ADVERTISEMENT

POLL: $15 Minimum Wage

How quickly should the minimum wage be raised to $15/hr?


  • Total voters
    176
Why not $18, OP?

Why not $20?

Why not $100?

Where would you stop? This comes up over and over, and you never get it. Why do you insist on causing inflation and destroying jobs?
 
How quickly should it be re-branded a "living wage" instead of a minimum wage.
You can't live off $9 an hour? I know people that do. They don't have anything above the essentials though. And if your 20+ making $8 an hour full time at McDonald's get a new job. Those are entry jobs into the work force. So many people want to do the minimum these days and reap the benefits. Welcome to the entitlement generation.
 
I don't know the answer, but I think philosophically it should be the case that working 40h/ week should produce earnings that keep one above the poverty level for a person and their dependent. Currently that's about $10/h.

Fairly that wage should just be pegged to some cost of living math and automatically adjusted each year. Politically Ds don't want to make increases automatic because they like having this issue resurface periodically as its a winner with the people.
 
Why not $18, OP?

Why not $20?

Why not $100?

Where would you stop? This comes up over and over, and you never get it. Why do you insist on causing inflation and destroying jobs?

Is there anyone else here who doesn't understand how silly this argument is?

Do you take a vitamin pill?

Do you take 10? Why not?

Why not 100?

Why not 1000?
 
[1] I don't know the answer, but I think philosophically it should be the case that working 40h/ week should produce earnings that keep one above the poverty level for a person and their dependent. Currently that's about $10/h.

[2] Fairly that wage should just be pegged to some cost of living math and automatically adjusted each year.

[3] Politically Ds don't want to make increases automatic because they like having this issue resurface periodically as its a winner with the people.

I agree with parts 1 and 2 but am not so sure about part 3. Sure some Ds are that cynical, but most?
 
You can't live off $9 an hour? I know people that do. They don't have anything above the essentials though. And if your 20+ making $8 an hour full time at McDonald's get a new job. Those are entry jobs into the work force. So many people want to do the minimum these days and reap the benefits. Welcome to the entitlement generation.

You missed my point. OP constantly wants to raise the minimum wage, to where he feels people can "live" by making it. Which was never the intent of the minimum wage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icu81222
You missed my point. OP constantly wants to raise the minimum wage, to where he feels people can "live" by making it. Which was never the intent of the minimum wage.
Then I agree with you. If your making $7.25 or $8 an hour your in a job that was never designed to be a career, or provide a living wage. Most were created for high school or college kids needing some extra coin. They are entry level positions. Nothing more.
 
I agree with parts 1 and 2 but am not so sure about part 3. Sure some Ds are that cynical, but most?
I think Ds in office often are. I got that bit of insight from some news show commentary where the speaker said the plan to peg the rate to inflation was suggested decades ago. Ds in congress rejected it because they wanted to keep the issue alive. Politically it makes sense to remind people every few years that they like liberal policy. Libs are bad salesmen as it is, they need help.
 
Serious question, why should flipping a burger be a livable wage job? Does knowing that you will make $15 an hour make you more or less driven to develope life skills to get a better job. If you were 16 years old and wanted to quit school, you would have no penalty for not educating yourself. You are paying the kid with the high school education the same money as the kid that dropped out. Also, the person that went to college may only get $18 to 20 per hour.
 
Would it make sense to increase min wage with cost of living increases? It seems it would benefit tax payers to have these people making min. wage not dependent on gov't assistance to make ends meet. If that means I have to pay 2 bucks for a mcdouble, so be it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
Serious question, why should flipping a burger be a livable wage job? Does knowing that you will make $15 an hour make you more or less driven to develope life skills to get a better job. If you were 16 years old and wanted to quit school, you would have no penalty for not educating yourself. You are paying the kid with the high school education the same money as the kid that dropped out. Also, the person that went to college may only get $18 to 20 per hour.
Because I don't want to pay pay welfare to that burger flipper and I'm not willing to let her baby starve. Make that burger flipper self sufficient via her own labor and we all win. A living wage encourages individual responsibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vroom_C14
Would it make sense to increase min wage with cost of living increases? It seems it would benefit tax payers to have these people making min. wage not dependent on gov't assistance to make ends meet. If that means I have to pay 2 bucks for a mcdouble, so be it.

