1968.
If it's possible to raise minimum wage without a corresponding decrease in purchasing power (like rent getting hiked up....not sure how they'd control for this stuff), I'm all for $10.10
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-real-minimum-wage-falls-every-year--heres-how-to-fix-that-2013-12
If it's possible to raise minimum wage without a corresponding decrease in purchasing power (like rent getting hiked up....not sure how they'd control for this stuff), I'm all for $10.10
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-real-minimum-wage-falls-every-year--heres-how-to-fix-that-2013-12
Not really. According to this site (to be fair I'm not sure how reliable they are) US purchasing power is about 30% higher on a general level, which still isn't enough to negate an almost 100% increase in the minimum wage, and when you look at more specific prices you'll see that necessities like fruit and veg are largely the same price; the discrepancies mostly come from luxury goods (and rent, but that's a separate supply and policy issue) or goods that taxed at a high level for public policy reasons (ciggies, beer). You'll see that Australian actually have about $700 more disposable income each month despite almost everything being more expensive.
Manmademan
Member
Don't be obtuse. i was using NYC and San Francisco as examples of areas where cost of living was drastically higher than the midwest, and they are. The point of my post wasn't "OMG 7.25 an hour in NYC" but treating a country as large as the US as having one "standard of living" compared to Australia, the UK, Brazil, France, New Zealand, etc is beyond stupid since cost of living within the US varies so wildly.
I ALSO Pointed out Philadelphia (where I live) as an example which IS 7.25 with relatively high cost of living compared to harrisburg and central pennsylvania 3 hours to the west in the same state. Moving from one area to the other rent and car insurance TRIPLED.
Good job ignoring that part of the post, smart guy.
heliosRAzi
Banned
I think these are just different lenses through which we can observe the world. The markets are one lense; science or objective metrics another; government designation yet another.
The exact same logic could be applied to any other product mentioned here. The "worth" of a snickers bar could be viewed as $1.00 based on market valuation, but may also be viewed as $.01 based on a Nutritionist's analysis of its nutritional contents. A life saving medical procedure may have a market value of $100,000, but an analysis of the person's future productivity saved might reveal $1,000,000 in saved productivity. One lense is not more correct than the other (or rather, if one is more correct, then surely its the objective scientific analysis rather than market analysis, which is simply an amalgamation of human preferences and values). These are different lenses through which we can view "worth."
Normally this isn't a distinction I'd bother making, but it's a door you opened with your philosophical inquiry in to the "worth" of a minimum wage worker. As soon as you ask what they are "worth," it's similarly reasonably to ask, "how do we gauge worth? What does worth mean?" You start out with the implicit assumption that "worth" is measured by market valuation, and I'm taking it one step further back and suggestion this is only one possible lense through which to view "worth," and quite possibly not the best one, if we're going to wax philosophical on the topic.
I could probably answer this by calling local unions, but... is there anything to back this up? I hear this all the time, and I have a hard time buying it. Was a 1-2 year wait for almost all apprenticeships 5-7 years ago. All these trades have a zero wait now?
Manmademan
Member
Some are arguing that a full time job should be able to pay the minimum living wage for an adult. That is the "worth" of a minimum wage worker. Currently, 7.25 does not do this and the embarrassing attempts by mcdonalds etc to show how one would "budget" on such wages only drives this point home.
The only reason 7.25 is even feasible to pay full time workers is due to the government heavily subsidizing these workers with welfare, SNAP, medicaid, and similar programs.
If we're using that as the criteria (i.e. a full time job should equal a living wage), then the job is easy, since the US Government already does this with social security payments, which *surprise* are tied to inflation and rise every year along with it. There is no reason minimum wage shouldn't be structured similarly.
There is a serious need for trade workers, but "rich white people" getting rid of vo-tech programs because they "hate skilled labor" is not why.
Black Mamba
Member
15% of small businesses. And it's probably very few.
It asked if it should be raised and adjusted yearly for inflation. That got 2/3 to say yes. When asked, people already have in their head it's the numbers that have been proposed time and again, not something like $20/hr
We don't need to hear from them. Their reasons are not relevant.
And what you don't seem to understand is that those in the 66% already pay higher wages. THAT'S WHY they want a min wage hike.
Small businesses pay more for services than large businesses. It's a competitive market. Outside of food service who are exempt, there's very few small people working for a small business making under $10/hr in our economy.
