What does minimum wage get you?

Originally posted by apathist
List those benefits, please. (I'm working poor, and could use some help.)

Which state?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Of all writers here, I expect that I am the furthest from being a narrow-minded ethnocentric American.
And the most humble, most grounded in reality, most objective, least narcissistic, least likely to rape or apologize for others who enjoy doing so, smartest, bestest, and most fun to be around.
Ever.

At least, I expect that you are so.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Scandinavian countries don't have a minimum wage. You don't need one with sufficiently good welfare benefits.

While Scandinavian countries do not have minimum wages, they DO have strong labor unions which protect workers. In the U.S., labor unions have been decimated and whatever is left, will surely become history shortly after January 20, 2017, a very dark day in U.S. history.

Denmark: None; instead, negotiated between unions and employer associations; the average minimum wage for all private and public sector collective bargaining agreements was approximately DKK 110 ($18) per hour, exclusive of pension benefits.[8][76]
Iceland: None; minimum wages are negotiated in various collectively bargained agreements and applied automatically to all employees in those occupations, regardless of union membership; while the agreements can be either industry- or sector-wide, and in some cases firm-specific, the minimum wage levels are occupation-specific.[8][47]
Norway: None; wages normally fall within a national scale negotiated by labor, employers, and local governments.[8]
Sweden: None; in Sweden the law provides for the right of workers to form and join independent unions to bargain wages collectively, and it prohibits antiunion discrimination.[8]
Finland: None; however, the law requires all employers, including non-unionized ones, to pay minimum wages agreed to in collective bargaining agreements; almost all workers are covered under such arrangements.[8]

When wages are so low, working people qualify for public assistance at any level, it really means the tax payer is providing welfare to corporations, not working people. Low wages in the U.S. simply translate to welfare for the wealthy.

Originally posted by sh76
ummmmm....

That would be a "no"

very well. glad we have that cleared.

Originally posted by sh76
Actually, I agree with KN on this one.

If the goal is to get people to have enough money to live properly, a guaranteed basic income, or at least a robust social welfare system, is far better than a higher minimum wage.

A high minimum wage forces an employer to pay more than is economically efficient, which makes it more likely that he will hire fewer peo ...[text shortened]... ead). Creating an artificially high minimum wage to secure that goal is exceedingly inefficient.

"A high minimum wage forces an employer to pay more than is economically efficient,"
economically efficient? for whom? for the employer? a slave is even more economically efficient.

"which makes it more likely that he will hire fewer people"
every business already hires the fewest people they can manage.

"outsource the job"
everyone who can do this already does it. you think apple will bring more jobs to the US if you lower the minimum wage to 5?

"(or, worse, force him to stop operating)"
you mean to say that there are many businesses that are so marginally profitable that an increase in payroll would bankrupt them?
even it that were the case, is it the employee's duty to sacrifice so that the employer stays profitable? would walmart go bankrupt if it were to pay its employees more?



i am sure you will mention small business. still not the employee's job to keep them afloat. the government should give THEM tax breaks to help them start out and keep them in business and eventually expand.

"Moreover, many people who make minimum wage don't need a living wage. They're summer job teenagers or college students living with their parents or on campus on the government's dime."
i mentioned this before, it seems it has been ignored.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/archive/characteristics-of-minimum-wage-workers-2014.pdf

more than half of minimum wage workers are ages 25 and above. also what does it mean "many don't need a living wage"? many people don't need the police but it still is useful to have cops around for those that do.


