Minimum wage

While I know it would never pass congress, but since we already to have a federal minimum wage, why can't their be tiered min wage? For instance those "beginner" type jobs that most teens get while in H.S. and/or college could be at a lower rate until that employee hits 18 or 19 and got their diploma. Also a lower wage for an employee who is in a kind of probationary period, maybe 6-months to a year. Then another bump for those people who are life long min wage employees who stay consistently employed for X amount of years, and if a company starts firing people near these incentive dates, they could get hit with a big fine unless they can show VERY good cause as to why they had to fire the employee. I think these kind of steps would be a lot better than just blanket raising the min wage for everyone everywhere to $15 or $20 an hour. I'm sure there are other possibilities as well, maybe a bit lower for part time or seasonal employees, etc. Maybe a regional difference (this is why it should be left up to the states to start with) This way small business could still afford to hire employees to keep their places well staffed, especially during busy seasons without driving up prices more than they already are, and these young whipper snappers can hopefully start getting jobs at a young age to find out what it means to earn money, gain some work experience for later in life and get out of their parents basements! $.02

Personally, I am against a minimum wage for several reasons.

First, everything has a labor component to it and any time the value of the labor component changes, all prices rise or fall relative to the change in value. In other words, there is no gain to raising the minimum wage as ALL prices will be forced up negating any advantage. To put it another way, if something costs 1 hour of labor when the minimum wage is $7 per hour, that same something will still cost 1 hour of labor when the minimum wage is $15 per hour. Who gains? Mostly the government with bracket creep giving the government a higher percentage of taxes with EVERY worker losing to bracket creep.

Second, minimum wages tend to disincentivize workers from improving their education so they can get and keep a better job. Keeping a minimum wage low or better yet non-existent encourages workers to improve themselves towards getting better jobs.

Third, minimum wages only apply to entry type jobs. They do not apply to any other type of job where the pay level is dictated by the needs of the company and the abilities of the workers that the company needs.

Fourth, a mandated minimum wage is always too low or to high depending on prevailing LOCAL costs and LOCAL wages. A minimum wage "right" for New York City is way too high for Podunkville, New York. A minimum wage "right" for Podunkville would be useless for New York City. Bottom line is that a minimum wage "right" for NYC would distort the Podunkville economy while a minimum wage "right" for Podunkville would have absolutely no effect on the NYC economy.

Fifth, minimum wages ENCOURAGE entry level workers to STAY entry level workers. That increases the entry level labor pool, keeping entry level wages low. It also forces non-entry level wages UP because the non-entry level labor pool is smaller than it would be if entry level workers moved up the ladder instead of congregating at the entry level labor pool. In other words, minimum wages widen the pay gap between entry level and non-entry level jobs.

Finally, I read somewhere that if the minimum wage is Federally set at $15 per hour that in Puerto Rico the minimum wage would be higher than the current AVERAGE wage there, which, if I remember correctly, is $13 per hour. PR is not exempt from the Federal minimum wage, so going to $15 per hour would decimate an already bankrupt PR, our own "Greece" if you will.

Multiple minimum wage levels violate the KISS rule. Anything that is not simple and straight forward is confusing to the users and is easily abused. Enforcing a complex minimum wage scheme is impossible without one or more new alphabet agencies that will eventually be as bad or worse than the IRS, EPA, and numerous other current government agencies. Thanks, but no thanks to encouraging bullies to "interpret" the minimum wage laws for us and if we don't bow to their wishes, they destroy us.

Not sure where you got out of my post that I am in favor of a minimum wage, but if you think it's going away anytime soon, you need to think again. They are also going to continue to raise the minimum wage, I'd just like to see it done in a more incremental way to do less damage to business and the economy. Even my suggestions at ways to restrain the min wage from going insane will probably never happen, at least not anytime soon. If individual states want to make a minimum wage that's their business but I don't think the feds should be telling the whole country what the min wage should be. The only form of wage controls I am in favor of is that of politicians. They should only be paid if they have a balanced budget. They should be paid whatever the average wage is for they type of office they hold, i.e. a U.S. Sen/Rep/Pres makes whatever the national average for income is, a state sen/rep/gov makes whatever the average income for his state is. That would encourage them to improve the economy. Also they need to have term limits for the Senators and Representatives as well.