Using a mcdouble is convenient. What if your grocery bill comes close to doubling as well? What about even going up 50%? Is your wage going to go up by the same percentage as the minimum wage workers?
 
You missed my point. OP constantly wants to raise the minimum wage, to where he feels people can "live" by making it. Which was never the intent of the minimum wage.
What was the intent of the minimum wage?

Even if the original intent of the MW wasn't to afford full-time workers a living wage, are we bound by what the intent was back then? Why?

Is requiring that a job pay a living wage a bad idea? Why?
 
Because I don't want to pay pay welfare to that burger flipper and I'm not willing to let her baby starve. Make that burger flipper self sufficient via her own labor and we all win. A living wage encourages individual responsibility.

Where do you think the money is going to come from for ainimum wage increase? Price increases that will be passed along to you. So maybe you'll feel better not "paying welfare" (which isn't going to go away anyway) you are still going to pay for minimum wage increase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icu81222
Using a mcdouble is convenient. What if your grocery bill comes close to doubling as well? What about even going up 50%? Is your wage going to go up by the same percentage as the minimum wage workers?
I would imagine a significant bump to min. wage would result in wages as a whole increasing yes. Imo there is plenty of money in this country to go around. Seems like an awful lot of it is sitting at the top.
 
8koXXEt.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: icu81222
Where do you think the money is going to come from for ainimum wage increase? Price increases that will be passed along to you. So maybe you'll feel better not "paying welfare" (which isn't going to go away anyway) you are still going to pay for minimum wage increase.
I realize the cost will be passed onto the consumer. I like that idea better.
 
Would it make sense to increase min wage with cost of living increases? It seems it would benefit tax payers to have these people making min. wage not dependent on gov't assistance to make ends meet. If that means I have to pay 2 bucks for a mcdouble, so be it.
This strikes me as a sensible position.

I have a less forgiving way of phrasing that. If a company can only survive in business by paying workers less than is needed to live a frugal existence, maybe they don't deserve to be in business. Why should we subsidize these bad capitalists with our tax-supported welfare programs. Let good capitalists - those who can figure out how to make a profit without abusing their workforce - compete against each other. Not against each other and subsidized scum.

That same argument can be used a lot of places. In the absence of universal health care, for example, good employers - those who pay for health care for their workers - are at a competitive disadvantage against those who eliminate that expense. The argument that capitalism prevents that because the good employers gain advantage in worker retention and saved training costs has been shown wanting - especially at the low end of the market - by the Obamacare experiment, where companies have opted to shift to part-time workers and pay fines rather than provide insurance.
 
Because I don't want to pay pay welfare to that burger flipper and I'm not willing to let her baby starve. Make that burger flipper self sufficient via her own labor and we all win. A living wage encourages individual responsibility.
How many of those who need the increase in the minimum wage will actually be responsible with that new double in salary? I'm guessing a large number will just increase their cigarette or alcohol fund or buy a newer car that they can't afford.

I realize that's just a generalization but people who think they can live off a job at McDonalds for the rest of their life probably aren't going to be very smart with their new found money.
 
Because I don't want to pay pay welfare to that burger flipper and I'm not willing to let her baby starve. Make that burger flipper self sufficient via her own labor and we all win. A living wage encourages individual responsibility.

Out of the irresponsibility of having the kid in the first place without the necessary skills to provide for it in the first place? You're enabling the behavious that caused her mess in the first place, pure and simple.

Maybe we should concentrate on that before we talk wages. You know...personal responsibility outside the federal government "curing it". Because as we all know, the federal government are experts at curing things like this.

