Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What should the minimum wage be?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by MikeB View Post
    Anyway, any raise in the minimum wage would probably have to be done at a national level or else some companies would simply move to different cities or states were labor is cheaper.
    That last, isn't that pretty much the same reason why people weren't allowed to leave the Soviet Union? Because at some point, political and economic authoritarianism can't even pretend to appeal to people and you have to deny them the option of voting with their feet or they won't put up with it?

    I mean, if it was actually better for people, they wouldn't need to be forced to live under it.
    sigpic
    Banner by LRae12

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
      That last, isn't that pretty much the same reason why people weren't allowed to leave the Soviet Union? Because at some point, political and economic authoritarianism can't even pretend to appeal to people and you have to deny them the option of voting with their feet or they won't put up with it?

      I mean, if it was actually better for people, they wouldn't need to be forced to live under it.
      Companies aren't people. What is good for a human isn't the same as what is good for a business.

      Lydia made the punch!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Ehlwyen View Post
        Companies aren't people. What is good for a human isn't the same as what is good for a business.
        The legal personhood of corporate forms notwithstanding, companies are people, they are made up of people, they are tools and instruments of people in pursuit of their own goals and interest -- either as owners/operators/investors or as employees or as consumers. It's not the signs and fixtures at a Domino's Pizza franchise that are going to want to flee from a 50, 70, 100% jump in their payroll overhead, it's the people who have staked their livelihood to the success and longevity of that franchise.

        I don't think we'll see actual exodus from Seattle's city limits, for example -- too damn expensive for most small business owners, I'd guess, the prospect of having to get out of a lease and/or sell commercial property in the city and find good space outside it, then any licensing and regulatory compliance cost, moving expense; for many, they'll just have to eat the proverbial bratwurst with the higher wage or just fold up tent completely. But the welcome mat has been pulled in from small businesses from trying to set up shop there, more or less.
        sigpic
        Banner by LRae12

        Comment


        • #19
          http://io9.com/the-u-s-has-the-most-...lth-1591403515

          This is interesting. With all the supposed horror stories about the United Kingdom’s healthcare system, apparently it’s actually the best in the developed world. The UK’s ranking in “healthy lives” is probably attributed to the diets and maybe exercise habits of those in the UK compared to other countries.

          It seems government run and paid for healthcare is the best. And this is probably because hospitals even though legally not for profit are actually mostly run as for profit businesses.




          KingofCretins

          http://www.buffyforums.net/forums/sh...l=1#post695901

          I’m not sure what you are trying to say or imply.

          I mean, if it was actually better for people, they wouldn't need to be forced to live under it.
          A lot of good things have been forced on people. The South remaining in the United States, desegregation, etc.

          Most Americans don’t know basic economics. Many are easily led to believe that if wages rise a bit then suddenly food prices and such would skyrocket. Most of the costs in most minimum wage jobs are rent or cost of buildings, cost of goods, etc.

          And paying such workers more means less of a burden on other taxpayers and more money in the economy and therefore more and better growth in the economy because such workers will be able to afford stuff. And wealth flows upward so the stockholding class won’t be ‘hurt’ by raising the minimum wage.

          ________________________________________________

          * A corporation is a legal entity and it’s mostly formed for liability reasons.

          Corporations have trillions of dollars in banks and investments. They have trillions overseas in tax shelters. Any corporation that buys back its stock essentially is destroying the value of the corporation and therefore the value to its owners in order to try to raise the price of the stock for short-term stockholders.

          And, no, corporations don’t even need to have employees. You can incorporate private planes, houses, empty buildings, land, etc.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by MikeB View Post
            http://io9.com/the-u-s-has-the-most-...lth-1591403515

            This is interesting. With all the supposed horror stories about the United Kingdom’s healthcare system, apparently it’s actually the best in the developed world. The UK’s ranking in “healthy lives” is probably attributed to the diets and maybe exercise habits of those in the UK compared to other countries.

            It seems government run and paid for healthcare is the best. And this is probably because hospitals even though legally not for profit are actually mostly run as for profit businesses.
            I saw that the other day. An interesting graphic indeed. However, healthcare discussion is worth another thread than this one about minimum wage.


            Most Americans don’t know basic economics.
            This is true.

            Many are easily led to believe that if wages rise a bit then suddenly food prices and such would skyrocket.
            This example has so many extremes that of course it is untrue.

            But when minimum wages go up there is a gradual increase in basic prices until it reaches an equilibrium. It's the looking back a year and more later that you can notice the difference was significant.

            An increase in minimum wages will raise prices. And it will level out at a point where there is little difference between standard of living from before the minimum wage was raised.

            I believe minimum wage needs to go up from time to time. However, raising minimum wage nationwide isnt the solution to the crisis in America's standard of living. Large municipalities with high cost of living should raise their minimum wages. The corporations that limit workers from achieving full 40 hour/week employment need to be stopped. There are other tricks that should be stopped which they are using to exploit employees and lower their standard of living.