I absolutely know it is not going away. And it will also get much more complicated. That is the way of EVERYTHING in government, witness the tax code. Anything to give more power to the regulators and trample on our freedoms. The only good thing is that sooner or later, the whole Ponzi scheme collapses on itself, but at the cost of much blood and heartache. That said, no matter what happens to the minimum wage, it no longer directly affects me. I just feel sorry for those who are currently getting hurt by it and those that will literally die when it all falls apart.

I was thinking on this.

If min wage goes to $15. I paid into SS on a $6 wage. (min wage was $4.75 I think) I wonder if I could have SS adjusted. Supposedly SS kept up with inflation via COLAS. But if a wage of $15, which is 3x the min wage when I worked-if I took what would be the SS based on $15, and devided by 3- that shorts me- even if you factor for the COLA.

BTW_ I agree on the tier- a problem on that tho- is they would run into fire-rehires- sort of like you have to work 90 days to be permanent- and places would fire workers on the 89th day and then rehire them

mm- on the other hand- if workers are asking to not get many hours- so as to keep section 8, food stamps- maybe we are paying- one way or the other- pick one

The $15 dollar minimumwage thing is canard. No thought whatsoever has gone in to their argument for more money because they are incapable of critical thought and unable to understand the fundamentals of a free and open marketplace where the prices are set by supply and demand. There is a reason why low/no skill jobs don't pay a wage higher or much higher than minimum wage. It is because there are way more people willing to work those jobs than there are jobs for that pool of workers. This is a simple formula folks, but they simply don't get it. If we acquiesce, and pay these people their $15 bucks an hour, then prices necessarily need to rise to accommodate their increased wages. That, or parts of the process in that business need to become more efficient, or become automated, i.e. robots, or automated cashiers. That is the sum of it. What I mean to say is that jobs will be eliminated. Equilibrium will occur, that is a fact. Whenever entropy increases, the system will act to achieve equilibrium, that is a natural fact within any given system.

Look at any city with high, i.e. unnatural/forced minimum wages like San Francisco, or Seattle, or Boston. How much does a regular hamburger sandwich cost there as opposed to someplace like where I live? That's right, something approaching double folks.

My state right now minimum wage is pretty much $11-$12/hour, not by govt. mandate, but that is about the least you can pay to get an employee. Mind you that even with skyrocketing cost of living here, we are still cheaper than most places. Many places still are WAY understaffed. Out in the oil patch starting pay for a burger flipper job is $20/hr and they cant fill those. Lots of places are only open 40-60 hours a week, not cause they don't have the business, but they can't get the staff, even at $20+ per hour. We're talking restaurants that there is a line when they open Mon morning at 6am, and have to turn people away when they are closing at 6pm on Fri night. I think if it wasn't for all the govt. programs there would be an even bigger migration of people here for the work, but since they can live on a warm beach and get govt. assistance why move to someplace where it snows for $20+ an hour? If we passed a state law tomorrow saying our min wage was $25/hr I don't think it would change much in the foreseeable future. I'm ok with that cause I'm sick of the crime, pollution, traffic, and idiotic drivers.

* necro bump *

A new law in California will raise the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20 per hour next year, an acknowledgment from the state's Democratic leaders that most of the often overlooked workforce are the primary earners for their low-income households.

When it takes effect on April 1, fast food workers in California will have the highest guaranteed base salary in the industry. The state’s minimum wage for all other workers — $15.50 per hour — is already among the highest in the United States.
...

Click to expand...

h/t: https://mishtalk.com/economics/mini...orkers-jumps-30-to-20-per-hour-in-california/

Roughly a 33% increase.