Giving a person a raise doesn't make them any smarter, any better of a worker, and any more responsible...let alone deserving of the raise given they did not improve one single solitary thing to deserve it.

They weren't that before the raise, and they won't be after.
 
Let's just eliminate income taxes on those making $15 an hour or less.

That would basically have the same effect as a pay raise and would not interfere with the private economy.
 
My payroll would have gone up $1600 last week alone based on a $15 minimum wage. That doesn't factor in SS and Medicaid either. And also assumes that supervisors, assistant, and anyone currently making over minimum wage now only gets minimum wage.

So to keep labor % between 15-20% of gross sales (pretty standard number if a restaurant wants to keep it's doors open), what increase should I put into effect that won't make all the customers who didn't get a raise never order again? Should the 2 single mothers who do get 35-40 hours and make more than minimum now be paid only minimum, same as the dishwasher, and likely have their hours cut when number of orders decreases after the price increase?
 
  • Like
Reactions: icu81222
How many of those who need the increase in the minimum wage will actually be responsible with that new double in salary? I'm guessing a large number will just increase their cigarette or alcohol fund or buy a newer car that they can't afford.

I realize that's just a generalization but people who think they can live off a job at McDonalds for the rest of their life probably aren't going to be very smart with their new found money.
But they won't qualify for welfare anymore. So that's still a point in favor of a living wage that lifts people above poverty. Cons say all the time libs want to pupetuate dependence and they will heap all sorts of harms from dependence at the feet of liberals. The reality is cons want dependence where libs want to resolve the issue.
 
They got robots to flip those burgers as well? Fast food employees aren't the only ones making poor wages btw.

And this is the biggest reason why this whole debate is so shortsighted.

Very few workers are actually engaged in producing things. Most employment gains are in the service sector, the financial industry and so on. Not making things, not growing things, not mining, not even shipping or sales. And many of the remaining "real jobs" are being replaced by computers, robots, drones, self-driving vehicles, online sales, and so on.

Like it or not, we probably don't have enough jobs for everybody who wants one. And it will only get worse.

That's the problem we need to face. We can create a lot of "real jobs" for a while if we decide to invest in rehabbing and revamping our infrastructure, in going green, in expanding higher education, in building high-speed rail, and other such things.

But then what?

Once we have gone green and our infrastructure is both modern and mostly self-repairing, and most education is on line, and so on, then what?

When we face 70% unemployment, the minimum wage will be moot. But right now it isn't.
 
Because I don't want to pay pay welfare to that burger flipper and I'm not willing to let her baby starve. Make that burger flipper self sufficient via her own labor and we all win. A living wage encourages individual responsibility.

This!
 
If we want more competitive jobs (money wise) we need a tax overhaul so companies don't leave our borders.

Graetz Plan anyone?
 
Out of the irresponsibility of having the kid in the first place without the necessary skills to provide for it in the first place? You're enabling the behavious that caused her mess in the first place, pure and simple.

Maybe we should concentrate on that before we talk wages. You know...personal responsibility outside the federal government "curing it". Because as we all know, the federal government are experts at curing things like this.

Giving a person a raise doesn't make them any smarter, any better of a worker, and any more responsible...let alone deserving of the raise given they did not improve one single solitary thing to deserve it.

They weren't that before the raise, and they won't be after.
I'd be all for the federal government mandating sex Ed. Curriculum. I'd even consider some plan to restrict breeding. But I fear those too might meet resistance. On base, I think it's our duty to care for the basic needs of our fellow man. I think the best way to do that is to make that a civic duty so that all citizens can access a standard of care as a right. But that's not what this is about, this is about valuing work. It's fun that you think asking someone to work for a living and support themselves with that labor is enabling. You're sort of ass backwards IMO.
 
I realize the cost will be passed onto the consumer. I like that idea better.
If they want to raise it to $10 an hour fine. $15 is ridiculous. I can't imagine the effect that will have on the economy. Construction cost will go way up. All of a sudden 250k houses are costing 350k. Getting your roof shingled, house sided or remodeled goes up 30%. Those aren't small increases.
 
