American Wages, the Minimum Wage and Income Brackets

Depends on tax policy.
Depends on buying power after inflation...

 

Exactly (my bold). It's not what you earn, it's what you spend. A minimum wage will work IF you curtail all spending other than the bare essentials, and keep it up for as many years as needed.

That some people are not prepared to do what it takes is utterly irrelevant. That's the reality, take it or leave it. But if you leave it, you'd better not complain about the consequences. Or rather - you can complain all you like, but only the morally bankrupt will listen.

 

structural unemployment is natural. the least efficient firms are supposed to fail under capitalism.

 

we are referring to the minimum wage not the maximum wage.

 

Dear @LafayetteBis
You already do, mix your beliefs with your economics.
Most people do project their beliefs into everything else.
The issue is whether we try to impose this on others
or let everyone have free choice to pursue as they believe.

By your quote "No doubt, but that will take a very willful American public to stop the Replicant Party that steadfastly refuses to enhance the Minimum Wage nationally" that SHOWS people are already taking beliefs and mixing that with economics.

Conservatives BELIEVE in free market economy.
Others may BELIEVE in socialistic economy, which can mean either
varying govt controls, regulations or literal ownership etc.
Some believe in voting "by majority rule" on how much to authorize govt to regulate.

I believe in free enterprise and cooperative economics, where people AGREE what to vote on and what to leave to free choice, or how to work out solutions that include both ways. If people want to vote to change laws regulating commerce, labor and wages, I'm all for that as long as people AGREE to the policies being voted on, so policy is based on reforming programs effectively and not relying on politics to force things through by outnumbering and silencing the opposition. I believe the opposing issues should be resolved, not just voted out.

So this is where your beliefs may differ from mine, and if you keep insisting on deciding economic policy by your ways, that IS INJECTING YOUR BELIEFS INTO ECONOMICS. You are doing it too!

I DON'T BELIEVE in imposing BELIEFS against the consent of taxpayers who have the right to have objections to policies resolved first. I don't believe that majority rule or judicial ruling is adequate UNLESS the sides AGREE to that.
I believe in conflict resolution to address reasons for objections so that people
CAN arrive at consensus based policies, or they AGREE to what majority-rule
standards to use, or AGREE to separate funding on areas of conflict
while consenting to public funding for areas they agree on.

@LafayetteBis I find ALL people are injecting their beliefs and bias
into the political process, so why not be honest about that?
And treat all people of all beliefs and creeds equally as having
full rights to fund and follow the policies they ascribe to?
Without conflicting with anyone else who has equal rights to their own?

 

Oh, but the do! And they are also a religious people.

They just try hard not to mix the two. They've seen what is happening in the US, but even the Rabidly Right in Europe do not bring religion into the debate.

I don't know how you can say "most people" - not until you show me a study that says so. Then I will ask you how the study was conducted to assure that it was absolutely fair and equitable in doing so.

I am a firm believer that one should NEVER EVER mix political and religious beliefs.

Which is tantamount to treading into dangerous waters. Take a lesson from Europe that was plagued - after the fall of the Roman Empire - by religious wars between the Protestants and the Catholics and even the Muslims.

All of which took about 10 centuries* to be resolved and a WW2 that seems to have ended the feud. Let us hope ... !

*A French Catholic King decided to help American Protestants to free themselves from an Anglican King. Wow!

 

Why do you believe some people work for minimum wage?

 

Of course businesses compete with each other and those who cannot go out of business. But if/when society arbitrarily decides to force a wage increase in the private sector, some businesses cannot deal with the higher costs...

 

I was responding to MW comments...

 

look at it this way; why should labor care if Firms fail if they can Only make it on Cheap labor in our First World economy.

 

a simple cost of living adjustment; wages must outpace inflation, one way or another.

 

Then labor should sell itself to the public and cut out firms entirely. Sell their labor value and reap 100% of the profits, without the evil employer stealing any of their labor value. That's what labor should do.

 

we should have no homeless, if it were that easy.

 

Right. You and your ilk should be inviting them into your home. How many do you currently have staying with you?