For posterity (from 2019):

Last summer, a paper on the effects of Seattle's minimum-wage increase made national headlines with its conclusion: The change made low-income workers worse off, not better, because it forced employers to cut back on hiring and hours to afford paying higher wages.

Although the finding contradicted years of research showing that the minimum wage had little to no effect on hiring practices, the paper was widely read and generally well regarded because of its reliance on high-quality data and convincing methods. David Autor, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who was not involved in the research, told The Washington Post at the time that the study was “very credible” and “sufficiently compelling in its design and statistical power that it can change minds.”

A little more than six months later, and minds have indeed been changed — among them Autor's. He now says that other recent minimum-wage papers have underscored the limitations of the Seattle study.

Chief among those newer papers is a large analysis of the effects of minimum-wage increases that have occurred since 1979. That paper, co-written by Arindrajit Dube of the University of Massachusetts, was recently presented at the American Economic Association's annual conference.

Dube's paper is more in line with conventional economic thinking: On average, minimum-wage increases eliminated jobs paying below the new minimum, but added jobs paying at or above the new minimum. The two changes effectively cancel each other out.
...
... But the University of Washington's Jacob Vigdor, who co-wrote the Seattle study, says the two findings are not necessarily contradictory.

Seattle's minimum-wage increase, Vigdor says, was a lot steeper than most other increases have been. Minimum wages at large businesses and franchises rose by $3.53, or more than 37 percent, over just nine months. Out of the 137 minimum-wage increases included in the Dube et al. paper, by contrast, that average increase was 10 percent.

It may be the case that “small increases to hourly rates of $11 or less seem to be okay, but a rapid increase to $13 causes more problems,” Vigdor said in an interview. “Our study only raises concerns about an increase from $11 to [as high as] $13 an hour, implemented nine months after a prior increase from $9.47.”

There may be another factor lurking behind the apparently contradictory findings: Neither paper has gone all the way through peer review and been published in an academic journal.
...

Click to expand...

There should also be a minimum brain cell standard for employees.

nickndfl said:

There should also be a minimum brain cell standaed for employees.

Click to expand...

Wages don't cause inflation; but nothing feeds the price-cost-price inflationary spiral like a jacked-up minimum wage.

First the proles and stupes all get it. Hurrah.

Then, those CLOSE TO the old minimum wage...THEY get a raise, TOO. Either to comply with MinWage or to keep their place, promoted a few pennies above it.

Then the GOONIONS get in on the action. When what had been their Union Shop wage, becomes Minimum Wage...that ain't gonna go over. THEY either have a COLA clause in their contract, or they start pressing for opening contracts, and/or strikes.

Eventually it's at a momentary equilibrium. Wages are up, say, 35 percent, across the board.

Labor COSTS are up. No, Mister Rich with his swimming pool filled with gold coins, doesn't just eat the cost.

Corporate bean-counters factor this new cost into new pricing. AND MORE, if they can.

Also, in bulk or packaged individual items...such as food...Shrinkflation comes in.

Eventually the cost of living eats up the 35-percent wage increase.

Left out of all this fun...are people trying to save for retirement or education.

I don't know why we have to go through this again. At least half the population was alive during the years of President Peanut...do we remember NOTHING?

This is disaster to anyone who's saved, or is trying to save, or trying to plan with relation to the economy.

...
"The economic literature on minimum wage increases has become murkier in recent years, but the overwhelming majority of economists agree that large minimum wage increases in excess of productivity gains means that employers will operate at a loss as far as the affected workers go," wrote Michael D. Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute following the passage of the FAST act. "Given that the average profit margin in the fast food industry is just 6–9 percent, those costs are almost certain to be passed along in terms of higher prices or lost jobs."

Another side effect of California's new minimum wage law could be the acceleration in fast food companies' turn towards automation in an attempt to save on labor costs.