"Creating an artificially high minimum wage to secure that goal is exceedingly inefficient."
the purpose of this thread was to show that at the current minimum wage in the US, you barely have enough to survive on (if you are being incredibly spartan and nothing unforseen happens). if you get fired, you don't have savings to keep you going until you get another job. if you break your leg, you will get fired and you won't have money for the hospital bills. eating all that cheap crap will eventually spell health issues which again will cost you. you have no money to educate yourself, develop new skills in order to get a better job. if you have kids, you can't properly raise them.


increase the minimum wage and suddenly you have a worker who is happier, better fed, spends more on commodities, thus helping the economy. a worker who starts a family and raises little americans that would one day pay for your pensions.
and you pay for this minimum wage increase with cutting the tax breaks from the uber rich which you give to small businesses. they thrive, the workers thrive and the walmart owners could trim a few grams off their fat

on the contrary, it is very efficient.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"A high minimum wage forces an employer to pay more than is economically efficient,"
economically efficient? for whom? for the employer? a slave is even more economically efficient.

"which makes it more likely that he will hire fewer people"
every business already hires the fewest people they can manage.

"outsource the job"
everyone who can do th ...[text shortened]... he walmart owners could trim a few grams off their fat

on the contrary, it is very efficient.

"...you mean to say that there are many businesses that are so marginally profitable that an increase in payroll would bankrupt them?"

Doesn't matter if there's one or many. Provided they reach a voluntary employer/employee agreement it is not your role to sacrifice that business nor the jobs of those employees to your dream feelings.

If its been said before I apologize, but it bears repeating. Higher minimum wages, means more money being spent back into the economy which helps business profitability, growth and the capacity to offer more employment. The end.

Originally posted by kmax87
If its been said before I apologize, but it bears repeating. Higher minimum wages, means more money being spent back into the economy which helps business profitability, growth and the capacity to offer more employment. The end.

At this point kmax clamps his hands firmly over his ears and starts stomping the ground while making a horrible "eeeee, eeeee" noise.

...and brags about it between eeeee's

Originally posted by kmax87
If its been said before I apologize, but it bears repeating. Higher minimum wages, means more money being spent back into the economy which helps business profitability, growth and the capacity to offer more employment. The end.

If that were true we could keep raising everyone's wages until we all became infinitely rich. The truth is we are all richer when goods can be produced cheaper and raising wages causes goods to be more expensive and we can purchase less and therefore we are, in real terms poorer.

Originally posted by kmax87
If its been said before I apologize, but it bears repeating. Higher minimum wages, means more money being spent back into the economy which helps business profitability, growth and the capacity to offer more employment. The end.

Yes, in a vacuum of course higher wages is good for everyone.

But depending on the circumstances, the price of those wages might be too high.

What is the pizza shop owner can't hire a 6th worker at $13/hr because the minimum wage is $15/hr? Instead, he'll make do with 5 employees at $15/hr? That's fine for the five, but the 6th is now unemployed? What if the owner can't provide adequate customer service with 5. He needs a 6th, but he can't afford to pay a 6th and now he shuts down his store and goes to work as manager of another pizza shop. Now, all 6 potential workers are out of a job and the person who would have otherwise gotten the job as manager of the other shop is likewise unemployed. There's also an empty storefront and all the other economic advantages to the first shop being open are blown.

Even if a company is profitable, if you increase the minimum wage, who says the company will simply pay the same number of employees? Maybe they'll cut staff to keep wages constant and figure that offering poorer service is worth it to save the wage increase? Maybe it becomes impossible for an 11th grader who wants a summer job and would gladly work for $8/hr (to get the experience, to fill the time and to pocket a little spending money) to find a job now that minimum wage is $15/hr.

I'm not advocating abolishing the minimum wage altogether. There's a certain point beyond which wages are so low as to practically constitute slavery. But:

1. Higher minimum wage is not always better for the economy; and
2. Tying minimum wage to cost of living is inefficient and fallacious. It's inefficient because if society wants to make sure everyone has a living it can simply pay each person a living rather than trying to force private companies to do it (who may or may not do it). It's fallacious because not everyone earning minimum wage needs a minimum wage.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

In addition, one needs money for the training. Anything beyond high school costs money and if you are lucky enough to have tuition covered, there's books plus the basics of food, shelter, transportation..... It can be overwhelming even for those without family responsibilities. In addition, many private "universities" freely rip off those who enroll, ie Trump University. Due to a lack of regulation and the poor enforcement of regulations that do exist, one needs money to sue. Much goes on in the U.S. that is illegal but if one lacks the deep pockets to sue, it just continues. This situation is about to get much worse since the GOP wants to deregulate as much as possible.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"A high minimum wage forces an employer to pay more than is economically efficient,"
economically efficient? for whom? for the employer? a slave is even more economically efficient.

