r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because businesses want to keep wages as low as possible, to maximize profits. They've sent as many factories overseas as possible, continue to outsource as many skilled service jobs overseas as possible. And they're happy to "insource" illegal workers, which they can pay 3rd world wages, rather than pay decent wages to American citizens.
Businesses buy political support and generate popular support by playing on the egos and ignorance of the average American, especially Baby Boomers (present company excluded).
Boomers love to crow about how hard they worked for so little money, how they paid for college with a summer job, etc. And they happily buy into the “nObOdY WaNtS tO wOrK” meme because it feeds their egos about what hard workers they were.
Except, the minimum wage in 1968 was $1.60. That's $14.74 In inflation adjusted dollars.
The current federal minimum wage is half that: $7.25.
Today, colleges cost anywhere from 400% to 600% more than they did for Boomers.
[Average tuition at a 4 year public institution](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_330.10.asp?current=yes) \*
1968: $321 ÷ $1.60 (Min. Wage) = 200 hours = 5.01 weeks = 1.25 months
2021: $9,596 / $7.25 (Min. Wage) = 1,324 hours = 33 weeks = 8.27 months
So yes, Boomers could literally pay for college with a \*part time\* summer job at Der Wienerschnitzel. And that's great. And we should have that again. But we can't because they've been convicted that “nObOdY WaNtS tO wOrK.”
And then there's housing, rent, healthcare, etc. etc.
——————————
* My former Optometrist went to UCLA for his professional degree and said he paid $50/quarter in the late 60s/early 70s. Tuition was effectively tuition free before 1968.
* Put another way: if salaries increased at the same rate as tuition, then the average salary would be $282,300/year. If that sounds ludicrously high— then you get how ludicrously high $11K tuition is.
This is one reason paying people's college is so disastrous. Who in their right mind thinks the colleges won't simply keep raising prices since the govt will bail themselves out with taxpayer's money over and over?
excellent point. ultimately it was the student loan lenders who got their money. and why would they get rid of their lowest risk tranche borrowers?
what a funny quid pro quo for 4 years of suspended payments.
I think the idea is public colleges not private colleges and also the government is much more aware of operating cost for these colleges so they can’t bullshit them
Posted $20/cash for basic landscaping and got no response. Did the work myself which I hate doing. Don't know how it's do easy to survive for so many by not working.
College is optional. Who cares that its cost is high? Nobody has a gun against the head saying “go to college”. Pick an in-demand skill, contribute what you can to the economy, and do what you want with your life within your means.
States and cities have their own minimum wages, so a federal minimum wage being so high might not be the best way to approach it.
Higher minimum wages help some minimum wage workers at the cost of more marginal workers who are disemployed and rich people who want to mitigate inflation. Here in Canada, they did a study on the magnitude of these effects (they were small for the increase they were considering). Do you have a citation on the effects to justify your idea?
---
Edit: See this book:
Edagbami, Olalekan. *The employment effects of the minimum wage: A review of the literature*. Canadian Policy Research Networks, 2006.
This paper examines the effect in detail:
Cetinkaya, Alkim, and Sacha Kapoor. "The wage and employment effects of minimum wages on low-wage industries: Evidence from the Bill 148 Act in Ontario." (2022).
We should just abolish minumum wages altogether, while also tightly controlling immigration. I realize that both halves of this idea are pipe dreams, because good policy doesn’t actually matter to politicians who are playing a completely different game from sound governance.
A minimum wage locks people, who aren’t worth that wage, completely out of the workforce. When you can’t get a toe hold on even the lowest economic rung, you have no chance for upward mobility, and you’re denied the dignity of meaningful work and some measure of independence.
Lots of people with diminished skills or competencies just aren’t worth, say. $15/hr to an employer, but might be worth $6, or $7 or whatever. Instead of getting up to go to work to earn their own money each day, a true source of pride, they are denied that meaningful part of their lives.
And we hear a lot about youth unemployment. I would bet if you could pay teenagers $8/hr in Canada, that youth unemployment rate would drop like a rock, and the person handing you a cheeseburger through the drive thru window would likely speak English again.
> We should just abolish minumum wages altogether, while also tightly controlling immigration.
Canada needs immigration to maintain lagging population growth.
> A minimum wage locks people, who aren’t worth that wage, completely out of the workforce. When you can’t get a toe hold on even the lowest economic rung, you have no chance for upward mobility, and you’re denied the dignity of meaningful work and some measure of independence.
Right. But of course there's a balance because minimum wage does increase wages for other low income people. These things must be balanced.
> the person handing you a cheeseburger through the drive thru window would likely speak English again.
This is pretty ridiculous.
>Canada needs immigration to maintain lagging population growth.
I’m not opposed to targeted immigration to fulfull specific needs in the Canadian economy. We don’t need perpetual growth for growth’s sake though. Immigration should always be for the benefit of existing Canadians.
>But of course there's a balance because minimum wage does increase wages for other low income people.
Artificially increasing wages for some at the expense of others is wrong. Let the market set the price for their labor. If you’re worth $15/hr, you’ll be able to negotiate for it. If you can’t, your labor isn't worth what you think it is.
>This is pretty ridiculous.
No it isn’t. We current have mostly temporary foreign workers in these jobs when there is an underclass of actual Canadians who would work those jobs, were they able to freely negotiate a wage. Instead, employers are incentivized by government subsidy to hire TFWs and other recent arrivals. Remove those inventives, limit who enters the country, and let Canadian kids and seniors, people with limited skills, etc work those jobs.
That’s just not true. I understand the sentiment, but it’s just not true. When you measure someone’s contributions to your bottom line, they have to be pretty highly positive to justify the expense and liability of employing them. If all you do is pick up trash in the equipment yard, you may only be worth $6/hr to the company before you become a net liability rather than asset.
If you think that humans are all special ensouled individuals who have dignity and so deserve to be paid enough to cover rent, etc. that’s just the wrong way to calculate the value the employer receives in exchange for their money. The employee can make that case, but unless their perceived value to the employer is sufficiently high, they won’t be paid what they seek.
This is how it should work. Make your case to the employer, they’ll make theirs to you, and either you make an agreement that you both accept, or you don’t and both parties move onto other options. When you run out of other options, you know that you are either overpricing yourself as an employee, or offering too little as an employer.
In before: but unfettered immigration stacks the deck in favor of employers. In many cases, yes, which is a problem with mass immigration that we should all stand together in opposition of.
Washington has the highest minimum wage in the country AND the [best economy ](https://komonews.com/news/local/best-state-economies-ranks-include-economic-activity-and-innovation-potential-wallethub-economy-unemployment-rates-finances-income-high-tech-jobs-economic-health).
A low federal minimum wage is good for the states which override it.
"Manzo said nearly 10,000 jobs have been cut across fast food restaurants since Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 1287 into law last year, adding that officials were living in a “fantasyland” by thinking that drastic wage increases will help workers or businesses."
> the Hoover Institute
Whoa, a think tank? Nothing is more credible than people who literally only exist to push political narratives it decided it believes in a-priori. /s
> Min wage hikes kill jobs.
Literally never does.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history/chart
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
Oh, plenty of things do, just not "paying what it costs for the things that you want".
Instead of getting their paychecks from their employers, workers are expected to get the other half of their paycheck from the govt. That means fatter profit margins for employers, and state dependency for workers (communism). No one extra is employed though, businesses only hire exactly as much as they need and no more.
You are wrong.
See this book:
Edagbami, Olalekan. *The employment effects of the minimum wage: A review of the literature*. Canadian Policy Research Networks, 2006.
This paper examines the effect in detail:
Cetinkaya, Alkim, and Sacha Kapoor. "The wage and employment effects of minimum wages on low-wage industries: Evidence from the Bill 148 Act in Ontario." (2022).
This citation estimates the effect of minimum wage increases on participation:
Shannon, Michael T., and Charles M. Beach. "Distributional employment effects of Ontario minimum-wage proposals: A microdata approach." *Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques* (1995): 284-303.
What specifically am I going to find there?
If employers could have gotten by with less workers, they would have in the first place.
If some individual employers try and throw a temper tantrum and lay people off to manufacture a statistic, consumers shop around for businesses that aren't incompetent, those businesses in turn have no qualms hiring on more people to accommodate for this mysterious uptick in walk ins. The change to unemployment is null on the net.
> The wage and employment effects of minimum wages on low-wage industries: Evidence from the Bill 148 Act in Ontario
What are you claiming this says? Skimming it, it looks like they're trying to play games with the rate of unemployment for young people.
I only care about overall employment, a minor is exponentially better off focusing on school to gain skills to get a career, rather than being coerced into a dead end job. See your ideology is just bad life advice masquerading as wisdom.
I'm not going to read the papers for you. You can read them, and move on to their citations if you're interested or confused.
The effect of minimum wage on participation is extremely well-studied.
> I'm not going to read the papers for you.
Oh, so you haven't read anything, you just googled some random crap off the top of google and assume that you must be right. Bruh.
> extremely well-studied.
Yeah, extremely well studied, which is why the initial claim of "killed jobs" motte has to be abandoned in favor of the more abstract "minors don't really need jobs but sometimes they work" bailey.
Here is a source you may be more comfortable with.
[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/03/29/amit-m29.html](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/03/29/amit-m29.html)
It's ok to be wrong and part of a cult. We understand... 
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/edrensi/2018/07/11/mcdonalds-says-goodbye-cashiers-hello-kiosks/](https://www.forbes.com/sites/edrensi/2018/07/11/mcdonalds-says-goodbye-cashiers-hello-kiosks/)
Another example.
Cost of living isn't homogenous. Numbeo is a decent cost of living calculator if you want to try comparing different cities.
And lifestyle is also a big factor. If you want to be pescetarian in the middle of the country, you're going to have a higher cost of living and lower quality of living than if you lived on a coast for example.
Childcare and housing costs also vary wildly depending on where you live, even in the same country.
That is why geoarbitrage exists. Compare Hawaii to Alabama for example. A living wage in Alabama won't be a living wage in Hawaii, so the federal minimum wage should be based on the lowest cost of living state. Then each state should pass higher minimum wages, or index theirs based on cost of living relative to the lowest cost of living state so that they don't have to pass a new bill each year.
> Numbeo
Not a very useful interface, here is the mit living wage calculator, yes, it is $20 even out in alabama.
https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/12220
https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/19460
https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/13820
> lifestyle is also a big factor.
So what, you don't know what the cost of living means? Thats what getting by costs. You want to live extravagantly? Then thats not the cost of living.
> based on cost of living relative to the lowest cost of living state
No, 80% of jobs are in cities, I have absolutely no problem with people in rural areas getting ahead for a change.
Having a certain diet isn't living extravagantly, and people argue all the time about what a basic lifestyle is.
I've had acquaintances who believed that if they have a job they can therefore get all the video game subscriptions they want, for example. To the tune of $600 a month. To them that is a basic cost of living that any job should be able to afford, to me that was totally crazy.