"Over the last few years, many Americans, myself included, have been to McDonald's and used touch screens to place our own orders instead of interacting with cashiers," wrote Brad Polumbo in the Washington Examiner this week. "Well, the more arbitrarily expensive you make human labor, the more companies are incentivized to hurry up and embrace automation."
...

Click to expand...

Some in the US are calling for a $50/hr minimum wage...

When Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law that set a first-in-the-nation minimum wage for healthcare workers, three words in a bill analysis foretold potential concerns about its cost: “Fiscal impact unknown.”

Now, three weeks after Newsom signed SB 525 into law — giving medical employees at least $25 an hour, including support staff such as cleaners and security guards — his administration has an estimated price tag: $4 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year alone.

Half of that will come directly from the state’s general fund, while the other half will be paid for by federal funds designated for providers of Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program, according to Newsom’s Department of Finance.

SB 525 is one of the most expensive laws California has seen in years and comes as the state faces a $14-billion budget deficit that could grow larger if revenue projections continue to fall short. ...

Click to expand...

This is why it's important to have substantial people in government - and important to limit the franchise, likewise, to people with a stake in society.

Let the clueless, feckless and useless vote, and you wind up with Comrade Hairdo running things.

Casey Jones said:

Let the clueless, feckless and useless vote, and you wind up with Comrade Hairdo running things.

Click to expand...

It isn't a bad idea, how would one weed out these people from the electoral process?

chieftain said:

It isn't a bad idea, how would one weed out these people from the electoral process?

Click to expand...

Stipulate either a minimum-tax liability as part of voter qualification; or stipulate that only owners of real property (with a baseline value) may register.

It's commonsense and would interject stability, and that's exactly why it will never fly in this environment. We either need collapse or State Secession to have any part of a descendant republic show such foresight.

And collapse will probably give us a full 80-year generational cycle (Strauss-Howe) of tyranny, a la the USSR.

Casey Jones said:

Stipulate either a minimum-tax liability as part of voter qualification; or stipulate that only owners of real property (with a baseline value) may register.

Click to expand...

That's just it, no one owns property, they possess a title to it.

chieftain said:

That's just it, no one owns property, they possess a title to it.

Click to expand...

Manner of viewing it.

When you're invested in a land mortgage; when you've busted your back putting in drainage or improvements, or tilling and farming it; when you live there, and with the neighbors, and share meals and hard times...you'll have the outlook of an owner.

In many places, wealth, money and non-real possessions, is/are taxed. You could argue the same thing - it's not really theirs - but I think it's more illustrative of intrusive, tyrannical government power.

In any event, an alternative method of weeding out non-invested persons, is a minimum tax cutoff. To vote, you must pay this much in Federal income tax. No payment, for whatever reason...no vote.

ALSO, NO Federal vote for Federal employees. Not even retirees. Their position of privilege, disqualifies them from objectively choosing elected officials.

I would even extend that to State/other government workers whose positions are subsidized by FedGov. Like, say, uh, TEACHERS. The teachers' unions have been THE greatest source of corruption in elections, the last 30 years.

Rather than passing silly restrictions they can work around...let the NEA/AFT give all the money to all the senile warmongers they can find. Just FORBID THEIR VOTING.

pmbug said:

Roughly a 33% increase.

Click to expand...

And they'll still not be able to remember to give ya bbq dipping sauce with your chicken nugget order.

Casey Jones said:

This is why it's important to have substantial people in government

Click to expand...

We're waaay past any hope of that. lol

chieftain said:

It isn't a bad idea, how would one weed out these people from the electoral process?

Click to expand...

Get rid of elections and do all public offices via a system similar to that of jury duty.

For example, one day you arrive home to find a summons that says you are the new State Senator for the next six years, and to report to your State capitol.

All selections would be drawn randomly from the list of people with an ID, drivers license, or utilities in their name.

No getting out of it.

Joe King said:

Get rid of elections and do all public offices via a system similar to that of jury duty.

