ADVERTISEMENT

Is the 12-Year-Old $7.25 Minimum Wage Enough Anywhere In America?

What college kid made $6/hr. In 1979? That would have been extremely rare. $4 to $4.50 would have been good. If they could have even found a job, and many could not. Remember, it was 1979 and Jimmy "the disaster" Carter was president.

The Senator said he was making $6 / hour. Not me.

Even if it's $3 hour -- which was about minimum wage in 1979 ($2.90) -- it's still the same - back then, you could work a full time summer job and earn most of your tuition, room, and board for the year.

Now, forget about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
Why deny someone else that same opportunity by cutting the bottom rungs off the employment ladder?




Yes, but for reasons that have nothing to do with the the government outlawing employment for the least skilled.



Correct, they could employ them at profitable rates.
Once you remove that opportunity with a law forbidding profitable employment their unemployment increases.



The country was undeniably more racist 90 years, yet employers were willing to overlook that and employ blacks at higher rates than whites.
That only changed after the minimum wage laws demanded by racists were enacted.



Indeed.
So, if wage floors don’t create unemployment, as Tom seems to think, why are you such pikers and not willing to put in a minimum wage that makes us all rich?
What do you think would happen?
Unemployment was higher in the late 1800s and early 1900s than much of the past fifty years. Reasonable wage floors do not create unemployment.

The reason employers were willing to overlook race back then is literally because they could hire them for pennies on the dollar. And they had no opportunity to get promoted. You seem to be missing that point.

Honestly, you sound like a first year econ student. Why don't you pass your classes and move out of Mommy's basement and then get a job in the real world before you spot off theory? Ok, good job young man or woman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
Even if it's $3 hour -- which was about minimum wage in 1979 ($2.90) -- it's still the same - back then, you could work a full time summer job and earn most of your tuition, room, and board for the year.
Now, forget about it.

It was thought that trying to make cheaper loans available would increase accessibility, but it has had the coincident effect of bidding up the prices colleges can charge and expect to collect.

There have been other unintended consequences as well:
link

According by an analysis by Demos, 12 years after entering college:

White men paid off 44 percent of their student-loan balance
White women paid off 28 percent
Black men saw their balances grow 11 percent
Black women saw their loan balances grow 13 percent
 
The Senator said he was making $6 / hour. Not me.

Even if it's $3 hour -- which was about minimum wage in 1979 ($2.90) -- it's still the same - back then, you could work a full time summer job and earn most of your tuition, room, and board for the year.

Now, forget about it.
You quoted him. Not sure why, but you did.
 
It was thought that trying to make cheaper loans available would increase accessibility, but it has had the coincident effect of bidding up the prices colleges can charge and expect to collect.

There have been other unintended consequences as well:
link

According by an analysis by Demos, 12 years after entering college:

White men paid off 44 percent of their student-loan balance
White women paid off 28 percent
Black men saw their balances grow 11 percent
Black women saw their loan balances grow 13 percent

There is no doubt in my view that has increased the cost of education. It’s a third-party payor issue, somewhat similar to healthcare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seminole97
Reasonable wage floors do not create unemployment.

So wage floors at some level create unemployment? You seem to agree on that.
Now the question is your wiggle word 'reasonable'.

I think you'd agree that a wage floor of $100/hr would create lots of unemployment, right?

The difference between us isn't that you don't think wage floors create unemployment, you've acknowledged that, it's that you think it is 'reasonable' to dis-employ some people in order to try and ensure a wage increase for others at some less egregious level than $100/hr would create.

I think it's cruel, and creates problems for society that outweigh the benefits.

Wage floors aren't going to raise living standards in society.
We need people to get more skills.
Jobs are among the best places to get skills (people are 'interning' for zero dollars right now to get around the existing wage floor).
 
Last edited:
You posted no comment, just posted his. So it seems that you were using his words to voice your thoughts. His comments, however, were phony, as almost no college kids made that amount. Had the kid actually made $6 per hour it would have been close (slightly under) to the cost of a year. Your later comment about $2.90 a year coming close to the cost of a year are incorrect, as it would provide less than half of the needed funds.
 
You posted no comment, just posted his. So it seems that you were using his words to voice your thoughts. His comments, however, were phony, as almost no college kids made that amount. Had the kid actually made $6 per hour it would have been close (slightly under) to the cost of a year. Your later comment about $2.90 a year coming close to the cost of a year are incorrect, as it would provide less than half of the needed funds.

Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

It was the Senator’s statement not mine. And if the Senator is lying or misremembering, my point is still the same - you can’t currently work and put yourself through school (or even come close) at minimum wage for the summer.

You used to be able to do that. I cited the post for the 5,000 hours of work point in response to @Jerome Silberman point about the cost of everything including college going up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
Increasing worker productivity is actually what enables them to have higher earning power.