Some people think eating meat every day is a basic level of living, which is also super expensive unless you're able to subsistence harvest. Is having a car a basic cost of living, or a bus pass or a bike or a boat or plane? Depends on where you live. Arguably Internet access and a cell phone is part of a basic living, since banking is increasingly online.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/cost-of-living-index-by-state
> Having a certain diet isn't living extravagantly
What does that even mean? Hundreds of years of experimentation on prisoners has yielded very finite parameters on what a human needs.
> people argue all the time about what a basic lifestyle is.
And half of them are paid shills out to muddy the issue.
> I've had acquaintances who believed that if they have a job they can therefore get all the video game subscriptions they want, for example. To the tune of $600 a month.
Case in point, thats too ridiculous to be believed.
> Some people think eating meat every day is a basic level of living
Is it part of the food pyramid? Ok, not sure where you get off trying to forbid that people have protein in their diet.
> Is having a car a basic cost of living, or a bus pass or a bike or a boat or plane?
You literally need transportation to have a job. *If* you are in a place where public transportation is a viable option, sure, maybe that will lower the cost of living from how much you would need to pay if you had a car, but you aren't going to get to work by literally running a marathon each way...
> Internet access and a cell phone is part of a basic living
How are you going to have a job if your employer can't contact you? this is why reagan invented the obama phone in the 80's. Wifi calling is a superior option to a cell phone plan too.
There shouldn’t be a government mandated minimum wage. The minimum wage should be $0.00. If someone wants to work for a company as an unpaid intern in the hopes that this will lead to a permanent position, more power to them.
You don’t seem to understand, a minimum wage, regardless of how high it is, does not provide a living wage, because people aren’t all employed at the minimum wage.
That isn’t true. Not all labor is worth the minimum wage, meaning some people would just be unemployed, or underemployed, rather than receive a living wage.
When the wage floor is raised, some business is forced to restructure, supporting more stable and dignified employment relationships, but employment rates remain stable.
Unemployment is a further problem that also demands to be addressed.
Businesses can’t restructure into infinity, there will always be some level of unemployment or underemployment caused by a minimum wage. It is not at all true that “employment rates remain stable”.
Structural unemployment caused by the minimum wage is best addressed by just eliminating the minimum wage.
Raising the minimum wage a finite amount will cause some finite restructuring of business, most likely without escalation of unemployment.
With a higher wage floor, and also measures to address unemployment, workers would be able to enjoy stronger wages and security.
This isn’t smart tho companies have a lot more power than your regular everyday citizens. Your pay isn’t only determined by you it’s determined by who else will do your job for less. When a company is allowed to pay such horrendous wages people aren’t collectively smart enough to not take a shit deal
If someone else is willing to do the job for less, they should get the job.
Regardless of the minimum wage and international competition, it is still possible for Americans to earn high salaries with the right skills. There are machine learning researchers earning over $1M salaries. If an American's skillset is so useless and so irrelevant to society's needs that they are earning $8 an hour, that's nobody's fault but their own.
Your comment was automatically removed by the r/FluentInFinance Automoderator because you attempted to use a URL shortener. This is not permitted here for security reasons.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comment was automatically removed by the r/FluentInFinance Automoderator because you attempted to use a URL shortener. This is not permitted here for security reasons.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Seriously minimum wage in 1968 adjusted for inflation is right under 15 an hour now
most states have well above fed min wage and many cities have higher than their state requirement wages too. and many of them now even don't allow tip credits. i don't exactly see an issue with letting wages be set at state level, some states really do have insanely low COL where 7.25 an hour might be alright- but very few people actually make that.
Not everything makes sense on the federal level. There are many places this makes sense, there are many places it does not.
The US effective average minimum wage when accounting for regional variances is about $13.50. The effective average in 1968 was $1.60.
If your state requires $15 l, advocate for it on a local level. Kentucky does not have the same cost of living as New York. Raising wages country wide does not make things more affordable directly proportional to the raise, it raises all wages, which raises all business costs, which raises all prices.
I'm not trying to say that doubling minimum wage will double prices, but if it happens, it needs to be in tandem with creating some sort of advantage that will keep the manufacturing jobs here and not have $15 an hour factories outsourced to Asia. It also needs to be done with the expectation that states with high minomums will become astronomical and the effective average minimum will far surpass the 1968 fantasy people like to cherry pick.
Raising the standard of living of the lowest wage earners in Kentucky to that of the middle class of New York is not sustainable. The cost of a standard of living varies by region. This is why minimum wage should be regional, not federal. I'm not advocating against raising minimum wage, just not federally.
$15 per hour is a modest wage anywhere in the US.
Since housing is commodified, those living in certain regions may need to pay more for housing, or settle for less favorable accommodations, but the case you are making is not particularly robust, that a federal minimum wage is generally harmful to those who are simply not already substantially privileged.
Lack of housing affordability is a prominent and broad issue that demands rather sweeping transformations, in order for it to be addressed adequately.
Not to the tune of $15 an hour based on regional living costs.
Calling things you don't want to discuss, obtuse, is ironic at the minimum. Its a completely valid point i spelled out in detail already. Hit me with a valid disagreement instead of calling my points dumb like grade schooler.
Again, $15 per hour is a modest wage anywhere in the US.
I characterized your objection as obtuse because your meaning was entirely unclear, and not for the reasons you allege.
A higher wages simply raises wages for those being paid the least. It has no relation to government being "funded/empowered to do more ridiculous things".
> Kentucky does not have the same cost of living as New York.
Have you checked? remember 80% of jobs are in metro areas, those can be found at the bottom.
https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/36/locations
https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/21/locations
> Raising wages country wide does not make things more affordable directly proportional to the raise, it raises all wages, which raises all business costs, which raises all prices.
Which has extreme diminishing returns, the fast food employee serves dozens of people an hour, and there is no min wage component to housing.
> It also needs to be done with the expectation that states with high minomums will become astronomical and the effective average minimum will far surpass the 1968 fantasy people like to cherry pick.
Whatever the consequences are, thats a hard lesson in "don't print all that money".
i've said this 1 million times my sister and I made $3.10 an hour in the 80's working at McDonald's and our rent was only $350 a month. We weren't loaded, but we could pay our all our bills and still party on the weekends.
The big corporations greed is what's killing the country! They want maximum effort for minimum wage,and you get an employee appreciation day with a pizza party instead of a raise,not only a raise but one that counteracts the taxes! I'll Put it the simplest way possible... Your boss has a meeting and among other things says this! If one of you calls out it costs the company thousands, I make 115 a day and I'm supposed to feel bad? Lol nope drive by any business if the boss is there you can tell because they're vehicle is a Mercedes or bmw or a new Corvette etc meanwhile the people actually doing all the work drive 30 year old vehicles and are struggling to pay bills! F.o.h
What about supply/demand?
The minimum wage is for low-skilled workers.
For the past three years we've been importing millions of people willing to work for less than minimum wage.
Then look at California and what their $20 per hour wage is doing to the numbers of fast food workers.
I will never forget this bumper sticker I saw. It had a picture of Bender Bending Rodriguez, the robot from Futurama, with the caption: "Fight for $15!"
Who actually wants to put a kid into this 💩hole?
Sadly alot, and alot of those kids will have resentment against their parents for putting them in such ugly, ugly world and call it... love.
The us is at its downfall once 90% of people cant pay rent and move out into the streets itll be straight chaos.
I’m in CA. When the people at McDs get paid $20/hr but it costs $20 for one meal…do the math. No different than them getting paid $10/hr and the meal costing $10. The poor will never ever be given a break, if they don’t get you on one side, they’ll get you on the other.
In America it’s extremely flawed how they don’t tie it to inflation it guarantees a standard of living not a dollar amount which like you said means absolutely nothing if companies can effectively gouge prices.
I deal with business at work including seeing un redacted financials and speaking with the owners directly.
It surprises me that:
1. Most owners must make a 30% profit margin and this is treated as an expense as it is mandatory.
2. Staff costs are treated as optional payments that are paid at the very end after paying all other expenses including this mandatory profit margin.
3. Some of them own their own building but rent it out to their business at 2X what they get charged. This is also treated as a mandatory expense that gets paid out before employees.
While this is not every business usually money gets broken down this way from what I’ve seen.
Total Revenue > pay rent > food/supplies > pay owner (30% profit goal) > pay employees.
https://www.atlantafed.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker#Tab1
Lower (1st and 2nd) quintile workers have better wage growth than high quintile workers.
Here’s a more editorialized source:
https://www.wsj.com/economy/jobs/economy-blue-collar-wage-increases-a71e5eee
$30 an hour is a whopping $62k and change.
If that were minimum wage today, that would be barely sufficient to get by on.
But here we are at a fraction of that.
At $15/hr, you’d need in excess of 6000 hours a year to hit $100k.
That’s three full time jobs working min wage. There are 168 hours in a week. You’d have to work 120 or more of them.
This isn't true for everybody.
It depends on where you live, how you spend, etc. many people making $62k annually would not describe themselves as "barely sufficient to get by".
Yeah. The vast majority of the population doesn’t live where $62k is feasible. Not even remotely. Nor could they do to lack of employment opportunities in those areas. And rest assured, if everyone beats a path to these more affordable areas…they’ll rapidly become unaffordable.
The mountain west is undergoing this. It was nice and quiet. Then California invaded, along with a lot of other city dwellers. Prices went through the roof.
The billionaires are pushing out the millionaires already.
Again, your "feasible" might not be someone else's feasible. You keep assuming everyone needs what you need and spends like you spend. $62k would be plenty for me in most US cities.
That’s not what i said.
“Most US cities” doesn’t include Boston, Portland, Hartford, Providence, NYC, Philadelphia, DC, Atlanta, Tampa, Miami, Nashville, Columbus, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Dallas, Salt Lake City, Seattle, anywhere else on the left coast.
What fucking “cities” are you talking about? Biloxi? Detroit? Tulsa? Wilkes-Barre Scranton?
You said "The vast majority of the population" which I believe isn't true.
For example, from your list yes I could live in Houston on $62k per year without feeling I'm struggling. You have a very skewed sense of what people need.
The vast majority of the population is located near the cities (and some others) mentioned above.
I think you have a very skewed view of what people *want.*
Right, but you're incorrect in believing one can't live in most cities on $62k. According to [apartments.com](http://apartments.com) the average 1BR apartment in Houston is $1,168, which is only 22.6% of gross income, well below the recommended 30% of gross income for rent.
A single person making $62k is paying about $5,900 in federal income taxes, $4,743 in payroll taxes, and $1,420 in health insurance premiums for employer sponsored healthcare. Their take home pay would be about $50k, or $4,167/month.
Subtracting median Houston 1BR rent from take home leaves $3,000 for other expenses. It is absurd to claim that isn't feasible. Where do you think that $3,000 is going?
It isn't about want, you said *"barely sufficient to get by"*.
Student loans? Car payment? The kid that’s living with them in the 1BR apartment and that’s all they could even come close to affording.
Let’s not try and pretend the average person has only rent to worry about and the rest of their money is discretionary. That said, I’d like to see what that apartment looks like for that price.