This is from 2004, but it demonstrates that small businesses did better with higher minimum wages. http://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_viewpoints_raising_minimum_wage_2004/
You're concerned with the opinions of a mostly bunch of either greedy or ignorant bunch of people, who are in the overwhelming minority. Why?
All evidence points to very small negative effects from raising the minimum wage (and positive for small businesses!) so that it can create large positive effects for a group of people that desperately need it.
LOL. Try again. Read what those things are, then get back to me when you are a bit more educated.
I just skimmed the thread, but are there any studies that show a cost-of-living increase when minimum wage increases? Like, identify economically similar areas with a similar cost of living in two states, and when one state increases the minimum wage track the general cost of living in those areas and see if any discrepancies show up?
What does a borderline charity case even mean?
jamesinclair
Banned
Of course.
There are thousands of data points.
Cities, counties, states all make constant readjustment.
You can compare across time and across space, in good economics and bad.
These data points spam decades.
All say the same thing:
Like most things in life, the right wing argument has no basis in reality
There's really no need for that. I don't want to ""fuck the poors". I'm poor. There are consequences to raising the minimum wage. I used the dollar menu as a light joke. You have to see it from the business' point of view as well.
IdreamofHIME
Member
If that amount of people suddenly got a wage increase, prices would shoot up right away. No way Businesses, Corporations and Government want people with money in their pockets.
Yep. The point is to KEEP UP with the cost of living. It's the more reasonable alternative to letting the cost of living go up and letting wages look pretty much the same for the past 20 years.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Public sector living wage jobs absorbing the unemployed would be a better fiscal policy tool to fight deflation than transfer payments or a national minimum wage increase to $10.10. SS is great for elderly, disabled, and their survivors because they are generally unable to work. I think we can be more creative and correspondingly more productive with other groups.
JzeroT1437
Member
Ding Ding Ding
Also, what kind of business are you running that you're able to "outsource" a duty that you've got someone working for minimum wage? Are you outsourcing laundry services to India?
You sound like a scumbag.
jamesinclair
Banned
The biggest flaw is the idea that he apparently thinks he knows how to run a business.
Are you going to fire someone off they cost you a few cents more?
That means either you'll be understaffed, or, if you won't, you were overstaffed in the first place.
That is, if you're able to fire someone tomorrow, with no loss to your business productivity, you should have fired him last year.
Or the business is just generally not doing well for other reasons.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Probably very few? Do you have proof for that? Also why do you keep calling the 33% greedy when your only proof is that Walmart (a large, publicly traded company with stockholders) is greedy?
If you don't directly ask a specific number, people will assume that you are talking about a general increase or the idea in general. It's a type of bias. In Canada, if you poll Queckers on if they thinking "Quebec should become a sovereign country", you usually get 50% saying yes, but if you ask if they want to "separate from Canada", support drops to the mid-20s. How you phrase a question changes people's answers. Once you start talking in terms of dollars, people will hold on more tightly to their wallets. I mean, ask yourself "Do you want an iPad"? And then ask yourself "Do you want to pay $600 for an iPad"? Two entirely different questions to me.
Why don't we need to hear from them? Do they know employ a large number of people? IF their reasons include inability to pay, why would that not be relevant?
So you agree that those 66% agree to pay because they can afford to pay, and don't lose any competitive edge when the wage is increased. That's called an ineffective price floor. To those businesses, having a higher minimum wage and no minimum wage are one in the same (ignoring competition). These businesses are usually hiring skilled workers, whose wages are already determined by market forces. These aren't restaurants, speciality stores and the like, those who are more likely to be affected by a minimum wage increase.
Most evidence shows that increase in minimum wage is negligible, non-existent effects on poverty, but has a negative effect on youth unemployment. Card/Krueger found a different result, albeit they compared the minimum wage increases of a more manufacturing based economy (Pennsylvania) to a more service-based one (New Jersey). Regardless, they took they compared the employment rates the moment the increase took effect to the period of time afterwards. They didn't start their data points from a period of time before the increase took effect. One could argue that businesses do their layoffs before the minimum wage hike took effect, the Card/Krueger study did not account for that.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=654069 or www.cbc.ca/​bc/news/​bc-110429-fraser-institute-minimum-wage.pdf
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=961374
I hope your scummy ass goes under, then. Any business that doesn't pay their employees a livable wage shouldn't exist in the first place, though.
- Status