What Should the Minimum Wage Be (USA)?

by Village Idiot 66 Replies latest social current

• 

  scary21

  I believe in Capitalism. What the market will bear The problem is it must be on a level playing field. The Wal-Mart by me is hiring, starting at $9.00 an hour. So I guess if that's the best you can do, I would get a room mate because you will not be able to carry the whole load on your own.( A dump in the USA would be middle class in Europe) And please don't have a lot of kids.
  

  The problem with too high of a minimum wage, it cuts many out of the workforce. The nice kid who is a little slow. He is just not worth it. People just entering the work force that can't compete with an experienced older person.
  

  The person who is really really good but you can't pay him more because you have to pay the average guy the same and he really is not worth $15.00. So the really really good one is getting screwed. Maybe the average one is a $10.00 hour worker and the really really good one should be paid $20.00 per hour. People lose their motivation !

  You don't want it to be that people are punished for doing the right thing and rewarded for doing the wrong thing. I can think of so many cases where that is happening. In a truly free market, things would work out better..
• 

  Village Idiot

  These laws are in fact beneficial to those workers who continue to be employed—those who are on the inside looking out, but at the expense of the unemployed who are on the outside looking in."

  That could be used to rationalize no minimum wage the result of which being that the unemployed may be employed while living out of his car (if any).

  I come back to the following thought: Isn't using minimum wage to ensure a specific lifestyle a form of social engineering? Is social engineering a good idea?

  Equating it with a loaded phrase like "social engineering" is an attempt to thwart the necessity of having enough money to sustain you. I've been talking about basic rent and food.
• 

  Village Idiot

  scary21: A dump in the USA would be middle class in Europe

  Not really.
• 

  slimboyfat

  How should the minimum wage be determined? Find out what the highest possible figure is that conservative politicians will agree to and double it. If they allow the level to be set at $7.50 then $15 should be about right.
• 

  Saintbertholdt

  Equating it with a loaded phrase like "social engineering" is an attempt to thwart the necessity of having enough money to sustain you. I've been talking about basic rent and food.

  So if you think that I'm using loaded language with Social Engineering, I'll abandon it.I do think it has merit though: LoveUniHateExams pointed to the United Kingdoms situation. If you look at the politics and economics of the UK in the 1970s and 80s it is a good example of social engineering by the left and the right, with its advantages and its foibles.
  

  Ok let me put it another way: What is the real minimum wage? Zero. Irrespective of minimum wage laws. If you're not working you're earning the real minimum wage, which is nothing. Which is worse: Living out of your car or living out of a cardboard box?

  That could be used to rationalize no minimum wage the result of which being that the unemployed may be employed while living out of his car (if any).

  True. Its my concern as well. I have to point out though that our concern is actually not borne out by the facts.

  From the text again: "Europe’s unemployment rates shot up when such government-mandated benefits to be paid for by employers grew sharply during the 1980s and 1990s. In Germany, such benefits accounted for half of the average labor cost per hour. By comparison, such benefits accounted for less than one-fourth the average labor costs per hour in Japan and the United States. Average hourly compensation of manufacturing employees in the European Union countries in general is higher than in the United States or Japan. So is unemployment."

  So what does one want then? Low unemployment or a better quality of life for those employed?

  It seems that you cannot have both, unless I am mistaken.
• 

  pepperheart

  scary21 talking about walmart if you go on to the worlds richest people 10 ten list 3 of the people there are part of the walmart family and they are worth billions of dollers each anf if you added all their money up they would be richer than bill gates.they have the same problem as lots of rich people do because they are so greedy and have such sad lives they NEVER have enough and are never happy.Nobody needs more than a billion dollars and once you have got a luxery house and a few luxery cars and go on vactions every month but lots of people fall into the money trap
  
• 

  talesin

  Medicine for profit - and we call ourselves civilized? - why is medicine without profit civilized? You're gonna have to expand on this point.

  This would depend on personal POV. If you feel that the bottom line (ie, profits) are more important than easing pain and suffering, then for-profit medicine is civilized. If you believe that relieving suffering and saving lives is more important than the bottom line, then it is not.

  The issue is complex. It's not a simple business. None of these problems are simplistic, which is why the debate can be endless.

  When you realize that most of the expensive medical research is funded by *drum roll please* the public purse, and then handed over to big pharma for final trials - oh, and to reap billions in profit, you may get a bit miffed.
  

  When you realize that a box of tissue sold to a hospital costs 5 times as much as the higher quality box of tissue you purchase at the department store, you may rethink that 'for-profit' thing a little bit.

  We NEED hospitals, we NEED drugs - these things are over-priced, and billions of dollars go from OUR pockets into the pockets of big business. Why? Because people will pay ANYTHING to save their child's/wife's/parent's life - to ease their pain, etc.
  
  But that matters not - it's all about supply and demand. And that's okay, because we are capitalists! And the bottom line is all that matters.

  We can go on and on about "other" cultures, and how barbaric they are, yet care not that millions in our own countries live in horrible conditions of pain and suffering. That woman has diabetes and can't afford her insulin? Tough - get a second job and stop whining. Okay, whatever. (BTW, had a friend in FLA in that position - late 30s, lost a couple of toes because she couldn't afford her insulin injections, and can tell many more stories like that) So yeah, I think it's uncivilized.

  But like I said, that is my personal opinion. No empirical studies, just anecdotal experiences. : ))
• 

  barry

  I believe you have to look at the minimum wage question like this.

  If minimum wage workers are paid more then the work they do has to be passed on to what they produce weather it be grocery produce, clothes, cleaning or factory produce.

  Imagine if higher paid workers have to pay a bit more for the above items or services wages are only part of the cost of them.

  Countries other than the US do this and are very successful in providing a working wage for all. Just like communism.

  There is a problem with this approach in that it will make a country less competitive and some may loose their jobs from lack of exports and an increase of imports. Some economic sectors will not be effected such as the tourist sector because their jobs can't be exported .

  There is no point in competing with say China on wages each country should compete on their natural advantage.

  I'm not an economist just my thoughts.
• 

  Berengaria

  First, I apologize for not reading past page one. Second, why not include references when making assertions? Who simply accepts arguments without supporting data?
• 

  scary21

  And who decides enough is enough ? Just throw them all in the Gulag...lol (Wal-Mart heirs)
  

  There are stock holders that own 46%. They are going to be upset and sell if there are no profits . If the cost of business increases, profits fall. Therefore people will not invest because ROI (return on investment) will decrease and jobs will lost or not created. Is that the economy you would like to have?
  

  Now it would be nice if they made a DONATION to all their employees out of their 54%

  2,200,000, workers worldwide

  $1.00 per hour x 18 hour a week x 50 (2 weeks vacation)= 26,000,000,000

  That would still leave them 120,000,000,000

  36 hours a week x 50= 52,000,000,000

  That would leave them 94,000,000,000........... Now after a few generations die off and they now have grown into 94 people they would fit into pepperhearts cap of 1,000,000,000 per person. .....lol kidding You can't regulate greed and I have no idea how much they give away to charities .