Help me understand the impact of a $15 minimum wage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?

If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.

And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.

You ignore the fact that people earning minimum wage 1. Have few employment prospects 2. Are likely already living in poverty and don't exactly have the option of being choosy. Do you know how hard it is for a homeless person to get a job? Someone on minimum wage is working multiple jobs to get by, and could be 1 emergency, 1 missed rent payment away from homelessness. Then their job prospects get infinely worse.

Stop acting like you don't understand that what you're presenting is a FALSE choice.

Sure, the newly freed slaves during reconstruction could have done whatever they wanted *in theory* but in reality, most of them entered into indentured servitude as sharecrippers for their former masters.

We've done this throughout our history. We present people with false choices and freedoms, then tsk tsk them for not succeeding against the system we've built to work against them.

People on this very thread have argued that small businesses can't succeed without this underclass of poverty wage workers. So which is it? Can they realistically say no, or not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?

If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.

And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.

Buddy, you ever been hungry?

Or a day away from losing your house? Seriously, everyone arguing against minimum wage needs to 1. Work a full week in a minimum wage job to see what back breaking demoralizing work it can be, and 2. Figure out how they would sustain themselves on the wage. Not just in theory. Find a place to live that allows you to get to work on time, even with minimal access to public transportation. Figure out how you're going to get to the grocery store, let alone pay for the groceries. Figure out who's going to watch your kids and who accepts childcare vouchers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let them eat cake, right?

That went real well.

This is a classic blunder of the “burn it all down” and “eat the rich” stance.

You think you’re fighting for a noble cause and so you treat “the rich” as a ruling class like Marie Antoinette of France when in reality they are workers in a free land in a government that is OF the people, by the people, and for the people...not some monarchy or dictatorial nation.
The “system” that you think you are fighting actually created opportunity for anyone who want to set high goals and work to achieve them. And yes I do mean anyone. This is why the race wars that the left is attempting to ignite to champion this Marxist movement in the US will eventually fail—even if it destroys our country in the process. There are so many immigrants who came from nothing and built a good life *starting* at minimum wage jobs and refusing to stop bettering their skills, education and lives along the way because America provides that opportunity to those who want it and commit to working for it.
If you keep pretending the US is pre-revolutionary France instead of a country with freedom of opportunity by the people and for the people, then you will eventually chase all the wealthy and educated people who have worked from nothing to create and sustain that opportunity out of the country and will be left with ruin. See Russian revolution. See French post-Revolution era.
It will be a very long, depressing road and in the end you’ll be speaking Chinese and working for far less than the current minimum wage you disdain with no way out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them eat cake, right?

That went real well.

This is a classic blunder of the “burn it all down” and “eat the rich” stance.

You think you’re fighting for a noble cause and so you treat “the rich” as a ruling class like Marie Antoinette of France when in reality they are workers in a free land in a government that is OF the people, by the people, and for the people...not some monarchy or dictatorial nation.
The “system” that you think you are fighting actually created opportunity for anyone who want to set high goals and work to achieve them. And yes I do mean anyone. This is why the race wars that the left is attempting to ignite to champion this Marxist movement in the US will eventually fail—even if it destroys our country in the process. There are so many immigrants who came from nothing and built a good life *starting* at minimum wage jobs and refusing to stop bettering their skills, education and lives along the way because America provides that opportunity to those who want it and commit to working for it.
If you keep pretending the US is pre-revolutionary France instead of a country with freedom of opportunity by the people and for the people, then you will eventually chase all the wealthy and educated people who have worked from nothing to create and sustain that opportunity out of the country and will be left with ruin. See Russian revolution. See French post-Revolution era.
It will be a very long, depressing road and in the end you’ll be speaking Chinese and working for far less than the current minimum wage you disdain with no way out.

I think you need to talk to people who are down in poverty and see if they agree with you. Because if you believe this and they do not, then don't be suprized if they fight against you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?

If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.

And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.

Buddy, you ever been hungry?