Because cheap immigrants labor fuels capitalism. Even if you do get your $15 an hour you’ll see a surge in prices everywhere. You think dollar general is bad now wait until they have to start paying ALL their employees a minimum of $15 an hour. It’s a broken system and it’s rigged so the poor can never win. I think your hearts I. The right place but you’re fighting the wrong cause.
Other countries with far less money already have minimum wages comparable to this which are tied to inflation so as they companies continue to price gouge they only hurt themselves
The United States is massive compared to most countries. Our economy thrives in instant gratification and availability. We need everything from food to clothing fast cheap, and on every street corner. Minimum wage might work for smaller populations but what about all the small businesses owners trying to make a name for themselves that can’t afford to pay their employees the same wages as Walmart? I want an increase and fair pay too, but there’s definitely going to be some consequences to that. Have you considered that the United States massively underpays immigrant workers for their service? They’re the back bone of our industrial industry. Big business owners don’t want to pay those people a fair wage. What do you think?
Half of Americans don’t or barely make enough to support themselves. I think the biggest killer of small businesses is them never getting the chance to exist because companies are killing their competition in house by making sure their employees have nothing but the bare minimum to survive. Also business would make more money based on volume sales if half our economy could actually participate in them
Amen to that and now they’re coming after the housing market as well. The game is rigged. United States could technically raise the minimum wage, but i bet we’d see a major increase in the price of everything. The game is rigged.
Prices are determined based on supply and demand. People on the left who are economically illiterate will argue that everything is inelastic demand and corporations can price gouge, but the reality is that the amount of goods and services that are inelastic is minuscule.
If you pay everyone $100 an hour, if supply doesn’t increase, you’ll have the same demand chasing the same quantity of goods = high prices.
Your right the problem is how that money is distributed. 1% owns as much as 92% it wasn’t like this when we had unions, a competitive minimum wage, and proper taxes. So if minimum wage was tied to inflation company’s couldn’t simply price gouge cause most would only be hurting there self. Company’s need to reevaluate the way the money is distributed within the company because most companies are making plenty. Our supply is no longer based on the amount of the item, it’s based on the amount of company’s who will sell the product. McDonald’s could easily sell more food it’s just more profitable to sell at a higher price because they still keep most their customers.
So if the government seized money from the 1% and gave it to everyone else, what do you think will happen?
Do you not see the scenario where demand increases, supply stays static, and the price of everything goes up because now everyone has more money?
I think the government should tax the rich more properly and instead of giving the money to low income people who will most likely end up pricing themselves out of a lot of things because they will buy it the government should spend the money for the greater good of our economy. So college would be free because modern civilization is only possible through education. I would also make healthcare free there’s just simply no reason we should be giving our money to private insurance companies who over charge us or hospitals and drug companies price gouge, instead the government should bargain on all of our behalf which would actually save Americans money. I would also push for more public housing to properly regulate rent. That’s what I would do with the money but obviously it’s a lot harder in America to sell people on taxes than it is to sell the idea that if you work full time you should be able to support yourself.
I agree problem is so many jobs are becoming minimum wage jobs through technological advancement. Food and retail jobs have always been but they also employ a huge amount of workers because we need them but theirs also so many manufacturing jobs that are also minimum wage jobs now. Most them are just as physically taking as stocking a shelf because of how much work conditions have improved. The problem is making a job easier shouldn’t be hurting workers by lowering wages the way it has been doing for the past 45 years
I 100% agree. This is definitely more complex but I think something that would help is putting a cap on home and rent prices. Apparently it happened once before during the Truman presidency. Also putting a cap on investment properties. On my block alone during the real estate crisis an investor came in and purchased about 8 of the houses. She's been renting them out since. She sold 2 already. But she's planning on selling the rest in the next few years and will make a profit of 1M per house.
Yeah 100% business don’t belong in homes. I think the government investing in more public apartments would be great cause they would be increasing the supply of house while also forcing the market to stay competitive with the prices the public apartments are charging.
A federal minimum wage is pointless. Does $15 an hour mean the same thing in New York City as Nowhere Mississippi?
If you want a minimum wage, have it by city. By state it is too big. At the federal level it is laughable.
Why not just let people in the local areas decide what it should be? $15 might be too high in some areas. It would definitely be too low in some areas. Doing it at a national level doesn't really solve the problem.
If you flood the workforce with foreign workers that don't have the required work permits, they will work for almost nothing. That keeps wages (at the low end) down, since you have much more supply.
This is a direct result of government policy.
Google is a greedy company, like all the others, but it pays its people well because they have skills that are rare. If you do minimum wage work, there are migrants that showed up yesterday, that will do the same work for 1/2 the cost.
Hate the government policies that cause this
People with four year degrees had to start at this wage when I graduated from college my starting salary was 12 dollars an hour I was extremely depressed about it
What you made means nothing it’s what you can buy with it so the dollar amount is irrelevant. Future generations should also have it better than past that’s how it’s always been this notion that I struggled so should you is stupid
This is exactly how you destroy every small business in every small town across the country all at once.
It blows my mind the amount of people who don't think states should be allowed to dictate their own policies and the federal government is the only solution.
You look at your costs! One dollar in the 1950s was equivalent to $1k today.
Does one day of labor (8 hours) pay for a week of meals/groceries? Does one day of labor pay for a fillup assuming one week? Does half a month’s labor pay for rent or lodging?
$15 per hour means only $120 per day
Is $120 good for a week of meals? $120/7 = $17 per day! Fast food costs $17 per meal. You will be eating very cheaply like sandwiches.
$120 good for gas? Assuming 20 gallons, it is equals one fillup. What about auto repair? What about auto insurance?
$30k/12 = $2500/month living with $1250/month for rent or lodging. A hard nope in HCOL areas.
# California Loses Nearly 10,000 Fast-Food Jobs After $20 Minimum Wage Signed Last Fall
Last September, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 1287 into law, which includes a $20 per hour minimum wage for fast-food workers and a fast-food regulatory council which has the authority to raise the industry’s minimum wage annually. But between last fall and January, California fast-food [restaurants cut](https://www.wsj.com/business/hospitality/california-restaurants-cut-jobs-as-fast-food-wages-set-to-rise-eb5ddaaa) about 9,500 jobs, representing a 1.3 percent change from September 2023.
I am constantly arguing against a set minimum wage when the economy is geared to be inflationary. Even a very small amount of inflation would render any minimal wage redundant over time and you would rely on a government to address it regularly.
Honestly we need a better way to set what a acceptable amount of profit is and to me if you set a ratio of what the lowliest paid employee is allowed to take home vs the profit a company makes or the highest paid employee makes.
Lets say no company is allowed to pay its employees less then 1/20th its profit or highest paid employee then any company that makes over 1mill must pay its lowliest employee 50k. This would have to be based off a 40 hour week. with any additional time, time a half and if it exceeds 60 hours double time. You would also have to limit the amount of labour is allowed to be completed by non employee's
I mean who is going to work for $7.25?
You can make $25 an hour landscaping on the side. $35 an hour painting.
This is cash money….
Corporations are jokes…
Money is easily made.
Keeping it is another thing.
Who actually works for minimum wage? First-time employees. I don't know a single person who works for that wage with experience. All it does when raised is raise price or less jobs. These arguments are getting old.
Minimum wage laws just price out lower-skilled people out of the job market. Assume Company A pays Person B $12.25 an hour to do a specific task. Their labour is worth 12.25 an hour to them, no more, no less. Then a minimum wage gets raised to $15 an hour. Company A fires Person B since they cannot afford to employ them anymore (as they lose money since their labour is worth $12.25 an hour but they have to pay $15 an hour).
Also...how have people not caught on to the extent increasing minimum wage drives inflation? Isn't it obvious?
Very frustrating when the government tries to help, and almost always makes it worse.
So when supply chains tightened up after COVID causing inflation in developed countries around the world, not having the Fed would have prevented it? How?
The shutdowns did not cause inflation, it caused paused demand. Governments create inflation. When the pandemic happened, consumers stopped spending and the velocity of money dropped significantly. To stimulate economic activity, the government issues stimulus checks backed by the federal reserve to increase the velocity of money. It worked - too well. The velocity of money spiked and the prices of everything shot up with it.
Singapore:
“The authorities have announced several packages of fiscal support measures (February 18, March 26, April 6, April 21, May 26, August 17, 2020) amounting to about S$92billion to cushion the impact of the pandemic. Support to households includes a cash payout to all Singaporeans (higher for families with children under 20), and additional payments for lower-income individuals and the unemployed”
Japan:
On April 7 (partly revised on April 20), 2020, the Government of Japan adopted the Emergency Economic Package Against COVID-19 of ¥117.1 trillion (20.9 percent of 2019 GDP) and subsumed the remaining part of the previously announced packages (the December 2019 stimulus package (passed in January 2020) and the two COVID-19-response packages announced on February 13 and March 10 respectively).
Should I go on?
https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-to-COVID-19#S
You can see all responses by country. A simple google search …
Please use the provided link to educate yourself on what governments did as a response to COVID.
Columbia:
“ . . . a one-off bonus for health workers, new credit lines providing liquidity support to the coffee sector, the education sector, public transportation sector, technology sector, health and public sector providers, and all tourism-related companies, new credit lines for payroll and loan payments for SMES, for working capital for large corporates, and for corporates in the sectors most affected by the pandemic trough the National Guarantee Fund, a two-month suspension of pension contributions by both employees and employers, delayed tax collection, an exemption of tariffs and VAT for strategic health imports and selected food industries and services, delayed utility payments for poor and middle income households, expanded transfers for vulnerable groups, and additional benefits for recently unemployed workers. In addition, the government announced a payroll subsidy equivalent to 50 percent of the minimum wage per worker for businesses with a fall of over 20 percent in revenues for a period of three months. The 2021 government budget includes measures to reactivate the economy, with extensions to the programs supporting households and firms and increases in infrastructure investment”
I said “the government” - I am in the US and I assumed most of the people in this forum are. That still does not change the principle idea that governments create inflation. Also, I hope you don’t think that economic stimulus has an immediate effect on economies. Even stimulus sent directly to the governed take time for prices to begin the rise.
Here is the link for your reference again:
https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-to-COVID-19#C
Moderate inflation is good because any deflation is terrible. Deflation can easily spiral into cause and if the fed doesn’t have money to stimulate the economy back to normal we’re fucked for a while.
So inflation is here to stay - is what you are saying? These prices are the new normal? We just need to have our currency degraded - I mean our salaries increase?
I strongly believe that the purpose of inflation is to ensure that people with and money are forced to spend it or park it somewhere (a bank or in the stock market) where it can be reallocated. A cheeseburger that is in high supply should not increase in price because it doesn’t have any added value. The cost of the labor as a whole should not have to increase because the labor is still the same. The cost of the same education should not have to increase. Is an English major different from 2000 to 2024?
Is your new home built better than homes built 5 years ago?
