$600 a week in unemployment benefits. This can't continue like this.

Just answer my question if 40% of the workers make $15 bucks an hour or less , I assume you want them all to make minimum wage of $15 bucks an hour, surely the $15 dollar an hour worker today won't get a $8 dollar an hour raise to $23 an hour

 

No.

 

On the contrary, some preliminary studies have been done - and they show that working and middle class people are putting as much of that money aside as they can. It's only the welfare class which is spending it all.

Speaking now only of the working classes - if you were living on $500pw while working, but are now getting $600pw, you can put aside $100pw towards an uncertain future. Who sort of person doesn't do that? Who would take that extra $100 and spent it on good times and new shoes in times like these? Someone who clearly doesn't need the money!

 

It's not their responsibility, so why would they? Each of us are responsible for ourselves (and our family).

 

Awww. I wanted to believe

 

It's ironic...100% of the cost of labor in a business is passed directly to the consumer in the price of goods and services. In theory, it does not matter to business how much the labor costs as long as the consumer will continue to buy their inflated goods and services. However, the consumer typically is slow or refuses to accept too much inflation and it's this balancing act that ultimately determines wages. Here in CA we have been presented with Prop 15 which basically wants to greatly increase property taxes for business...and yes this can be done...but again 100% of the cost of doing business, including higher property taxes, will be passed to the consumer in higher prices of goods and services. If the consumer refuses to pay higher prices, businesses either greatly scale back and/or close the doors...

 

Yes they will...over time as the dust settles...the entire hourly wage scale will increase relative to the MW increase. Imagine an employee who has worked for 2-3 years, gained knowledge and skills, etc. and is earning $15/hour, then starting tomorrow new and current employees with zero tenure and no gained knowledge and skills, etc. will also be paid $15/hour?

Ironic is after the dust does settle, when all wages have been adjusted upward, and the inflation, those earning the minimum wage of $15/hour will still be at the bottom rung of wages and will have the same issues they have today...

 

"In theory", sure. But in reality, we see small business owners saying they cannot stay in business if the minimum wage is raised to $15/hour. They can't pass it on to consumers. And I'd much rather talk reality than meaningless theoretical happy-talk.

 

This is precisely what I said!

 

I hear the same Argument from the same old guys day in and day out going back to 1985. We have gone from a country THEN where one job supported a whole family, their vacations, their vehicles and insurance, College for 3 kids. That is what a factory job at GM, or Chrysler would do in Delaware at the time. I know it for fact.
Now, that Job has been moved to Alabama, or Mississippi, or god forbid Mexico. That same job in Mississippi would pay 24 - 30/hr. That was a great living wage in 1990. Not today, today it pays the bills, that's it, food, electric, phone, house and insurance. And your house had better be meager.

So, "THAT GUY" says we need NOT raise min. wage. the argument is always the same. Then McDonald will raise the price of a Big Mac from 6$ to 10$ to make up the difference. No, they wont, because they wont sell big macs.

It all matters and the normal GUY wants to act smart and have an OPINION as if he knows what he is talking about. Ask that same guy, How much is inflation and what has it been for 20 years. He turns right to CPI and says 1-2%. Wow, how brilliant, you copy and paste what the FED tells you too. Real Inflation has ran close to 7% Year over year for 30 years. If you made 15/hr back then, today you should make 52/hr.

It really is that simple. But these are the same guys who WANTED China goods in the 80s, now they stand against it. WHY you might ask ? Because they are taught to follow like a lamb. They follow the preaching of the RW think tank, it's mass media propagnada networks, both on the right and on the left.

Now, it does not matter if they raise the min. wage, but to be a worker making 20/hr and stand AGAINST it is ridiculous. I have a strong feeling many posting that raising the min wage is a bad idea are PAID to do so. You have to remember, there are 50+ think tanks, with Billions of dollars in Propaganda media rolling around to sway your opinion. It is not 1970 anymore. That was a good time, the regulations and tax on the rich worked. How Ironic is it that people today are riding around in vehicles that are 20 years old and cheer to HELP THE RICH and PUNISH the poor with lower wages.

Lets face it, they are just gullible, misinformed, and believe that mis/disinformation. As Forrest Gumps mom would say... Stupid is....

 

You are correct. Yet, if we do NOT tax the Mega rich, and force LABOR pay rate laws on him as were in place from the 1940s - 1985 it will matter not. I really don't think we can save America anyway, the ELITE businessman, the FED, and Politicians going back to Reagan / Art Laffer gave it all away. At the time, it was one small move to bump the economy. Bush never put it back, we never tariffed China and Mexico, we didnt force Biotechs. to comply with reality. We didn't tax the rich to make up for the loses in wages and now we just borrow to make up the difference. All of it is unsustainable and America, its people, its infrastructure are going to pay for it in a bad way.