Or a day away from losing your house? Seriously, everyone arguing against minimum wage needs to 1. Work a full week in a minimum wage job to see what back breaking demoralizing work it can be, and 2. Figure out how they would sustain themselves on the wage. Not just in theory. Find a place to live that allows you to get to work on time, even with minimal access to public transportation. Figure out how you're going to get to the grocery store, let alone pay for the groceries. Figure out who's going to watch your kids and who accepts childcare vouchers.

The point from most everyone here is that you should not be working a minimum wage job as a life plan. Period. Minimum wage jobs are meant to be an entry into the work force wherein you enter with no skills and no experience. A 16-year-old getting his feet wet with a minimum wage job does not need to pay a mortgage. He then gains experience which he uses to get a better paying job. And continues to take on more responsibility and more skills such that he can command an increase for the next job. We are arguing apples and oranges because you think a person should be able to sustain a family on a minimum wage job. I do not. I agree with you that it’s insufficient to do that. I just disagree that the wage needs to change. Why would you want to incentivize someone to work their entire lives in a no-skills-requires job instead of encouraging growth of skills and mind to achieve more and be compensated for that commitment and effort?
To that end, if the goal is equality of outcome, why do we strive for anything? If in the end we will all be assigned a job and wage that is of equal value, then why would one continue to go to school and achieve more education or learn a new skill?

[Anonymous]

The alternative to a higher minimum wage, is UBI. Or societal unrest. Pick.

This is pretty much it (or we keep subsidizing these people through our taxes). People want to believe that anyone can gain more skills and get higher pay, but there are those who, for one reason or another, cannot. At the same time, there are jobs that need to get done that are unskilled. It's humane to pay people a living wage because we are talking about our fellow man. We have seen the situation with wage disparity get worse, not better. It will never be perfect, but let's try to make it better. This is a moral imperative as much as anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?


If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.

And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.


Buddy, you ever been hungry?


Or a day away from losing your house? Seriously, everyone arguing against minimum wage needs to 1. Work a full week in a minimum wage job to see what back breaking demoralizing work it can be, and 2. Figure out how they would sustain themselves on the wage. Not just in theory. Find a place to live that allows you to get to work on time, even with minimal access to public transportation. Figure out how you're going to get to the grocery store, let alone pay for the groceries. Figure out who's going to watch your kids and who accepts childcare vouchers.


The point from most everyone here is that you should not be working a minimum wage job as a life plan. Period. Minimum wage jobs are meant to be an entry into the work force wherein you enter with no skills and no experience. A 16-year-old getting his feet wet with a minimum wage job does not need to pay a mortgage. He then gains experience which he uses to get a better paying job. And continues to take on more responsibility and more skills such that he can command an increase for the next job. We are arguing apples and oranges because you think a person should be able to sustain a family on a minimum wage job. I do not. I agree with you that it’s insufficient to do that. I just disagree that the wage needs to change. Why would you want to incentivize someone to work their entire lives in a no-skills-requires job instead of encouraging growth of skills and mind to achieve more and be compensated for that commitment and effort?
To that end, if the goal is equality of outcome, why do we strive for anything? If in the end we will all be assigned a job and wage that is of equal value, then why would one continue to go to school and achieve more education or learn a new skill?

The goal is not equality of outcome. Why do you think that? The goal is ability to sustain basic needs based on a full time job. There will be people who make more than minimum wage based on their education, skills, etc. There are many, many people making over $15 an hour you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them eat cake, right?

That went real well.

This is a classic blunder of the “burn it all down” and “eat the rich” stance.