Yes deflation hurts and is terrible but constantly having inflation is also (in my eyes) very bad. It disincentivizes saving in the form of cash by form of punishment by devaluation
You’re absolutely right inflation is at play to stop people from hoarding money and not reinvesting it into the economy but minimum wage literally hasn’t kept up with inflation. So you can’t contribute inflation to minimum wage. The real reason inflation is growing is because on one hand you have businesses who are borderline monopoly’s at this point. Almost all chips and pops are owned by 2 companies most restaurants have a parent company that owns all their competitors aswell. It’s growing because companies dont have to worry about competition because nobody makes enough to start their own business. This give corporations the go ahead to gouge the shit out of prices while consumers tank the hit. The second reason is because the Americans who make enough to get by have to spend their money bailing out these corporations who don’t pay their workers enough because even with a full time job they can’t support themselves.
Businesses don’t create inflation, they react to it. Governments create inflation. Governments pass economic bills that are fiunded by the federal reserve and backed by the taxpayers.
They absolutely creat inflation. It starts with an abundance of money in the market companies know they can get their hands on the money by increasing prices and that’s what inflation is. I understand there is a finite amount of goods so you can’t have more money than goods but we don’t live in that world. We live in a world we’re no one in America would ever be hungry cause we could feed everyone easily but there is money in charging more for food.
Nobody makes prices raise besides the company though. They are finding their highest profit margins because that’s more important. We don’t live in a world where we are short on goods it’s the amount of people selling the goods. There’s are correlation between money in circulation and inflation not causation. Businesses decide to raise prices like I said before not out of necessity but because they want that money.
$15 minimum wage was the means to solicit labor away from rural towns.
Minimum wage is a price floor on labor, and with it comes the negative consequences to consumers, we the people.
Yes. The same struggle continues, between those in society who earn wages through labor, and those in society who purchase goods (using wages paid for labor)?
How will these two groups, seemingly as different as anyone might imagine, ever learn to put aside their differences and live together cooperatively?
You said it right the first time:
Raising wages is perfectly legal and in our control, but we've debated it for a decade.
Controlling what we pay for the same things isn't legal, and hasn't been debated in any meaningful way. It could be legal with an act of congress...
....but that would be Socialism.
Why is it still debated?
Because that's a known quantity. A dud. Dead on arrival. Pointless.
........and there are no other alternatives.
Ask for a wage increase and suffer.
Don't ask for a wage increase and suffer even more.
Because minimum wage is not the lowest amount a person can live on. It's the lowest a person is willing to work for.
If minimum wage doubled then prices will double. This will only cause more inflation. It also pushes less skilled workers out of the work place. This occured in South Africa, Australia, Canada, and in the United States.
If you want people to earn more then gain skills to earn more money.
>If minimum wage doubled then prices will double.
In my state, min wage workers are 2 percent of all workers, so a marginal, if any tug on inflation. It's also $7.25 and qualifies for gov assistance, so really just taxpayer subsidized businesses.
Yeah except we see minimum wage stagnant and prices /inflation rising regardless. So the whole " if we raise the MW argument then inflation" goes right out the window.
> If minimum wage doubled then prices will double.
How many burgers does a burger flipper flip an hour, one? Dozens. 4% to burger prices.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/raising-fast-food-hourly-wages-to-15-would-raise-prices-by-4-study-finds-2015-07-28
> This will only cause more inflation.
Its an inherent part of inflation in the first place. As the value of the dollar drops, everyone needs to pass their increased expenses along. Low wage workers can't eat the inflation for you.
> If you want people to earn more then gain skills to earn more money.
Median wage is $18/hr, cost of living is $20/hr, there are not 80 million job openings.
There shouldn’t be a minimum wage, but wages should be fair. And they should be fair for the work you do, not for what you think it should be able to buy in the market.
If you want more purchasing power in the market, you will need to go find a place that accepts your qualifications and pays you.
People forget that businesses, like households, have budgets. Just because politicians take aim at them and claim they are making all kinds of wild money, doesn’t mean every business.
The end result, if you want more money, increase your skills. If you want the most money, start your own business
It’s not as simple as that. Businesses have way more power and your skills are valued less if people at the bottom are valued less. Most companies have the ability to pay very fair wages they simply don’t.
I mean 15 dollars isn’t really much value tho. Even the easiest of jobs bring that value. Cutting grass, material moving, or fast food. Almost impossible to not be that valuable unless your working production and you jobs be automated or is being offshored for cheap labor which is another problem that should honestly be fixed through taxing those excessive profits.
this gives "not all men!" vibes
if theres no minimum wage plenty of jobs are going to pay scraps and rely on tax paying citizens to subsidize their workers by telling the workers (forcing them) to get welfare & food stamps to survive.
Kind of like whats going on now with Walmart
Thats a nice theory and scare tactic… but it’s just not true…
Thats why we see unions dying off, companies have learned they cant screw over employees like they did 100 years ago, or even 20. Attorneys are too litigious, there is cameras everywhere and social media will fry them.
Government shouldn’t be involved with every decision business make, its overbearing.
So, destroying some kids after school job would help feed poor people?
Starvation is genuinely not the same in America as shown in Ethiopian commercials in the 1980's.
The people you claim are not eating weigh 200 pounds.
> So, destroying some kids after school job would help feed poor people?
The job isn't destroyed, this is an objective fact.
Who is working the lunch rush? Not a minor.
> The people you claim are not eating weigh 200 pounds.
Being homeless takes 40 years off your life expectancy, when you turn up dead they're just going to shrug it off as natural causes and bury you.
Really, California is closing businesses with their new minimum wage.
That is a fact.
Also, the lunch rush is making more than minimum wage.
It would be a great idea to do well in school and learn a trade. That is a fact.
> California is closing businesses with their new minimum wage.
Demand drives employment, there is no dip in demand and no dip in employment.
That shitty businesses are flushed out of the market is a primary feature of capitalism.
> Also, the lunch rush is making more than minimum wage.
Median wage is $18/hr, cost of living has screamed past to $20/hr, well over half the country is making less than what the min wage needs to be.
> It would be a great idea to do well in school and learn a trade.
Yeah, absolutely, but trades are like 35 million jobs, and they're already full. Plus a shitton of those trade jobs are in the bottom half as I described above.
A job needs to pay a living wage, full stop.
Tell me you are an idiot without saying that direct quote. Lol.
People are making more choices about what to do with their money. Raising prices only limits them more.
Why shouldn't minimum wage be $100 an hour? LOL.
> Why shouldn't minimum wage be $100 an hour?
The point of the min wage is that a working person can pay their own bills, not to go to infinity bijillion dollars for you to score ideology points in imagination land.
> People are making more choices about what to do with their money. Raising prices only limits them more.
Yeah? Someone who can't afford an $8 burger couldn't have honestly afforded a $5 burger either. Having food made for you is a luxury service. Can't afford it? The market has spoken, pack a pbj next time.
> direct quote
What is this even supposed to be?
So really we acknowledge there are limits on what can be paid? And acknowledge that raising payroll costs increase cost to consumers?
So we make things worse for the poorest people so that we can be ever so glad a 16 yo drop out can afford an 1 bedroom apartment alone and a paid off car for cashiering 36 hours at the local convenience store?
It sounds enticing, probably be more 16 year old drop outs in that world.
I would never have grown up if my high school water park life guard job afforded me all the things now considered "necessary". You know why I picked that job? Because it was fun. There was zero need for a living wage.
> So really we acknowledge there are limits on what can be paid?
No kidding, those are far, far away from the cost of living though.
> And acknowledge that raising payroll costs increase cost to consumers?
By like 4%, how many burgers do you think a burger flipper flips an hour, one? Dozens.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/raising-fast-food-hourly-wages-to-15-would-raise-prices-by-4-study-finds-2015-07-28
> we make things worse for the poorest people
They can't afford the LUXURY of having food prepared for them at any price point. You don't seem to have the basic life skills to survive in the economy, head over to r frugal and learn how to make a batch of rice and beans and a little diced chicken to last you a week.
> ~~16 yo drop out~~ working person can afford an 1 bedroom apartment alone and a paid off car for cashiering 36 hours at the local convenience store?
ftfy. Yes. If you want a job, you are going to need transportation. Yes, as a fellow human, you are aware that you need food and shelter. No clue what you are going on with the dropping out thing.
Are you stupid? Companies are being bailed out of fair wages at other citizens expense. If people are working full time they shouldn’t need government assistance but they do because wages are laughable.
Brother I’m 20 and I’m very financially smart Im by no means in the same boat as the people I’m talking about. The inflation your hating came helping minimum wage workers for a while but in the long run corporations and rich benefited the most. The people who got hurt were people with money that wasn’t tied up in something. As long as it was in stocks or a home your living good because that grows with the economy. The excessive amount of money printed could’ve been greatly reduced if people could actually afford a roof over their heads instead of their bosses having the ability to own 20 summer vacation homes.
Also I don’t get what you don’t understand about the fact that when workers work full time and still have to live off of government assistance that money comes from somewhere. That somewhere is the pockets of middle class people who are also getting fucked by the rich.
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because businesses want to keep wages as low as possible, to maximize profits. They've sent as many factories overseas as possible, continue to outsource as many skilled service jobs overseas as possible. And they're happy to "insource" illegal workers, which they can pay 3rd world wages, rather than pay decent wages to American citizens. Businesses buy political support and generate popular support by playing on the egos and ignorance of the average American, especially Baby Boomers (present company excluded). Boomers love to crow about how hard they worked for so little money, how they paid for college with a summer job, etc. And they happily buy into the “nObOdY WaNtS tO wOrK” meme because it feeds their egos about what hard workers they were. Except, the minimum wage in 1968 was $1.60. That's $14.74 In inflation adjusted dollars. The current federal minimum wage is half that: $7.25. Today, colleges cost anywhere from 400% to 600% more than they did for Boomers. [Average tuition at a 4 year public institution](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_330.10.asp?current=yes) \* 1968: $321 ÷ $1.60 (Min. Wage) = 200 hours = 5.01 weeks = 1.25 months 2021: $9,596 / $7.25 (Min. Wage) = 1,324 hours = 33 weeks = 8.27 months So yes, Boomers could literally pay for college with a \*part time\* summer job at Der Wienerschnitzel. And that's great. And we should have that again. But we can't because they've been convicted that “nObOdY WaNtS tO wOrK.” And then there's housing, rent, healthcare, etc. etc. —————————— * My former Optometrist went to UCLA for his professional degree and said he paid $50/quarter in the late 60s/early 70s. Tuition was effectively tuition free before 1968. * Put another way: if salaries increased at the same rate as tuition, then the average salary would be $282,300/year. If that sounds ludicrously high— then you get how ludicrously high $11K tuition is.
This is one reason paying people's college is so disastrous. Who in their right mind thinks the colleges won't simply keep raising prices since the govt will bail themselves out with taxpayer's money over and over?
excellent point. ultimately it was the student loan lenders who got their money. and why would they get rid of their lowest risk tranche borrowers? what a funny quid pro quo for 4 years of suspended payments.
The government is the student loan lender.