If the capitalist hands his employee a shovel, there's a limit in how much dirt he can move in an hour.
If the capitalist can put that employee in the seat of a back hoe (and the employee can learn how to use it - this is the skills part!) then he move a lot more dirt, and thus earn more money for his employer, and the employer can afford to pay him a higher wage.
Profits enable savings, and savings enable the purchase of additional capital equipment to enable higher productivity and higher living standards.
That's how capitalism works.

Now, it's also true putting one guy in a back hoe might mean he needs fewer shovellers, but that is going to free up labor for other enterprises that entrepreneurs are constantly creating (if he can't figure out new uses for them himself).
Getting the majority of our laborers out of the farm fields was the prerequisite to having the labor available to build the world around you that didn't exist before when most people were tilling the soil.

I am a capitalist, right down to my toes.

But, success in business is not driving up wages like it says in my economics text book. Businesses continues to evolve to need fewer employees, which is what business is supposed to do. The profits go to the shareholders and Sr. Management - which again, is a part of capitalism. The workers, both skilled and unskilled, continue to make the wage necessary to keep them on the workforce.

Bottom line - if you are an unskilled worker you better get skilled. If you are a skilled worker, you need to figure out how to develop higher level skills. Case in point - if you are a shoveler you better learn how to operate a backhoe.

But, not everyone can do that. That's why we have a minimum wage.
 
I am a capitalist, right down to my toes.
But, success in business is not driving up wages like it says in my economics text book.

Agreed.
The Feds broke our money.
It has fostered the ‘financialization’ of the American economy and allowed elites to skim society’s gains by diverting to themselves first access to newly ‘printed’ (not earned) purchasing power.
We have to realize what went wrong in order to fix it, and too many of the offered solutions are trying to deal with symptoms of the problem, not the problem itself.

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

img_0540-1_arrow.jpg

wages2_arrow.jpg



Bottom line - if you are an unskilled worker you better get skilled. If you are a skilled worker, you need to figure out how to develop higher level skills. Case in point - if you are a shoveler you better learn how to operate a backhoe.

But, not everyone can do that. That's why we have a minimum wage.

No doubt all workers have to do that as the best path to increasing their earnings, but the minimum wage doesn’t give them those skills, it just makes it unprofitable to employ anyone without the skills to earn the wage.
In many, many cases ‘on the job’ is the best way to find and develop those skills, so we can’t chase polices that take jobs away from people as a solution to low wages. It’s counterproductive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85
To support a family of 4? No. But $15 an hour probably isn't enough either.

To support a 15 or 16 year old kid, that wants some extra change to buy video games, candy and other junk his parents may not want to buy him? It probably will suffice.
 
It needs to be raised.

It hasn't been raised in 11 years - the minimum wage has gone down almost every year for 11 straight years when inflation adjusted.

If minimum wage was simply inflation adjusted, it would be $10.55

Last 40 years, CEO salaries are up more than 1,000%. Average workers are up 11%; minimum wage workers are down. And work productivity has doubled during that time period.

So workers are working hard, productivity is up, those at the top are killing it, and those at the bottom are paying for it.

That isn't right, and that path isn't sustainable.
I agree MW should be $11 or close to it; but I would really like to see the data that states the average workers salary has only gone up 11% in 40 years. Or did I read that wrong?
 
Agreed.
The Feds broke our money.
It has fostered the ‘financialization’ of the American economy and allowed elites to skim society’s gains by diverting to themselves first access to newly ‘printed’ (not earned) purchasing power.
We have to realize what went wrong in order to fix it, and too many of the offered solutions are trying to deal with symptoms of the problem, not the problem itself.

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

img_0540-1_arrow.jpg

wages2_arrow.jpg





No doubt all workers have to do that as the best path to increasing their earnings, but the minimum wage doesn’t give them those skills, it just makes it unprofitable to employ anyone without the skills to earn the wage.
In many, many cases ‘on the job’ is the best way to find and develop those skills, so we can’t chase polices that take jobs away from people as a solution to low wages. It’s counterproductive.

Great info.

I see lots of folks bash the Fed here in HROT, but it hasn't been explained to me why the Fed deserves it.

Not defending the Fed - just looking for some knowledge.

Also, I agree that raising the minimum wage makes it "less profitable" to higher these workers, but not sure why it would make it unprofitable.

Many raw materials and most services that a business needs increase in price over the years. The company manages those costs the best they can, including increasing prices when they can. Wages for most employees keep pace with inflation, why shouldn't the minimum wage?
 
Great info.
I see lots of folks bash the Fed here in HROT, but it hasn't been explained to me why the Fed deserves it.
Not defending the Fed - just looking for some knowledge.

Should be another thread. I’d be happy to contribute to the discussion.
Start with the question: Is counterfeiting wrong? Why?

Also, I agree that raising the minimum wage makes it "less profitable" to higher these workers, but not sure why it would make it unprofitable.