You think you’re fighting for a noble cause and so you treat “the rich” as a ruling class like Marie Antoinette of France when in reality they are workers in a free land in a government that is OF the people, by the people, and for the people...not some monarchy or dictatorial nation.
The “system” that you think you are fighting actually created opportunity for anyone who want to set high goals and work to achieve them. And yes I do mean anyone. This is why the race wars that the left is attempting to ignite to champion this Marxist movement in the US will eventually fail—even if it destroys our country in the process. There are so many immigrants who came from nothing and built a good life *starting* at minimum wage jobs and refusing to stop bettering their skills, education and lives along the way because America provides that opportunity to those who want it and commit to working for it.
If you keep pretending the US is pre-revolutionary France instead of a country with freedom of opportunity by the people and for the people, then you will eventually chase all the wealthy and educated people who have worked from nothing to create and sustain that opportunity out of the country and will be left with ruin. See Russian revolution. See French post-Revolution era.
It will be a very long, depressing road and in the end you’ll be speaking Chinese and working for far less than the current minimum wage you disdain with no way out.

I think you need to talk to people who are down in poverty and see if they agree with you. Because if you believe this and they do not, then don't be suprized if they fight against you.

Yes but we do know from research how to help future generations to avoid living in poverty even if we change nothing about the wages or the system.
We just aren’t teaching students the things they neeed to know to improve their future conditions. And that is, to live above the poverty line in the US, you must do only these three things:
1. Graduate high school
2. Do not start a family until you are married (or have a two-parent commitment to raising family in one household—for those who object to the “marriage” label)
3. Get a job. ANY job. Even a minimum wage job under those 2 previous conditions will keep today’s high school students out of poverty as adults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The alternative to a higher minimum wage, is UBI. Or societal unrest. Pick.

This is pretty much it (or we keep subsidizing these people through our taxes). People want to believe that anyone can gain more skills and get higher pay, but there are those who, for one reason or another, cannot. At the same time, there are jobs that need to get done that are unskilled. It's humane to pay people a living wage because we are talking about our fellow man. We have seen the situation with wage disparity get worse, not better. It will never be perfect, but let's try to make it better. This is a moral imperative as much as anything else.

The problem I see most often is that those lobbying for govt to force a $15 minimum wage will not do it on their own. They are the ones paying their own cleaning staff or gardening crew $10/hour and then shouting about how badly they feel for people. No one is stopping you from paying more! Truly they aren’t!

And you only need look at Bernie’s campaign to get a glimpse of what happens when you do! He’s the champion of $15 minimum wage and yet he wasn’t paying his own staff to that standard. And when they finally did, they had to lay off staff in order to do that! It will kill jobs and no one cares!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them eat cake, right?

That went real well.

This is a classic blunder of the “burn it all down” and “eat the rich” stance.

You think you’re fighting for a noble cause and so you treat “the rich” as a ruling class like Marie Antoinette of France when in reality they are workers in a free land in a government that is OF the people, by the people, and for the people...not some monarchy or dictatorial nation.
The “system” that you think you are fighting actually created opportunity for anyone who want to set high goals and work to achieve them. And yes I do mean anyone. This is why the race wars that the left is attempting to ignite to champion this Marxist movement in the US will eventually fail—even if it destroys our country in the process. There are so many immigrants who came from nothing and built a good life *starting* at minimum wage jobs and refusing to stop bettering their skills, education and lives along the way because America provides that opportunity to those who want it and commit to working for it.
If you keep pretending the US is pre-revolutionary France instead of a country with freedom of opportunity by the people and for the people, then you will eventually chase all the wealthy and educated people who have worked from nothing to create and sustain that opportunity out of the country and will be left with ruin. See Russian revolution. See French post-Revolution era.
It will be a very long, depressing road and in the end you’ll be speaking Chinese and working for far less than the current minimum wage you disdain with no way out.

I think you need to talk to people who are down in poverty and see if they agree with you. Because if you believe this and they do not, then don't be suprized if they fight against you.

You don’t have to “agree” in order for a reality to befall a nation. History dictates it will not end well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Let them eat cake, right?

That went real well.


This is a classic blunder of the “burn it all down” and “eat the rich” stance.