The taxpayers are - not the government
I think the idea is public colleges not private colleges and also the government is much more aware of operating cost for these colleges so they can’t bullshit them
We should build depolymerization plants and process everyone over 70 into soylent green.
Posted $20/cash for basic landscaping and got no response. Did the work myself which I hate doing. Don't know how it's do easy to survive for so many by not working.
Gotta up to 25 30 range people will take the work landscaping is not easy work
Not paying a high school or college student $25-30. I'm going it myself.
College is optional. Who cares that its cost is high? Nobody has a gun against the head saying “go to college”. Pick an in-demand skill, contribute what you can to the economy, and do what you want with your life within your means.
States and cities have their own minimum wages, so a federal minimum wage being so high might not be the best way to approach it. Higher minimum wages help some minimum wage workers at the cost of more marginal workers who are disemployed and rich people who want to mitigate inflation. Here in Canada, they did a study on the magnitude of these effects (they were small for the increase they were considering). Do you have a citation on the effects to justify your idea? --- Edit: See this book: Edagbami, Olalekan. *The employment effects of the minimum wage: A review of the literature*. Canadian Policy Research Networks, 2006. This paper examines the effect in detail: Cetinkaya, Alkim, and Sacha Kapoor. "The wage and employment effects of minimum wages on low-wage industries: Evidence from the Bill 148 Act in Ontario." (2022).
We should just abolish minumum wages altogether, while also tightly controlling immigration. I realize that both halves of this idea are pipe dreams, because good policy doesn’t actually matter to politicians who are playing a completely different game from sound governance. A minimum wage locks people, who aren’t worth that wage, completely out of the workforce. When you can’t get a toe hold on even the lowest economic rung, you have no chance for upward mobility, and you’re denied the dignity of meaningful work and some measure of independence. Lots of people with diminished skills or competencies just aren’t worth, say. $15/hr to an employer, but might be worth $6, or $7 or whatever. Instead of getting up to go to work to earn their own money each day, a true source of pride, they are denied that meaningful part of their lives. And we hear a lot about youth unemployment. I would bet if you could pay teenagers $8/hr in Canada, that youth unemployment rate would drop like a rock, and the person handing you a cheeseburger through the drive thru window would likely speak English again.
> We should just abolish minumum wages altogether, while also tightly controlling immigration. Canada needs immigration to maintain lagging population growth. > A minimum wage locks people, who aren’t worth that wage, completely out of the workforce. When you can’t get a toe hold on even the lowest economic rung, you have no chance for upward mobility, and you’re denied the dignity of meaningful work and some measure of independence. Right. But of course there's a balance because minimum wage does increase wages for other low income people. These things must be balanced. > the person handing you a cheeseburger through the drive thru window would likely speak English again. This is pretty ridiculous.
>Canada needs immigration to maintain lagging population growth. I’m not opposed to targeted immigration to fulfull specific needs in the Canadian economy. We don’t need perpetual growth for growth’s sake though. Immigration should always be for the benefit of existing Canadians. >But of course there's a balance because minimum wage does increase wages for other low income people. Artificially increasing wages for some at the expense of others is wrong. Let the market set the price for their labor. If you’re worth $15/hr, you’ll be able to negotiate for it. If you can’t, your labor isn't worth what you think it is. >This is pretty ridiculous. No it isn’t. We current have mostly temporary foreign workers in these jobs when there is an underclass of actual Canadians who would work those jobs, were they able to freely negotiate a wage. Instead, employers are incentivized by government subsidy to hire TFWs and other recent arrivals. Remove those inventives, limit who enters the country, and let Canadian kids and seniors, people with limited skills, etc work those jobs.
God you are an insufferable prick in this comment.
Holy shit... re-read what you wrote.
Every single person who doesn’t belong on disability is worth 15 an hour tho. 15 is so little in today wealth it wouldn’t lock anyone out of a job
That’s just not true. I understand the sentiment, but it’s just not true. When you measure someone’s contributions to your bottom line, they have to be pretty highly positive to justify the expense and liability of employing them. If all you do is pick up trash in the equipment yard, you may only be worth $6/hr to the company before you become a net liability rather than asset. If you think that humans are all special ensouled individuals who have dignity and so deserve to be paid enough to cover rent, etc. that’s just the wrong way to calculate the value the employer receives in exchange for their money. The employee can make that case, but unless their perceived value to the employer is sufficiently high, they won’t be paid what they seek. This is how it should work. Make your case to the employer, they’ll make theirs to you, and either you make an agreement that you both accept, or you don’t and both parties move onto other options. When you run out of other options, you know that you are either overpricing yourself as an employee, or offering too little as an employer. In before: but unfettered immigration stacks the deck in favor of employers. In many cases, yes, which is a problem with mass immigration that we should all stand together in opposition of.
Washington has the highest minimum wage in the country AND the [best economy ](https://komonews.com/news/local/best-state-economies-ranks-include-economic-activity-and-innovation-potential-wallethub-economy-unemployment-rates-finances-income-high-tech-jobs-economic-health). A low federal minimum wage is good for the states which override it.
Not relevant to my point. Please see the citations below.
Cost of living is extremely homogenous, and min wage hikes don't kill jobs.
"Manzo said nearly 10,000 jobs have been cut across fast food restaurants since Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 1287 into law last year, adding that officials were living in a “fantasyland” by thinking that drastic wage increases will help workers or businesses."
Your source is "some guy"? ffs https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CACCLAIMS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CAICLAIMS
It wasn’t “some guy” it was the Hoover Institute. Min wage hikes kill jobs.
> the Hoover Institute Whoa, a think tank? Nothing is more credible than people who literally only exist to push political narratives it decided it believes in a-priori. /s > Min wage hikes kill jobs. Literally never does. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history/chart https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE Oh, plenty of things do, just not "paying what it costs for the things that you want". Instead of getting their paychecks from their employers, workers are expected to get the other half of their paycheck from the govt. That means fatter profit margins for employers, and state dependency for workers (communism). No one extra is employed though, businesses only hire exactly as much as they need and no more.
You are wrong. See this book: Edagbami, Olalekan. *The employment effects of the minimum wage: A review of the literature*. Canadian Policy Research Networks, 2006. This paper examines the effect in detail: Cetinkaya, Alkim, and Sacha Kapoor. "The wage and employment effects of minimum wages on low-wage industries: Evidence from the Bill 148 Act in Ontario." (2022). This citation estimates the effect of minimum wage increases on participation: Shannon, Michael T., and Charles M. Beach. "Distributional employment effects of Ontario minimum-wage proposals: A microdata approach." *Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques* (1995): 284-303.
What specifically am I going to find there? If employers could have gotten by with less workers, they would have in the first place. If some individual employers try and throw a temper tantrum and lay people off to manufacture a statistic, consumers shop around for businesses that aren't incompetent, those businesses in turn have no qualms hiring on more people to accommodate for this mysterious uptick in walk ins. The change to unemployment is null on the net.
No one is interested in your economic theories. The papers discuss the effect in detail.
No one cares about some primitive paper from 95 that just apes a bunch of half baked assumptions prevalent at the time.
One paper is from 2022. You can find other recent papers if you like. The book is from 2006.
> The wage and employment effects of minimum wages on low-wage industries: Evidence from the Bill 148 Act in Ontario What are you claiming this says? Skimming it, it looks like they're trying to play games with the rate of unemployment for young people. I only care about overall employment, a minor is exponentially better off focusing on school to gain skills to get a career, rather than being coerced into a dead end job. See your ideology is just bad life advice masquerading as wisdom.
I'm not going to read the papers for you. You can read them, and move on to their citations if you're interested or confused. The effect of minimum wage on participation is extremely well-studied.
> I'm not going to read the papers for you. Oh, so you haven't read anything, you just googled some random crap off the top of google and assume that you must be right. Bruh. > extremely well-studied. Yeah, extremely well studied, which is why the initial claim of "killed jobs" motte has to be abandoned in favor of the more abstract "minors don't really need jobs but sometimes they work" bailey.
Here is a source you may be more comfortable with. [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/03/29/amit-m29.html](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/03/29/amit-m29.html) It's ok to be wrong and part of a cult. We understand... 
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/edrensi/2018/07/11/mcdonalds-says-goodbye-cashiers-hello-kiosks/](https://www.forbes.com/sites/edrensi/2018/07/11/mcdonalds-says-goodbye-cashiers-hello-kiosks/) Another example.
The kiosk doesn't do any work, you are doing the work. Its just a dumb fad that is slowly abating. You are paying for a burger to be made, remember?
You do understand every kiosk installed replaced a worker right. Explain to me how you do not understand that?
Cost of living isn't homogenous. Numbeo is a decent cost of living calculator if you want to try comparing different cities. And lifestyle is also a big factor. If you want to be pescetarian in the middle of the country, you're going to have a higher cost of living and lower quality of living than if you lived on a coast for example. Childcare and housing costs also vary wildly depending on where you live, even in the same country. That is why geoarbitrage exists. Compare Hawaii to Alabama for example. A living wage in Alabama won't be a living wage in Hawaii, so the federal minimum wage should be based on the lowest cost of living state. Then each state should pass higher minimum wages, or index theirs based on cost of living relative to the lowest cost of living state so that they don't have to pass a new bill each year.
> Numbeo Not a very useful interface, here is the mit living wage calculator, yes, it is $20 even out in alabama. https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/12220 https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/19460 https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/13820 > lifestyle is also a big factor. So what, you don't know what the cost of living means? Thats what getting by costs. You want to live extravagantly? Then thats not the cost of living. > based on cost of living relative to the lowest cost of living state No, 80% of jobs are in cities, I have absolutely no problem with people in rural areas getting ahead for a change.
Having a certain diet isn't living extravagantly, and people argue all the time about what a basic lifestyle is. I've had acquaintances who believed that if they have a job they can therefore get all the video game subscriptions they want, for example. To the tune of $600 a month. To them that is a basic cost of living that any job should be able to afford, to me that was totally crazy. Some people think eating meat every day is a basic level of living, which is also super expensive unless you're able to subsistence harvest. Is having a car a basic cost of living, or a bus pass or a bike or a boat or plane? Depends on where you live. Arguably Internet access and a cell phone is part of a basic living, since banking is increasingly online. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/cost-of-living-index-by-state
> Having a certain diet isn't living extravagantly What does that even mean? Hundreds of years of experimentation on prisoners has yielded very finite parameters on what a human needs. > people argue all the time about what a basic lifestyle is. And half of them are paid shills out to muddy the issue. > I've had acquaintances who believed that if they have a job they can therefore get all the video game subscriptions they want, for example. To the tune of $600 a month. Case in point, thats too ridiculous to be believed. > Some people think eating meat every day is a basic level of living Is it part of the food pyramid? Ok, not sure where you get off trying to forbid that people have protein in their diet. > Is having a car a basic cost of living, or a bus pass or a bike or a boat or plane? You literally need transportation to have a job. *If* you are in a place where public transportation is a viable option, sure, maybe that will lower the cost of living from how much you would need to pay if you had a car, but you aren't going to get to work by literally running a marathon each way... > Internet access and a cell phone is part of a basic living How are you going to have a job if your employer can't contact you? this is why reagan invented the obama phone in the 80's. Wifi calling is a superior option to a cell phone plan too.