I have been preaching to my kid and her boyfriend "get out of here while you can" Take what I give you and establish somewhere that regulation, tax, and finance are still as they were in America during the 40s - 80s. The Globalists deregulated for themselves and regulated at local level around the country destrying the ability of the small guy to grow. Nothing is impossible, but try competing with Amazon, Google, or even Walmart and watch what happens. It isnt good for the country which means it isn't good for its people.

 

Well...just to touch on a few points; First, the cost of doing business and the cost of living in the USA has increased so much that working and living are almost not viable. Sure most everyone can find a place to live and a job but most live pay check to pay check. Second, with tremendous population growth today we have a surplus of workers who are unskilled to lower skilled...a surplus of labor means lower labor wages. Third, we operate in a global economy today meaning businesses can source labor and materials and locate facilities anywhere in the world that makes sense...this also means the US is competing with the world regarding the cost of doing business. Fourth, many Americans don't possess the education and skills for higher paying jobs and it doesn't appear this trend is changing. Fifth, who pays tariffs? Not China or Mexico? The party who is buying imports pays the tariffs! This means US companies buying imports are paying the tariffs and all this does is lower profits and increase consumer prices.

Lastly, you are not going to 'force' anything on anyone and especially the rich because they have the aptitude and options and resources to make course changes as needed. The Laffer Curve states that as you force higher and higher taxes on people they will find ways to pay less and less taxes! People proclaim the wealthy need to pay their fair share of taxes but why not demand that ALL Americans pay their fair share of taxes? Why is it always about raising taxes...why not talk about greatly lowering the costs of all government levels?

 

No it won't, where would they get the money??? That's what people don't understand about profit margins they can't pay a $15 dollar today worker $23 bucks tomorrow.

 

My point was 'if' you increase wages for the bottom 30-40 million American workers, there must be some upward ripple effect to all other wage earners. This will cause horrific inflation and threaten the viability of many businesses. In cases where employers need to reduce expenses it probably means a reduction in the workforce. Like I said; in theory a business does not care what labor rates are as long as the consumer continues to accept inflated prices on goods and services.

I don't agree with a national minimum wage because every location has a different cost of living. Those living in San Francisco need $50/hour while those living in Mayberry RFD might get by on $10/hour?

 

This could be solved if we had a government that is, in fact, of the people, by the people, and for the people. Imagine a new law that says the minimum wage is $15/hour and it is pegged to the change in the wealth and income of the top 1%. That would stop the insane growth in income disparity fast!

Then we could tie congressional salaries to the median income. All these excesses could be reined in. But the problem is that our insane economy requires an annual 2.5-3% growth in order to be considered "healthy". And such rates of growth are not sustainable. We are seeing that now.

 

Have you ever wondered why it is that the Scandinavian countries don't have this problem to the extent we do?

That's why the national MW is lower than so many state and city minimum wage rates. They're free to increase the MW to correct for that problem.

 

Is it because they are all white and you can walk across those countries in less than a day?

 

I suppose the first step might be to explain why we need a MW? What is it's actual purpose? Once we can understand 'why' then we must decide 'what' the MW should be? And how should a MW be applied...nationally or state or local?

I think the idea of a MW goes back to Depression times to provide some standardization and to prevent employers from taking advantage of workers. Some people today say it should be about a living wage but this is a separate can of worms to define. I agree if there is a MW it should somehow be tied to some inflationary index...but the problem here is sometimes this might equate to zero or even a reduction in the MW. A national MW makes no sense to me because every zip code has a different cost of living. Congressional salaries have nothing to do with MW? I believe MW only effects 1 to 1.5 million Americans and it depends on their locations and cost of living what MW should be. Being a business person myself I don't like the idea of government telling me how much to pay for labor...I believe supply and demand of labor works well to determine compensation.

MW is a complex issue...not as simple as feeling bad for low pay workers and just demanding increased wages...

 

FYI the minimum wage laws in the USA and across the world was made because of racism, to prevent blacks, browns and reds from undercutting the white man

 

Scandinavian countries are not the USA! Fact is in the USA we have a surplus of unskilled and lower skilled labor...this means lower wages.

If you want local governments to compensate MW for higher cost of living issues, then any national MW should be set based on the lowest cost of living area in the USA. In this case $7.25/hour is probably okay...then all other locations can factor this to relate to the local cost of living...