If I can only earn $10/hr for your business and the government says you have to pay me at least $15/hr OR $0/hr, I’m either not getting hired or I’m ‘interning’.
You’re not going to choose to lose $5/hr hiring me.

Many raw materials and most services that a business needs increase in price over the years. The company manages those costs the best they can, including increasing prices when they can. Wages for most employees keep pace with inflation, why shouldn't the minimum wage?

Inflation is a consequence of what the Fed has done to our money, it is not the natural order.
The minimum wage, insofar as it has an impact (meaning inflation hasn’t obviated it), simply makes it unprofitable to hire the lowest skilled among us.
 
I am sure it's been pointed out somewhere in this thread, but $7.25 isn't meant to be a living wage, it's meant to be a wage floor for people without many skills such as those with middle and high school acumen. If these are the only jobs people are going to get and they are trying to make a living by doing so then they are a failure in life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85
Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

It was the Senator’s statement not mine. And if the Senator is lying or misremembering, my point is still the same - you can’t currently work and put yourself through school (or even come close) at minimum wage for the summer.

You used to be able to do that. I cited the post for the 5,000 hours of work point in response to @Jerome Silberman point about the cost of everything including college going up.
If we provide free pubic college we don't have to worry about whether kids can pay for college on a summer's worth of MW work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
Why stop there? Why not $30 / hr?
Or how about $11?

If the bill called for $11, would the Rs vote for it?

How about $9?

Is there any number - if proposed by a Dem president or congressperson - that the Rs would approve?

The GQP is already into full rejection mode. And note that they are blaming it on Biden for not being as bipartisan as he promised.

For a good rebuttal of that R lie, check here:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
If I can only earn $10/hr for your business and the government says you have to pay me at least $15/hr OR $0/hr, I’m either not getting hired or I’m ‘interning’.
You’re not going to choose to lose $5/hr hiring me.

I am opposed to $15/hr. But there are lots of spots between $7.25 and $15. As I said in my original post, things like this should be gradual.

If unskilled labor was "worth" $7.25/hr twelve years ago, it should be worth more now.
 
I am opposed to $15/hr. But there are lots of spots between $7.25 and $15. As I said in my original post, things like this should be gradual.

If unskilled labor was "worth" $7.25/hr twelve years ago, it should be worth more now.

It's worth what an employer will pay for it based on market conditions. There are different conditions by type of work and location of work. That's why a lot of employers currently pay well above the federal minimum, or state minimums.
 
Question: Despite the minimum wage being $7.25, what is the percentage of businesses that actually pay that and don't pay higher? I don't know of any fast food chains in my area that pay minimum wage, but I very well may be wrong on that. There are many businesses that pay $9-10 an hour.
 
I am opposed to $15/hr. But there are lots of spots between $7.25 and $15. As I said in my original post, things like this should be gradual.
Just to be clear, as proposed this raise to $15 IS gradual.

I assume we can all agree that a $15 MW will be reasonable some day. So how many years do you think we should take to phase it in?

It's also worth pointing out that the longer we wait to address this issue, the more drastic and dislocating it will be to implement whatever fix we agree on.

It's sort of like tackling climate change. We've known for decades what we face. If we had chosen to start dealing with it back then - or even a decade ago - or even under the Trump admin - it would be easier than it will now be.

Can we please stop being stupid about these important things?
 
Question: Despite the minimum wage being $7.25, what is the percentage of businesses that actually pay that and don't pay higher? I don't know of any fast food chains in my area that pay minimum wage, but I very well may be wrong on that. There are many businesses that pay $9-10 an hour.
Some people use this as a deflection. The train of thought being "if few businesses actually pay people at or near the current MW, then we don't really have a problem, so let's not raise the MW."

I prefer to look at it as an argument that "it won't actually be all that hard on most businesses to accommodate a gradual phase-in of a MW raise, so let's quit the food fights and just get it done."

If you are right and most businesses pay $9-10 or more, then the first phase of the proposed raise to $15 - which raises it to $9 and change, iirc - will hardly, um, phase anyone. (sorry, the devil made me do it)
 
Question: Despite the minimum wage being $7.25, what is the percentage of businesses that actually pay that and don't pay higher? I don't know of any fast food chains in my area that pay minimum wage, but I very well may be wrong on that. There are many businesses that pay $9-10 an hour.

Inflation has largely obviated it.
I prefer to look at it as an argument that "it won't actually be all that hard on most businesses to accommodate a gradual phase-in of a MW raise”

Why don’t you prefer to look at it as your willingness to throw otherwise willing and able people out of the job market?

What in your mind, or anyone else’s, entitles you to deny someone else willing and able to work the legal ability to do so?

WE ALL WANT PEOPLE TO EARN MORE MONEY.

Cutting rungs off the bottom of the economic ladder isn’t the path to that.

More capital and skills enhancing their productivity is the only way to increase wealth production and raise living standards.

There is no magic wand aspect to a wage floor, it just generates unemployment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85
ADVERTISEMENT