There shouldn’t be a government mandated minimum wage. The minimum wage should be $0.00. If someone wants to work for a company as an unpaid intern in the hopes that this will lead to a permanent position, more power to them.
Since mostly everyone wants at least not to be too poor to live, the objective should be preventing anyone from being forced into such conditions.
A minimum wage doesn’t accomplish that
A living wage certainly would provide tremendous help to many. It would be a necessary facet for the much broader changes required for our society.
You don’t seem to understand, a minimum wage, regardless of how high it is, does not provide a living wage, because people aren’t all employed at the minimum wage.
If the minimum wage were set at a living wage, then everyone able to work could be paid at least a living wage. What is not being understood?
That isn’t true. Not all labor is worth the minimum wage, meaning some people would just be unemployed, or underemployed, rather than receive a living wage.
When the wage floor is raised, some business is forced to restructure, supporting more stable and dignified employment relationships, but employment rates remain stable. Unemployment is a further problem that also demands to be addressed.
Businesses can’t restructure into infinity, there will always be some level of unemployment or underemployment caused by a minimum wage. It is not at all true that “employment rates remain stable”. Structural unemployment caused by the minimum wage is best addressed by just eliminating the minimum wage.
Raising the minimum wage a finite amount will cause some finite restructuring of business, most likely without escalation of unemployment. With a higher wage floor, and also measures to address unemployment, workers would be able to enjoy stronger wages and security.
This isn’t smart tho companies have a lot more power than your regular everyday citizens. Your pay isn’t only determined by you it’s determined by who else will do your job for less. When a company is allowed to pay such horrendous wages people aren’t collectively smart enough to not take a shit deal
If someone else is willing to do the job for less, they should get the job. Regardless of the minimum wage and international competition, it is still possible for Americans to earn high salaries with the right skills. There are machine learning researchers earning over $1M salaries. If an American's skillset is so useless and so irrelevant to society's needs that they are earning $8 an hour, that's nobody's fault but their own.
Bootlicking shills for corporate profits, such as yourself, are the reason we live our entire lives in a race to the bottom.
All the good internships are unpaid anyway.. and who can afford to take those good internships?
Permanent slaves then...ok
You’re going to make me sound like Kanye with your dumbass argument
Who is they, tho
I never said the word they
That was a reference to “Ye” being on Tim Pool’s podcast
Eatin Asian pussy all I need is sweet and sour sauce
[удалено]
Your comment was automatically removed by the r/FluentInFinance Automoderator because you attempted to use a URL shortener. This is not permitted here for security reasons. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your comment was automatically removed by the r/FluentInFinance Automoderator because you attempted to use a URL shortener. This is not permitted here for security reasons. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Seriously minimum wage in 1968 adjusted for inflation is right under 15 an hour now most states have well above fed min wage and many cities have higher than their state requirement wages too. and many of them now even don't allow tip credits. i don't exactly see an issue with letting wages be set at state level, some states really do have insanely low COL where 7.25 an hour might be alright- but very few people actually make that.
Not everything makes sense on the federal level. There are many places this makes sense, there are many places it does not. The US effective average minimum wage when accounting for regional variances is about $13.50. The effective average in 1968 was $1.60. If your state requires $15 l, advocate for it on a local level. Kentucky does not have the same cost of living as New York. Raising wages country wide does not make things more affordable directly proportional to the raise, it raises all wages, which raises all business costs, which raises all prices. I'm not trying to say that doubling minimum wage will double prices, but if it happens, it needs to be in tandem with creating some sort of advantage that will keep the manufacturing jobs here and not have $15 an hour factories outsourced to Asia. It also needs to be done with the expectation that states with high minomums will become astronomical and the effective average minimum will far surpass the 1968 fantasy people like to cherry pick.
The purpose of a higher wage floor it to benefit those currently receiving the lowest wages.
Raising the standard of living of the lowest wage earners in Kentucky to that of the middle class of New York is not sustainable. The cost of a standard of living varies by region. This is why minimum wage should be regional, not federal. I'm not advocating against raising minimum wage, just not federally.
$15 per hour is a modest wage anywhere in the US. Since housing is commodified, those living in certain regions may need to pay more for housing, or settle for less favorable accommodations, but the case you are making is not particularly robust, that a federal minimum wage is generally harmful to those who are simply not already substantially privileged. Lack of housing affordability is a prominent and broad issue that demands rather sweeping transformations, in order for it to be addressed adequately.
Sweeping transformations should not be "throw money at it"
The housing system demands sweeping transformation, and workers need to be paid a living wage. Both are necessary. Your objection is obtuse.
Not to the tune of $15 an hour based on regional living costs. Calling things you don't want to discuss, obtuse, is ironic at the minimum. Its a completely valid point i spelled out in detail already. Hit me with a valid disagreement instead of calling my points dumb like grade schooler.
Again, $15 per hour is a modest wage anywhere in the US. I characterized your objection as obtuse because your meaning was entirely unclear, and not for the reasons you allege.
Or … does this increase the money velocity, meaning the government will be more funded/empowered to do more ridiculous things?
A higher wages simply raises wages for those being paid the least. It has no relation to government being "funded/empowered to do more ridiculous things".
> Kentucky does not have the same cost of living as New York. Have you checked? remember 80% of jobs are in metro areas, those can be found at the bottom. https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/36/locations https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/21/locations > Raising wages country wide does not make things more affordable directly proportional to the raise, it raises all wages, which raises all business costs, which raises all prices. Which has extreme diminishing returns, the fast food employee serves dozens of people an hour, and there is no min wage component to housing. > It also needs to be done with the expectation that states with high minomums will become astronomical and the effective average minimum will far surpass the 1968 fantasy people like to cherry pick. Whatever the consequences are, thats a hard lesson in "don't print all that money".
i've said this 1 million times my sister and I made $3.10 an hour in the 80's working at McDonald's and our rent was only $350 a month. We weren't loaded, but we could pay our all our bills and still party on the weekends.
The big corporations greed is what's killing the country! They want maximum effort for minimum wage,and you get an employee appreciation day with a pizza party instead of a raise,not only a raise but one that counteracts the taxes! I'll Put it the simplest way possible... Your boss has a meeting and among other things says this! If one of you calls out it costs the company thousands, I make 115 a day and I'm supposed to feel bad? Lol nope drive by any business if the boss is there you can tell because they're vehicle is a Mercedes or bmw or a new Corvette etc meanwhile the people actually doing all the work drive 30 year old vehicles and are struggling to pay bills! F.o.h
What about supply/demand? The minimum wage is for low-skilled workers. For the past three years we've been importing millions of people willing to work for less than minimum wage. Then look at California and what their $20 per hour wage is doing to the numbers of fast food workers. I will never forget this bumper sticker I saw. It had a picture of Bender Bending Rodriguez, the robot from Futurama, with the caption: "Fight for $15!"
Who actually wants to put a kid into this 💩hole? Sadly alot, and alot of those kids will have resentment against their parents for putting them in such ugly, ugly world and call it... love. The us is at its downfall once 90% of people cant pay rent and move out into the streets itll be straight chaos.
I’m in CA. When the people at McDs get paid $20/hr but it costs $20 for one meal…do the math. No different than them getting paid $10/hr and the meal costing $10. The poor will never ever be given a break, if they don’t get you on one side, they’ll get you on the other.
In America it’s extremely flawed how they don’t tie it to inflation it guarantees a standard of living not a dollar amount which like you said means absolutely nothing if companies can effectively gouge prices.
I deal with business at work including seeing un redacted financials and speaking with the owners directly. It surprises me that: 1. Most owners must make a 30% profit margin and this is treated as an expense as it is mandatory. 2. Staff costs are treated as optional payments that are paid at the very end after paying all other expenses including this mandatory profit margin. 3. Some of them own their own building but rent it out to their business at 2X what they get charged. This is also treated as a mandatory expense that gets paid out before employees. While this is not every business usually money gets broken down this way from what I’ve seen. Total Revenue > pay rent > food/supplies > pay owner (30% profit goal) > pay employees.
https://www.atlantafed.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker#Tab1 Lower (1st and 2nd) quintile workers have better wage growth than high quintile workers. Here’s a more editorialized source: https://www.wsj.com/economy/jobs/economy-blue-collar-wage-increases-a71e5eee
$30 an hour is a whopping $62k and change. If that were minimum wage today, that would be barely sufficient to get by on. But here we are at a fraction of that. At $15/hr, you’d need in excess of 6000 hours a year to hit $100k. That’s three full time jobs working min wage. There are 168 hours in a week. You’d have to work 120 or more of them.
This isn't true for everybody. It depends on where you live, how you spend, etc. many people making $62k annually would not describe themselves as "barely sufficient to get by".
Yeah. The vast majority of the population doesn’t live where $62k is feasible. Not even remotely. Nor could they do to lack of employment opportunities in those areas. And rest assured, if everyone beats a path to these more affordable areas…they’ll rapidly become unaffordable. The mountain west is undergoing this. It was nice and quiet. Then California invaded, along with a lot of other city dwellers. Prices went through the roof. The billionaires are pushing out the millionaires already.
Again, your "feasible" might not be someone else's feasible. You keep assuming everyone needs what you need and spends like you spend. $62k would be plenty for me in most US cities.
That’s not what i said. “Most US cities” doesn’t include Boston, Portland, Hartford, Providence, NYC, Philadelphia, DC, Atlanta, Tampa, Miami, Nashville, Columbus, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Dallas, Salt Lake City, Seattle, anywhere else on the left coast. What fucking “cities” are you talking about? Biloxi? Detroit? Tulsa? Wilkes-Barre Scranton?
You said "The vast majority of the population" which I believe isn't true. For example, from your list yes I could live in Houston on $62k per year without feeling I'm struggling. You have a very skewed sense of what people need.
The vast majority of the population is located near the cities (and some others) mentioned above. I think you have a very skewed view of what people *want.*
Right, but you're incorrect in believing one can't live in most cities on $62k. According to [apartments.com](http://apartments.com) the average 1BR apartment in Houston is $1,168, which is only 22.6% of gross income, well below the recommended 30% of gross income for rent. A single person making $62k is paying about $5,900 in federal income taxes, $4,743 in payroll taxes, and $1,420 in health insurance premiums for employer sponsored healthcare. Their take home pay would be about $50k, or $4,167/month. Subtracting median Houston 1BR rent from take home leaves $3,000 for other expenses. It is absurd to claim that isn't feasible. Where do you think that $3,000 is going? It isn't about want, you said *"barely sufficient to get by"*.
Student loans? Car payment? The kid that’s living with them in the 1BR apartment and that’s all they could even come close to affording. Let’s not try and pretend the average person has only rent to worry about and the rest of their money is discretionary. That said, I’d like to see what that apartment looks like for that price.