"which makes it more likely that he will hire fewer people"
every business already hires the fewest people they can manage.

"outsource the job"
everyone who can do th ...[text shortened]... he walmart owners could trim a few grams off their fat

on the contrary, it is very efficient.

===economically efficient? for whom? for the employer? a slave is even more economically efficient.===

Yes, slavery may be more economically efficient, but it is morally repugnant and violates the natural rights of the slave. The same cannot be said for a $10 minimum wage.

===every business already hires the fewest people they can manage. ===

Wages are part of that calculus. Increase the wage and you may decrease the number of people they can afford to hire.

==="outsource the job"
everyone who can do this already does it. you think apple will bring more jobs to the US if you lower the minimum wage to 5?===

There are always inherently going to be companies on the margin between outsourcing and not outsourcing and raising the minimum wage will inevitably be the tipping point for at least some companies. Whether Apple happens to be one of them is immaterial.

==="(or, worse, force him to stop operating)"
you mean to say that there are many businesses that are so marginally profitable that an increase in payroll would bankrupt them?===

Of course there are. Profitability is a continuum. There are hundreds of thousands or millions of companies Change any factor significantly and you'll push some firms who are on the margins to the wrong side of the ledger. It's inevitable.

===even it that were the case, is it the employee's duty to sacrifice so that the employer stays profitable?===

Sacrificing implies that you're giving something up. The employees never "had" the $15/hr; nor have they a natural right to an particular wage.

=== would walmart go bankrupt if it were to pay its employees more? ===

Skipping straight to Walmart (as in the case of Apple above) is irrelevant. There are companies on the margins of profitability.


===i am sure you will mention small business. still not the employee's job to keep them afloat. the government should give THEM tax breaks to help them start out and keep them in business and eventually expand.===

Wouldn't it be more efficient to just give the employee the benefits he needs rather than give the employer a tax break so that he can pay every employee what this employee needs? Anyway, maybe you can share with us the nature of these magical tax breaks that will offset a wage increase?

===more than half of minimum wage workers are ages 25 and above. also what does it mean "many don't need a living wage"? many people don't need the police but it still is useful to have cops around for those that do.===

Let's assume "more than half" of minimum wage earners do need a minimum wage? That's a concession that almost half don't. You're going to potentially cost a significant percentage of the 45% their jobs on the alter of making private industry pay the 55% what social welfare systems can pay them more efficiently? I don't think that's very efficient.


===the purpose of this thread was to show that at the current minimum wage in the US, you barely have enough to survive on (if you are being incredibly spartan and nothing unforseen happens). if you get fired, you don't have savings to keep you going until you get another job. if you break your leg, you will get fired and you won't have money for the hospital bills. eating all that cheap crap will eventually spell health issues which again will cost you. you have no money to educate yourself, develop new skills in order to get a better job. if you have kids, you can't properly raise them.===

Minimum wage earners are eligible for Medicaid, so the healthcare issues are irrelevant. There are also food programs (anachronistically called "food stamps" but they're actually debit cards that can be used at supermarkets that get refilled every month) that minimum wage earners are eligible for. Anyway, cheap food is not inherently any less healthy than expensive food. People on food stamps may not be able to afford too many steaks, but nobody is starving for lack of healthy staples like bread, eggs, milk, cereal, fruits and vegetables, etc.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

===Upon that point, Sh76 and I apparently agree.===

Sorry about that. I guess it was bound to happen sooner or later. 😉😉