Out of the irresponsibility of having the kid in the first place without the necessary skills to provide for it in the first place? You're enabling the behavious that caused her mess in the first place, pure and simple.

Maybe we should concentrate on that before we talk wages. You know...personal responsibility outside the federal government "curing it". Because as we all know, the federal government are experts at curing things like this.

Giving a person a raise doesn't make them any smarter, any better of a worker, and any more responsible...let alone deserving of the raise given they did not improve one single solitary thing to deserve it.

They weren't that before the raise, and they won't be after.


There is a great deal of wisdom in this. Certainly things worth considering, anyway. Also, correcting the flawed monetary system MIGHT shift this whole scenario.... just maybe. When you don't have sound money, this will always keep happening.

When I started in the work force at 16, the minimum wage was $3.35 and I worked only part-time. Now, I lived at home and was in high school, but I made a $110 a month loan payment for my car. I paid for my gas, my clothes, my food that I didn't eat at home (which was most of my food at that age) and anything else I wanted that wasn't included in my home life (going on a date, buying a cassette tape, etc.). Now, it's evolved to 5 times that amount. The used cars are still running on 4 wheels, the food is still made on the same grills, the gas is still pulled from the same middle eastern locale, and the cassettes are free online. The things are no different than they were then, but they cost more and you have to work longer to make that amount. The reason is... the currency/instrument of exchange is constantly losing it's value.
 
My payroll would have gone up $1600 last week alone based on a $15 minimum wage. That doesn't factor in SS and Medicaid either. And also assumes that supervisors, assistant, and anyone currently making over minimum wage now only gets minimum wage.

So to keep labor % between 15-20% of gross sales (pretty standard number if a restaurant wants to keep it's doors open), what increase should I put into effect that won't make all the customers who didn't get a raise never order again? Should the 2 single mothers who do get 35-40 hours and make more than minimum now be paid only minimum, same as the dishwasher, and likely have their hours cut when number of orders decreases after the price increase?
I think questions like that are perfectly reasonable. That's part of the reason why we should be (and should have been) phasing this in very gently over time. By fighting it, it has become harder. And it is now generating worker action and public action to bring about change. That has to be less desirable than a gradual phase-in.

It's an empirical question whether you will actually lose business if you raise prices. Your competitors will also have to raise prices, so you aren't being placed in unfair competition with them. But the real question is probably one of elasticity. I'm not knowledgeable enough about your field to know, but I'd guess that's what will bite you in the butt - IF you do get bitten in the butt.

If you accept the inevitability of a significant MW increase, what are your suggestions for making it as painless as possible?

 
They can have almost double their salary if everyone else gets the same raise. Any other option can F off
 
Every minimum wage increase is a pay cut to anyone that makes more than minimum wage. The reason is the base level of many goods and services go up.

My high school and college kids don't need to make $15 an hour at their summer jobs.

Anybody who thinks you can suck at high school and work at McDonald's and make damn near what a new math teacher makes in Iowa is crazy.

I don't like the income gap but rewarding losers isn't the answer.
 
Every minimum wage increase is a pay cut to anyone that makes more than minimum wage. The reason is the base level of many goods and services go up.

My high school and college kids don't need to make $15 an hour at their summer jobs.

Anybody who thinks you can suck at high school and work at McDonald's and make damn near what a new math teacher makes in Iowa is crazy.

I don't like the income gap but rewarding losers isn't the answer.
Exactly, rewarding workers is the answer.
 
What I would support is a program that trains people to get better jobs (semi skilled factory or trade workers) as long as they currently work at least 32 hours a week and are drug free.

An avenue for your burger flipper to get his foot in the door at a job higher up in the food chain.

I am sorry but the free loading loser class needs to prove they are willing to work before they get help to a better life.
 
ADVERTISEMENT