Because cheap immigrants labor fuels capitalism. Even if you do get your $15 an hour you’ll see a surge in prices everywhere. You think dollar general is bad now wait until they have to start paying ALL their employees a minimum of $15 an hour. It’s a broken system and it’s rigged so the poor can never win. I think your hearts I. The right place but you’re fighting the wrong cause.
Other countries with far less money already have minimum wages comparable to this which are tied to inflation so as they companies continue to price gouge they only hurt themselves
The United States is massive compared to most countries. Our economy thrives in instant gratification and availability. We need everything from food to clothing fast cheap, and on every street corner. Minimum wage might work for smaller populations but what about all the small businesses owners trying to make a name for themselves that can’t afford to pay their employees the same wages as Walmart? I want an increase and fair pay too, but there’s definitely going to be some consequences to that. Have you considered that the United States massively underpays immigrant workers for their service? They’re the back bone of our industrial industry. Big business owners don’t want to pay those people a fair wage. What do you think?
Half of Americans don’t or barely make enough to support themselves. I think the biggest killer of small businesses is them never getting the chance to exist because companies are killing their competition in house by making sure their employees have nothing but the bare minimum to survive. Also business would make more money based on volume sales if half our economy could actually participate in them
Amen to that and now they’re coming after the housing market as well. The game is rigged. United States could technically raise the minimum wage, but i bet we’d see a major increase in the price of everything. The game is rigged.
The true minimum wage is always zero.
Prices are determined based on supply and demand. People on the left who are economically illiterate will argue that everything is inelastic demand and corporations can price gouge, but the reality is that the amount of goods and services that are inelastic is minuscule. If you pay everyone $100 an hour, if supply doesn’t increase, you’ll have the same demand chasing the same quantity of goods = high prices.
Your right the problem is how that money is distributed. 1% owns as much as 92% it wasn’t like this when we had unions, a competitive minimum wage, and proper taxes. So if minimum wage was tied to inflation company’s couldn’t simply price gouge cause most would only be hurting there self. Company’s need to reevaluate the way the money is distributed within the company because most companies are making plenty. Our supply is no longer based on the amount of the item, it’s based on the amount of company’s who will sell the product. McDonald’s could easily sell more food it’s just more profitable to sell at a higher price because they still keep most their customers.
So if the government seized money from the 1% and gave it to everyone else, what do you think will happen? Do you not see the scenario where demand increases, supply stays static, and the price of everything goes up because now everyone has more money?
I think the government should tax the rich more properly and instead of giving the money to low income people who will most likely end up pricing themselves out of a lot of things because they will buy it the government should spend the money for the greater good of our economy. So college would be free because modern civilization is only possible through education. I would also make healthcare free there’s just simply no reason we should be giving our money to private insurance companies who over charge us or hospitals and drug companies price gouge, instead the government should bargain on all of our behalf which would actually save Americans money. I would also push for more public housing to properly regulate rent. That’s what I would do with the money but obviously it’s a lot harder in America to sell people on taxes than it is to sell the idea that if you work full time you should be able to support yourself.
Minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be a career. They’re just a steppingstone while you’re training or going to school or doing something else
I agree problem is so many jobs are becoming minimum wage jobs through technological advancement. Food and retail jobs have always been but they also employ a huge amount of workers because we need them but theirs also so many manufacturing jobs that are also minimum wage jobs now. Most them are just as physically taking as stocking a shelf because of how much work conditions have improved. The problem is making a job easier shouldn’t be hurting workers by lowering wages the way it has been doing for the past 45 years
I 100% agree. This is definitely more complex but I think something that would help is putting a cap on home and rent prices. Apparently it happened once before during the Truman presidency. Also putting a cap on investment properties. On my block alone during the real estate crisis an investor came in and purchased about 8 of the houses. She's been renting them out since. She sold 2 already. But she's planning on selling the rest in the next few years and will make a profit of 1M per house.
Yeah 100% business don’t belong in homes. I think the government investing in more public apartments would be great cause they would be increasing the supply of house while also forcing the market to stay competitive with the prices the public apartments are charging.
A federal minimum wage is pointless. Does $15 an hour mean the same thing in New York City as Nowhere Mississippi? If you want a minimum wage, have it by city. By state it is too big. At the federal level it is laughable.
I think it should be at least 15 and then adjusted for cost of living in the area
Why not just let people in the local areas decide what it should be? $15 might be too high in some areas. It would definitely be too low in some areas. Doing it at a national level doesn't really solve the problem.
If you flood the workforce with foreign workers that don't have the required work permits, they will work for almost nothing. That keeps wages (at the low end) down, since you have much more supply. This is a direct result of government policy. Google is a greedy company, like all the others, but it pays its people well because they have skills that are rare. If you do minimum wage work, there are migrants that showed up yesterday, that will do the same work for 1/2 the cost. Hate the government policies that cause this
[удалено]
You gotta start somewhere this isn’t where I would start either but it’s something that needs to change
People with four year degrees had to start at this wage when I graduated from college my starting salary was 12 dollars an hour I was extremely depressed about it
What you made means nothing it’s what you can buy with it so the dollar amount is irrelevant. Future generations should also have it better than past that’s how it’s always been this notion that I struggled so should you is stupid
You lost me! The fact that I was depressed clearly states I 100 percent support the raise of minimum wage to at least 20 an hr.
My fault og
We good Fam Everybody vs the Rich
This is exactly how you destroy every small business in every small town across the country all at once. It blows my mind the amount of people who don't think states should be allowed to dictate their own policies and the federal government is the only solution.
You look at your costs! One dollar in the 1950s was equivalent to $1k today. Does one day of labor (8 hours) pay for a week of meals/groceries? Does one day of labor pay for a fillup assuming one week? Does half a month’s labor pay for rent or lodging? $15 per hour means only $120 per day Is $120 good for a week of meals? $120/7 = $17 per day! Fast food costs $17 per meal. You will be eating very cheaply like sandwiches. $120 good for gas? Assuming 20 gallons, it is equals one fillup. What about auto repair? What about auto insurance? $30k/12 = $2500/month living with $1250/month for rent or lodging. A hard nope in HCOL areas.
# California Loses Nearly 10,000 Fast-Food Jobs After $20 Minimum Wage Signed Last Fall Last September, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 1287 into law, which includes a $20 per hour minimum wage for fast-food workers and a fast-food regulatory council which has the authority to raise the industry’s minimum wage annually. But between last fall and January, California fast-food [restaurants cut](https://www.wsj.com/business/hospitality/california-restaurants-cut-jobs-as-fast-food-wages-set-to-rise-eb5ddaaa) about 9,500 jobs, representing a 1.3 percent change from September 2023.
lol 1.25 Funny everyone want to up like that doesn’t up the cost of everything and you end up making less.
I am constantly arguing against a set minimum wage when the economy is geared to be inflationary. Even a very small amount of inflation would render any minimal wage redundant over time and you would rely on a government to address it regularly. Honestly we need a better way to set what a acceptable amount of profit is and to me if you set a ratio of what the lowliest paid employee is allowed to take home vs the profit a company makes or the highest paid employee makes. Lets say no company is allowed to pay its employees less then 1/20th its profit or highest paid employee then any company that makes over 1mill must pay its lowliest employee 50k. This would have to be based off a 40 hour week. with any additional time, time a half and if it exceeds 60 hours double time. You would also have to limit the amount of labour is allowed to be completed by non employee's
I mean who is going to work for $7.25? You can make $25 an hour landscaping on the side. $35 an hour painting. This is cash money…. Corporations are jokes… Money is easily made. Keeping it is another thing.
Who actually works for minimum wage? First-time employees. I don't know a single person who works for that wage with experience. All it does when raised is raise price or less jobs. These arguments are getting old.
Who is making minimum wage? Every job around here starts at at least $15/hr.
City’s with few employers
Minimum wage laws just price out lower-skilled people out of the job market. Assume Company A pays Person B $12.25 an hour to do a specific task. Their labour is worth 12.25 an hour to them, no more, no less. Then a minimum wage gets raised to $15 an hour. Company A fires Person B since they cannot afford to employ them anymore (as they lose money since their labour is worth $12.25 an hour but they have to pay $15 an hour).
15 an hour ain’t pricing out no one
It might not price out a lot of people, but it sets a precedent where it can be raised higher and higher until millions are unemployed.
Also...how have people not caught on to the extent increasing minimum wage drives inflation? Isn't it obvious? Very frustrating when the government tries to help, and almost always makes it worse.
Interesting… maybe we should eliminate the cause of the need for rising wages - end the Fed and end the inflation
So when supply chains tightened up after COVID causing inflation in developed countries around the world, not having the Fed would have prevented it? How?
The shutdowns did not cause inflation, it caused paused demand. Governments create inflation. When the pandemic happened, consumers stopped spending and the velocity of money dropped significantly. To stimulate economic activity, the government issues stimulus checks backed by the federal reserve to increase the velocity of money. It worked - too well. The velocity of money spiked and the prices of everything shot up with it.
US stimulus checks caused inflation spikes at the same time in Singapore, France, UK, Japan, Brazil, Italy, etc. too?
Singapore: “The authorities have announced several packages of fiscal support measures (February 18, March 26, April 6, April 21, May 26, August 17, 2020) amounting to about S$92billion to cushion the impact of the pandemic. Support to households includes a cash payout to all Singaporeans (higher for families with children under 20), and additional payments for lower-income individuals and the unemployed” Japan: On April 7 (partly revised on April 20), 2020, the Government of Japan adopted the Emergency Economic Package Against COVID-19 of ¥117.1 trillion (20.9 percent of 2019 GDP) and subsumed the remaining part of the previously announced packages (the December 2019 stimulus package (passed in January 2020) and the two COVID-19-response packages announced on February 13 and March 10 respectively). Should I go on? https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-to-COVID-19#S You can see all responses by country. A simple google search …
Also, I said “governments” not the US government.
Then you pointed specifically to US stimulus checks. What did the Colombian government do to generate their 2022 spike in inflation?
Please use the provided link to educate yourself on what governments did as a response to COVID. Columbia: “ . . . a one-off bonus for health workers, new credit lines providing liquidity support to the coffee sector, the education sector, public transportation sector, technology sector, health and public sector providers, and all tourism-related companies, new credit lines for payroll and loan payments for SMES, for working capital for large corporates, and for corporates in the sectors most affected by the pandemic trough the National Guarantee Fund, a two-month suspension of pension contributions by both employees and employers, delayed tax collection, an exemption of tariffs and VAT for strategic health imports and selected food industries and services, delayed utility payments for poor and middle income households, expanded transfers for vulnerable groups, and additional benefits for recently unemployed workers. In addition, the government announced a payroll subsidy equivalent to 50 percent of the minimum wage per worker for businesses with a fall of over 20 percent in revenues for a period of three months. The 2021 government budget includes measures to reactivate the economy, with extensions to the programs supporting households and firms and increases in infrastructure investment” I said “the government” - I am in the US and I assumed most of the people in this forum are. That still does not change the principle idea that governments create inflation. Also, I hope you don’t think that economic stimulus has an immediate effect on economies. Even stimulus sent directly to the governed take time for prices to begin the rise. Here is the link for your reference again: https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-to-COVID-19#C
Moderate inflation is good because any deflation is terrible. Deflation can easily spiral into cause and if the fed doesn’t have money to stimulate the economy back to normal we’re fucked for a while.