You think you’re fighting for a noble cause and so you treat “the rich” as a ruling class like Marie Antoinette of France when in reality they are workers in a free land in a government that is OF the people, by the people, and for the people...not some monarchy or dictatorial nation.
The “system” that you think you are fighting actually created opportunity for anyone who want to set high goals and work to achieve them. And yes I do mean anyone. This is why the race wars that the left is attempting to ignite to champion this Marxist movement in the US will eventually fail—even if it destroys our country in the process. There are so many immigrants who came from nothing and built a good life *starting* at minimum wage jobs and refusing to stop bettering their skills, education and lives along the way because America provides that opportunity to those who want it and commit to working for it.
If you keep pretending the US is pre-revolutionary France instead of a country with freedom of opportunity by the people and for the people, then you will eventually chase all the wealthy and educated people who have worked from nothing to create and sustain that opportunity out of the country and will be left with ruin. See Russian revolution. See French post-Revolution era.
It will be a very long, depressing road and in the end you’ll be speaking Chinese and working for far less than the current minimum wage you disdain with no way out.


I think you need to talk to people who are down in poverty and see if they agree with you. Because if you believe this and they do not, then don't be suprized if they fight against you.


Yes but we do know from research how to help future generations to avoid living in poverty even if we change nothing about the wages or the system.
We just aren’t teaching students the things they neeed to know to improve their future conditions. And that is, to live above the poverty line in the US, you must do only these three things:
1. Graduate high school
2. Do not start a family until you are married (or have a two-parent commitment to raising family in one household—for those who object to the “marriage” label)
3. Get a job. ANY job. Even a minimum wage job under those 2 previous conditions will keep today’s high school students out of poverty as adults.

A minimum wage job will not keep you out of poverty if the minimum wage goes decades without being increased. Just saying.

[Anonymous]

All y'all's arguments are sweet and dandy but as a taxpayer I'm tired of having to pay for the welfare and food stamps of full time employees. I'm tired of subsidizing their employers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?

If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.

And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.

Buddy, you ever been hungry?

I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.

I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?

If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.

And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.

Buddy, you ever been hungry?

Or a day away from losing your house? Seriously, everyone arguing against minimum wage needs to 1. Work a full week in a minimum wage job to see what back breaking demoralizing work it can be, and 2. Figure out how they would sustain themselves on the wage. Not just in theory. Find a place to live that allows you to get to work on time, even with minimal access to public transportation. Figure out how you're going to get to the grocery store, let alone pay for the groceries. Figure out who's going to watch your kids and who accepts childcare vouchers.

The point from most everyone here is that you should not be working a minimum wage job as a life plan. Period. Minimum wage jobs are meant to be an entry into the work force wherein you enter with no skills and no experience. A 16-year-old getting his feet wet with a minimum wage job does not need to pay a mortgage. He then gains experience which he uses to get a better paying job. And continues to take on more responsibility and more skills such that he can command an increase for the next job. We are arguing apples and oranges because you think a person should be able to sustain a family on a minimum wage job. I do not. I agree with you that it’s insufficient to do that. I just disagree that the wage needs to change. Why would you want to incentivize someone to work their entire lives in a no-skills-requires job instead of encouraging growth of skills and mind to achieve more and be compensated for that commitment and effort?
To that end, if the goal is equality of outcome, why do we strive for anything? If in the end we will all be assigned a job and wage that is of equal value, then why would one continue to go to school and achieve more education or learn a new skill?

You're assuming that everyone CAN learn new skills and increase their earning potential. I know that's a fantasy, and that even people who aren't bright or who lack drive deserve to earn enough from their full-time labor to eat and have decent shelter.

I'm not arguing that someone on minimum wage should earn enough to own a house or take luxury vacations. I'm saying they shouldn't have to skip meals or take vouchers from the government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All y'all's arguments are sweet and dandy but as a taxpayer I'm tired of having to pay for the welfare and food stamps of full time employees. I'm tired of subsidizing their employers.

This. Folks want to screech about wealth redistribution when it comes to stimulus checks and loan forgiveness, but how is this any different? Small business earners get rich, while they pay their labor scraps, and the rest us pay taxes that go toward making up the difference for them.