            Large corporations will never learn to value their employees as humans rather than a physical resource they input into their business model and give them a living wage. So people who can afford to need to limit their patronage of these places when possible. Use a local or small business that pays and treats its employees with decency. It's becoming increasingly difficult to find small businesses to provide these goods or services. Raising minimum wages drastically is harder for these type businesses to survive since they dont have the cushiony profit magin that large corporations do.

            Lydia made the punch!

            Comment


            • #21
              There has yet to be a business founded for the primary purpose of assuring anyone a living wage (whatever that is, I have never met anyone who would make a pass at quantifying it, seems mostly to be a euphemism for "more than they make"). It just isn't what a business if for. Realize that any business starts as its founder/founders having a goal by which they will make money, earn their own living -- everything that follows, be it types of corporate legal structures, for the purpose of soliciting investment or limiting liability; hiring an extra hand or two or ten thousand and a board of directors because there is more work that needs to be done than the founder/founders can do themselves; all of it, all serves that one master, that the people starting the business did it to provide their *own* livelihood, not anyone else's, at least not as anything to other than an incidental byproduct.

              Even occasional rises in the minimum wage can have collateral effects. For instance, Susie starts her job at MacDowell's when the applicable MW is 7.25, works there for three years, runs shifts as an assistant and makes $11.25. New law raises MW to $12.00. Susie now makes $12.00. Bob is hired the next day and makes $12.00. Not only is Susie out the entire value of her seniority, but maybe hours get cut or more will be asked during the hours she does work, because the business still has to make money, that is its primary function.
              sigpic
              Banner by LRae12

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                There has yet to be a business founded for the primary purpose of assuring anyone a living wage (whatever that is, I have never met anyone who would make a pass at quantifying it, seems mostly to be a euphemism for "more than they make").
                Rather than surveying random people on the street, there is google and wikipedia. There seem to be plenty of sites about it online. I never looked up a definition before. I was just assuming living wage was loosely a percentage of the poverty level like so many federal services determine low income eligibility upon.

                Cool, I even found a living wage calculator. Lots of interesting data here! ...Jeez! A living wage is well below the amount that would make one ineligible to file bankruptcy.

                It just isn't what a business if for. Realize that any business starts as its founder/founders having a goal by which they will make money, earn their own living -- everything that follows, be it types of corporate legal structures, for the purpose of soliciting investment or limiting liability; hiring an extra hand or two or ten thousand and a board of directors because there is more work that needs to be done than the founder/founders can do themselves; all of it, all serves that one master, that the people starting the business did it to provide their *own* livelihood, not anyone else's, at least not as anything to other than an incidental byproduct.
                The goal of life isn't to make money, it is to make a better life. Businesses are a means to that end. A business can effectuate a better life by many other ways than just making money. Every person has a different definition of their own better life.

                There is a great divide between the motivation and operation of a private business versus a public business company. Lumping all businesses under a single business theory doesn't work for me.

                It's a shame that you have never worked for company that had any concern about the welfare of you or your coworkers. I have and know others who run such small businesses. It makes the working place a much better environment. Being miserable for 8 hours a day isn't worth it.

                There is a disconnect in large businesses. When you are a CEO in another state, what does it matter what the working environment is in the store, as long as the people in your immediate office are all being well paid?



                Even occasional rises in the minimum wage can have collateral effects. For instance, Susie starts her job at MacDowell's when the applicable MW is 7.25, works there for three years, runs shifts as an assistant and makes $11.25. New law raises MW to $12.00. Susie now makes $12.00. Bob is hired the next day and makes $12.00. Not only is Susie out the entire value of her seniority, but maybe hours get cut or more will be asked during the hours she does work, because the business still has to make money, that is its primary function.
                Your example makes an assumption that there is a very narrow profit margin for a company. It also makes the assumption that a business can only make money by cutting hourly wages.

                Honestly, a good company would raise the Susie's wage accordingly above minimum wage because they value her experience and continued employment.

                I use a similar example to disagree with drastic increases of minimum wage because a good business has to struggle with raising its wages back to an amount above minimum wage. However, you also throw in that she would lose her seniority or work hours which are some of the really dehumanizing tricks that companies use. Even without a minimum wage hike, MacDowell's is just as likely to fire Suzie at her $11.25 rate so they can hire a new person to work at $7.25. Or worse, make her reapply for the job at the intro $7 rate. It's cruel.

                Lydia made the punch!

                Comment


                • #23
                  All said regarding writers, producers, actors, directors, viewers, readers, etc. are what I remember, my opinions, etc.



                  * Companies that do stock buy-backs and/or make 'huge' profits can afford to pay their workers more. Now apartments in So Cal are around at least $1,600/month. The minimum wage--including benefits--in The United States should be over $15/hr. If that's too much for a company--they maybe shouldn't be a company. And Single Payer Universal Health Care would help with costs for companies and employees.


                  * Things are so bad for some people in The United States that Andrew Yang is around 6th in polling for the United States Presidential Nomination for the Democratic Party. And his UBI (universal basic income) is an extremely paltry $12K/year.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X