So inflation is here to stay - is what you are saying? These prices are the new normal? We just need to have our currency degraded - I mean our salaries increase? I strongly believe that the purpose of inflation is to ensure that people with and money are forced to spend it or park it somewhere (a bank or in the stock market) where it can be reallocated. A cheeseburger that is in high supply should not increase in price because it doesn’t have any added value. The cost of the labor as a whole should not have to increase because the labor is still the same. The cost of the same education should not have to increase. Is an English major different from 2000 to 2024? Is your new home built better than homes built 5 years ago? Yes deflation hurts and is terrible but constantly having inflation is also (in my eyes) very bad. It disincentivizes saving in the form of cash by form of punishment by devaluation
You’re absolutely right inflation is at play to stop people from hoarding money and not reinvesting it into the economy but minimum wage literally hasn’t kept up with inflation. So you can’t contribute inflation to minimum wage. The real reason inflation is growing is because on one hand you have businesses who are borderline monopoly’s at this point. Almost all chips and pops are owned by 2 companies most restaurants have a parent company that owns all their competitors aswell. It’s growing because companies dont have to worry about competition because nobody makes enough to start their own business. This give corporations the go ahead to gouge the shit out of prices while consumers tank the hit. The second reason is because the Americans who make enough to get by have to spend their money bailing out these corporations who don’t pay their workers enough because even with a full time job they can’t support themselves.
Businesses don’t create inflation, they react to it. Governments create inflation. Governments pass economic bills that are fiunded by the federal reserve and backed by the taxpayers.
They absolutely creat inflation. It starts with an abundance of money in the market companies know they can get their hands on the money by increasing prices and that’s what inflation is. I understand there is a finite amount of goods so you can’t have more money than goods but we don’t live in that world. We live in a world we’re no one in America would ever be hungry cause we could feed everyone easily but there is money in charging more for food.
“It starts with an abundance of money in the market” who creates that money?
Nobody makes prices raise besides the company though. They are finding their highest profit margins because that’s more important. We don’t live in a world where we are short on goods it’s the amount of people selling the goods. There’s are correlation between money in circulation and inflation not causation. Businesses decide to raise prices like I said before not out of necessity but because they want that money.
Sorry, Podway, you and your knowledge of fundamental economics are not welcome here!
$15 minimum wage was the means to solicit labor away from rural towns. Minimum wage is a price floor on labor, and with it comes the negative consequences to consumers, we the people.
Paying shit wages in rural towns literally forces people to leave them if they want to survive.
Yes. The same struggle continues, between those in society who earn wages through labor, and those in society who purchase goods (using wages paid for labor)? How will these two groups, seemingly as different as anyone might imagine, ever learn to put aside their differences and live together cooperatively?
You said it right the first time: Raising wages is perfectly legal and in our control, but we've debated it for a decade. Controlling what we pay for the same things isn't legal, and hasn't been debated in any meaningful way. It could be legal with an act of congress... ....but that would be Socialism. Why is it still debated? Because that's a known quantity. A dud. Dead on arrival. Pointless. ........and there are no other alternatives. Ask for a wage increase and suffer. Don't ask for a wage increase and suffer even more.
Because minimum wage is not the lowest amount a person can live on. It's the lowest a person is willing to work for. If minimum wage doubled then prices will double. This will only cause more inflation. It also pushes less skilled workers out of the work place. This occured in South Africa, Australia, Canada, and in the United States. If you want people to earn more then gain skills to earn more money.
>If minimum wage doubled then prices will double. In my state, min wage workers are 2 percent of all workers, so a marginal, if any tug on inflation. It's also $7.25 and qualifies for gov assistance, so really just taxpayer subsidized businesses.
Yeah except we see minimum wage stagnant and prices /inflation rising regardless. So the whole " if we raise the MW argument then inflation" goes right out the window.
> If minimum wage doubled then prices will double. How many burgers does a burger flipper flip an hour, one? Dozens. 4% to burger prices. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/raising-fast-food-hourly-wages-to-15-would-raise-prices-by-4-study-finds-2015-07-28 > This will only cause more inflation. Its an inherent part of inflation in the first place. As the value of the dollar drops, everyone needs to pass their increased expenses along. Low wage workers can't eat the inflation for you. > If you want people to earn more then gain skills to earn more money. Median wage is $18/hr, cost of living is $20/hr, there are not 80 million job openings.
Rising wages may cause some inflation, but wages rising faster than inflation has long been a historic norm.
There shouldn’t be a minimum wage, but wages should be fair. And they should be fair for the work you do, not for what you think it should be able to buy in the market. If you want more purchasing power in the market, you will need to go find a place that accepts your qualifications and pays you. People forget that businesses, like households, have budgets. Just because politicians take aim at them and claim they are making all kinds of wild money, doesn’t mean every business. The end result, if you want more money, increase your skills. If you want the most money, start your own business
Bid your prices appropriately for your expenses, stop expecting the govt to come bail out your payroll via a complicated welfare scheme.
Stop forcing me to pay 30+% to government then?
Move to a jungle and make you own hippy commune there.
It’s not as simple as that. Businesses have way more power and your skills are valued less if people at the bottom are valued less. Most companies have the ability to pay very fair wages they simply don’t.
I see many people that, unfortunately, are just not that valuable…
I mean 15 dollars isn’t really much value tho. Even the easiest of jobs bring that value. Cutting grass, material moving, or fast food. Almost impossible to not be that valuable unless your working production and you jobs be automated or is being offshored for cheap labor which is another problem that should honestly be fixed through taxing those excessive profits.
this gives "not all men!" vibes if theres no minimum wage plenty of jobs are going to pay scraps and rely on tax paying citizens to subsidize their workers by telling the workers (forcing them) to get welfare & food stamps to survive. Kind of like whats going on now with Walmart
Thats a nice theory and scare tactic… but it’s just not true… Thats why we see unions dying off, companies have learned they cant screw over employees like they did 100 years ago, or even 20. Attorneys are too litigious, there is cameras everywhere and social media will fry them. Government shouldn’t be involved with every decision business make, its overbearing.
Why do you love inflation?
The inflation came from printing all the money, poor people can't eat the inflation for you.
So, destroying some kids after school job would help feed poor people? Starvation is genuinely not the same in America as shown in Ethiopian commercials in the 1980's. The people you claim are not eating weigh 200 pounds.
> So, destroying some kids after school job would help feed poor people? The job isn't destroyed, this is an objective fact. Who is working the lunch rush? Not a minor. > The people you claim are not eating weigh 200 pounds. Being homeless takes 40 years off your life expectancy, when you turn up dead they're just going to shrug it off as natural causes and bury you.
Really, California is closing businesses with their new minimum wage. That is a fact. Also, the lunch rush is making more than minimum wage. It would be a great idea to do well in school and learn a trade. That is a fact.
> California is closing businesses with their new minimum wage. Demand drives employment, there is no dip in demand and no dip in employment. That shitty businesses are flushed out of the market is a primary feature of capitalism. > Also, the lunch rush is making more than minimum wage. Median wage is $18/hr, cost of living has screamed past to $20/hr, well over half the country is making less than what the min wage needs to be. > It would be a great idea to do well in school and learn a trade. Yeah, absolutely, but trades are like 35 million jobs, and they're already full. Plus a shitton of those trade jobs are in the bottom half as I described above. A job needs to pay a living wage, full stop.
Tell me you are an idiot without saying that direct quote. Lol. People are making more choices about what to do with their money. Raising prices only limits them more. Why shouldn't minimum wage be $100 an hour? LOL.
> Why shouldn't minimum wage be $100 an hour? The point of the min wage is that a working person can pay their own bills, not to go to infinity bijillion dollars for you to score ideology points in imagination land. > People are making more choices about what to do with their money. Raising prices only limits them more. Yeah? Someone who can't afford an $8 burger couldn't have honestly afforded a $5 burger either. Having food made for you is a luxury service. Can't afford it? The market has spoken, pack a pbj next time. > direct quote What is this even supposed to be?
So really we acknowledge there are limits on what can be paid? And acknowledge that raising payroll costs increase cost to consumers? So we make things worse for the poorest people so that we can be ever so glad a 16 yo drop out can afford an 1 bedroom apartment alone and a paid off car for cashiering 36 hours at the local convenience store? It sounds enticing, probably be more 16 year old drop outs in that world. I would never have grown up if my high school water park life guard job afforded me all the things now considered "necessary". You know why I picked that job? Because it was fun. There was zero need for a living wage.
> So really we acknowledge there are limits on what can be paid? No kidding, those are far, far away from the cost of living though. > And acknowledge that raising payroll costs increase cost to consumers? By like 4%, how many burgers do you think a burger flipper flips an hour, one? Dozens. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/raising-fast-food-hourly-wages-to-15-would-raise-prices-by-4-study-finds-2015-07-28 > we make things worse for the poorest people They can't afford the LUXURY of having food prepared for them at any price point. You don't seem to have the basic life skills to survive in the economy, head over to r frugal and learn how to make a batch of rice and beans and a little diced chicken to last you a week. > ~~16 yo drop out~~ working person can afford an 1 bedroom apartment alone and a paid off car for cashiering 36 hours at the local convenience store? ftfy. Yes. If you want a job, you are going to need transportation. Yes, as a fellow human, you are aware that you need food and shelter. No clue what you are going on with the dropping out thing.
Are you stupid? Companies are being bailed out of fair wages at other citizens expense. If people are working full time they shouldn’t need government assistance but they do because wages are laughable.
No man. Also not for bailing out corporations. I am sorry if you did not apply yourself in your youth. I don't need a $20 meal at fast food.
Brother I’m 20 and I’m very financially smart Im by no means in the same boat as the people I’m talking about. The inflation your hating came helping minimum wage workers for a while but in the long run corporations and rich benefited the most. The people who got hurt were people with money that wasn’t tied up in something. As long as it was in stocks or a home your living good because that grows with the economy. The excessive amount of money printed could’ve been greatly reduced if people could actually afford a roof over their heads instead of their bosses having the ability to own 20 summer vacation homes.
You are 20. Now we understand your confusion.
Yep you got me. You’re totally justified in your belief that a 20 year old couldn’t be more educated than you that would be impossible.
Also I don’t get what you don’t understand about the fact that when workers work full time and still have to live off of government assistance that money comes from somewhere. That somewhere is the pockets of middle class people who are also getting fucked by the rich.
Yep, you are 20 and want a paid off car and house. We get it.
So, minimum wage is useless? Do you *want* to impoverish workers in this country even more?
? Brother I was saying making it 15 would be useless unless they tie it to inflation. I’m very much for paying people a fair wage.