For example, one day you arrive home to find a summons that says you are the new State Senator for the next six years, and to report to your State capitol.

All selections would be drawn randomly from the list of people with an ID, drivers license, or utilities in their name.

No getting out of it.

Click to expand...

And it would take them a day and a half to figure a way to jigger the system.

We'd have Obamas, Bidens and Clintons running every aspect of government for however long it lasted...about 18 months, probably.

But that's just not gonna work.

Actually, in fairness, NO system is going to work with a morally-bereft population, or morally nihilistic Political Leadership Class.

We have both.

Joe King said:

And they'll still not be able to remember to give ya bbq dipping sauce with your chicken nugget order.

Click to expand...

But just know this: It has NOTHING to do with LEGALIZED POT.

It just couldn't...ya know, dood?

Ken Rose, a restaurateur and chef in Sandy, Utah, said that though he has always paid his employees above his state’s minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, in the past few years, he’s had to bump employee pay higher than ever.

“For me, minimum wage is what you can hire an employee for,” Rose, who owns Tiburon Fine Dining, a contemporary American restaurant in Sandy told CNN. “$7.25 hasn’t been relevant for years.”

An ever-shrinking number of workers in the US are paid the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour – and a growing chorus of unions, economists and even employers agree it’s out of step with today’s economic reality.

Sounds like a self fixing problem to me.
"unions, economists and even employers agree it’s out of step with today’s economic reality."

If employers agree, all they gotta do is pony up more $. Why they need gov to tell them how much to pay?Are they too stupid to figure out what it takes to get a position filled?

McDonald's and Chipotle Mexican Grill executives said they will raise their menu prices next year in California to off-set the minimum wage increase for fast food workers. ...

Click to expand...

Interesting article from 2015 for anyone interested:

^^^^^^
Along the same lines. From 2019.

Raise the cost of merchants, and then expect prices not to increase.

Sounds like someone had a little trouble with basic arithmetic.

And PSY101, covering basic human motivations. When something that is supposed to make a profit, instead makes a loss...the person DOING it, STOPS.

Raise the cost of labor, when what you are selling is a service...and prices go up or the business goes under.

California Pizza Huts lay off all delivery drivers ahead of minimum wage increase​

Gee, who could have possibly seen that coming?

Pizza Hut is laying off more than 1,200 delivery drivers in California.

The layoffs, which will take place through the end of February, come as California's minimum wage is about to go up by $4. Fast-food workers in the state are set to get a pay bump of close to 30% in April as the minimum wages rises from $16 to $20 an hour.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/california-pizza-huts-lay-off-234021911.html

Lotta talking points about this today.

California slaps a new minimum wage on fast food and fast food slaps back​

California just made labor in fast food more expensive without adding any value. Meaning, it is welfare imposed on the free market and someone is going to pick up the tab.

It won’t be government.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-slaps-minimum-wage-fast-182452872.html

On January 1st, 22 states and 38 cities and counties raised their minimum wages, sparking some celebration for 10 million workers who get a pay hike, and many doubts for the rest.

While this is perhaps a well-intentioned policy, intentions don’t indicate a policy’s effectiveness. Many economists argue that this decision will disadvantage the people it aims to help, namely, lower-skilled workers.
...

Click to expand...

More:

Why would anyone in their right mind want the GOVERNMENT to get involved with things such as minimum wage, education or helathcare. if you want a federal minimum wage, you should take your ideas to KKKanada where they embrace COMMUNISM.

JayDubya said:

California slaps a new minimum wage on fast food and fast food slaps back​

California just made labor in fast food more expensive without adding any value. Meaning, it is welfare imposed on the free market and someone is going to pick up the tab.

It won’t be government.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-slaps-minimum-wage-fast-182452872.html

Click to expand...

yeah, federal minimum wage is fucking stupid.

The higher minimum wages go the more feasible automation becomes for each industry....

Geez! Who could have seen that coming?