 

Why not look at it this way; an employee has little loyalty to an employer and an employer has little loyalty to an employee. An employee can be fired or can resign in a moment's notice. Since this is the premise of most all jobs, in what way can you expect a great relationship? An employer is going to pay whatever wage is necessary to hire and sustain workers. An employee will jump ship if they perceive another job is more interesting. Unions exacerbate this relationship by demanding and forcing wage and benefit changes. Seems to me this entire relationship between employers and employees is adversarial at best. It is also misleading when people believe all businesses are profitable and cash strong...it's actually the opposite in many cases. Bottom line; jobs and employees and employers and wages are a complex topic and most everything within them is in some way intertwined...

 

This is impossible to achieve nation-wide since all geographic areas of the US present varying cost of living scenarios. You cannot have one MW policy that works in both SF and Mayberry RFD...

 

No idea. Why don't you ask them?

When I did it (while studying at night), it was because I had no qualifications.

 

right wing logic always works in right wing fantasy.

we should be upgrading infrastructure.

 

Solving for simple poverty for Labor on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

The least motivated will opt out and the more motivated will be more worth it.

 

there is an economic based reason why some places are less expensive, and more like the third world.

 

Well I asked you what 'you believe' so no need to 'ask them'?

I agree with your answer about MW...I did the same thing as part time work during high school and worked my way through college working odd jobs at night and weekends. At that time I did not earn enough to have a 'living wage' and barely made enough to pay for school and have some gas/food money. It would have been impossible for me to be married, have kids, and all the expenses, working for the lowest wages! The same applies to today...in cases in which people need more income, it is incumbent upon each person to take steps to increase their value in the workplace...

 

Dear @LafayetteBis
I can show you a case that doesn't require a published study
(thought your idea might be revealing and enlightening to pursue one):

Look at the fallout over the ACA mandates and laws passed by Congress under Obama.

1. the LIBERALS all proclaim this is constitutional
NOTE: I am one of the ONLY Democrats I have found arguing that ACA was unconstitutional on its face
and should never have been passed, much less enforced.

@LafayetteBis If you can find me ONE DEMOCRAT besides myself arguing
that ACA is unconstitutional, then that's two of us vs. all the other Democrats arguing it's the law.

Can you find me one?
Do we need to do a "study" to show this isn't 50/50?

Do you WANT to do a formal study to MEASURE how BAD the bias is,
if it's a thousand to one or a million to one?

2. CONSERVATIVES are the ones arguing the ACA was UNCONSTITUTIONAL
NOTE: There are more conservatives accepting the ACA as law by process,
in contrast to me being the ONLY progressive Democrat I know arguing it was unconstitutional.

Do you want to do a formal study on how many Conservatives
are divided on both sides of this argument?

I am guessing it would 75/25 to 60/40 depending how you ask the question.
Even Conservatives I argued with who started out agreeing it was constitutional,
changed their mind and started waffling or finally agreeing with me it wasn't!

So the 50/50 or 60/40 could actually be closer to 75/25 arguing it is unconstitutional vs. constitutional among CONSERVATIVES.
(Among liberal progressive Greens and Democrats,
I am guessing it is 30/70 or greater disparity in bias if you
push people. If you just ask straight up, it's more 20/80 or 10/90 at most.
When I ask all I get are people saying it was constitutional and valid law,
so that's close to 100% bias with me being the only one saying it's
unconstitutional. And since people even count me out, I don't even count!)

Do you want to do a formal study on this?
I'm happy to ask professors at Rice and UH in Houston
to please help. I do believe there is a bias in belief,
and it isn't fair to impose public policy without addressing
and accommodating these beliefs as equal creeds people have a right to without discrimination or denial.

 

Be my guest!

I am happy enough in the Economics Forum. The subject is far more tangible ...

 

Do you know thw definition of poverty? Its just a low income within a geographical area. That's why poverty in Mexico is a different income than poverty in the US. People in so called poverty in america are still rich, on the global scale.

 

??? @LafayetteBis ???

^ If you are the one insisting on a study, shouldn't you be proactively involved?

I have found enough proof of people projecting biases,
but I thought YOU were the one who needed a formal study!

This isn't for MY sake, but for yours since you insisted!

Another example: Look at how people project their beliefs about
socialism vs. capitalism onto the policies they vote on, support or reject.

Do you agree (without having to do a formal study) that this
already shows people projecting their biased beliefs on economic policy???