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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they do something like this then it needs to be at the state level. $15/hr might not be too bad in NY but it's insane in Alabama.

If they do this, we need to stop tipping. Surely nobody thinks that a waitress deserves $15/hr AND a tip, right?

Current minimum wage for tipped employees is $2.13/hr. Presumably that would increase proportionally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d rather we stopped this “living wage” talk and focus on making essentials like health care and housing more affordable/accessible.

If the 15 does not result in reduced employment, it will result in inflation of things like daycare, food, and housing. Then the 15 will not have as much buying power as it does now. And where does that place people who are already making 15 an hour? Are their wages going to go up too?

If it does result in reduced employment, then that is going to be a larger societal problem. Work is important to human dignity and a sense of purpose.

I also have kids. One will be old enough for a PT job in a year or two. Its already hard enough for young people to get their foot in the door and this will make it harder.

Raising minimum wage will not cause inflation. That’s a myth that keeps being repeated by idiots like you.

Calling someone an "idiot" when they did nothing to provoke you, except have a opinion different than yours makes you the bigger idiot and an asshole too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Democrat that supported Biden. But I don't understand why it seems to be $15 or nothing? Can they raise the minimum wage to $10 as compromise? [b]The jump from 7 to 15 seems large[/b], and concerning in terms of job loss and cost of goods. However, I do see the argument of not taking advantage of the lower paid and raising their wages. Why can there not be a happy medium proposed? I have not yet heard of a discussion of compromise.

Wtf???

What about the fact that minimum wage workers have not had a raise in 11.5 years? Isn't that just as bad as a "jump"? What about the fact that in fact their earnings have been decreasing steadily since 1968 relative to the cost of living? In any case, it would likely be phased in.

According to something I heard on NPR, the post-civil rights era minimum wage changes had a huge effect on narrowing the income gap between blacks and whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A minimum wage job needs to be able to pay its workers enough to feed, clothe and house themselves. As PP noted above, there are only so many hours a day you can work and in this new economy, people ARE expected to support themselves on minimum wage jobs. It is not heavy-handed to correct a real labor issue. With any change, there are consequences, yes. We have lost entire swaths of jobs due to technological changes. But we don't sit on our hands and let allowing businesses big and small thrive by exploiting their labor.(and please, spare us "they have a choice" argument, because they simply don't for a variety of reasons).

There is something seriously wrong in a country where people can put in a hard and honest 40+hours of work a week and still not be able to meet the basics.

Basically this. We shouldn't have a static minimum wage, that is fought over by politicians. It should be tied to productivity, inflation, something like that.

Agreed. But apparently people that can’t qualify to do more than minimum wage work should just be at risk for hunger or homelessness...because their work isn’t worth a living wage I guess?

+1. This a a question some people don’t want to acknowledge. Not every worker is capable of a certain level of output. That does not mean their contributions are worth nothing and that they are better off staying home and collecting benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d rather we stopped this “living wage” talk and focus on making essentials like health care and housing more affordable/accessible.

If the 15 does not result in reduced employment, it will result in inflation of things like daycare, food, and housing. Then the 15 will not have as much buying power as it does now. And where does that place people who are already making 15 an hour? Are their wages going to go up too?

If it does result in reduced employment, then that is going to be a larger societal problem. Work is important to human dignity and a sense of purpose.

I also have kids. One will be old enough for a PT job in a year or two. Its already hard enough for young people to get their foot in the door and this will make it harder.

Which would you rather if it were you at that income level? I'd rather a living wage so I don't have to be dependent on public projects.

There should be no shame in benefitting from programs such as national health care.
As far as housing, if government interference has made it expensive, then perhaps the government ought to either stop interfering (restrictive zoning, etc) or make it right some other way. There should be no shame in benefiting from that either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d rather we stopped this “living wage” talk and focus on making essentials like health care and housing more affordable/accessible.

If the 15 does not result in reduced employment, it will result in inflation of things like daycare, food, and housing. Then the 15 will not have as much buying power as it does now. And where does that place people who are already making 15 an hour? Are their wages going to go up too?

If it does result in reduced employment, then that is going to be a larger societal problem. Work is important to human dignity and a sense of purpose.

I also have kids. One will be old enough for a PT job in a year or two. Its already hard enough for young people to get their foot in the door and this will make it harder.

Which would you rather if it were you at that income level? I'd rather a living wage so I don't have to be dependent on public projects.

There should be no shame in benefitting from programs such as national health care.
As far as housing, if government interference has made it expensive, then perhaps the government ought to either stop interfering (restrictive zoning, etc) or make it right some other way. There should be no shame in benefiting from that either.

Of course there’s no shame. But which would YOU rather?

[Anonymous]

The possibility of low income housing instantly springing up in every community in America is nil. That leaves increased min wage as the best option for addressing inequality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d rather we stopped this “living wage” talk and focus on making essentials like health care and housing more affordable/accessible.

If the 15 does not result in reduced employment, it will result in inflation of things like daycare, food, and housing. Then the 15 will not have as much buying power as it does now. And where does that place people who are already making 15 an hour? Are their wages going to go up too?

If it does result in reduced employment, then that is going to be a larger societal problem. Work is important to human dignity and a sense of purpose.

I also have kids. One will be old enough for a PT job in a year or two. Its already hard enough for young people to get their foot in the door and this will make it harder.

Raising minimum wage will not cause inflation. That’s a myth that keeps being repeated by idiots like you.

Calling someone an "idiot" when they did nothing to provoke you, except have a opinion different than yours makes you the bigger idiot and an asshole too.

+1. Handful of posters here who immediately resort to name calling when they cannot debate the topic at hand. “Idiot”, “moron” throughout this forum. Just scroll on by. There are some reasonably intellectual folks here who can exchange a meaningful dialogue. Unfortunately you have to weed through to find them.

[Anonymous]

Current minimum wage for tipped employees is $2.13/hr. Presumably that would increase proportionally.

True, but employers are required to make up the difference if 2.13 + tips does not equal the full minimum wage ($15?) per hour. So, waiters and waitresses are still required to get the full minimum wage, just that some of it comes from tips.

[Anonymous]

“The other issue is that prices vary widely from one part of the US to another. An appropriate minimum wage in NYC would not be an appropriate minimum wage in Podunkville, Arkansas. “

This to me is the biggest problem with it. It is a HUGE jump if you are in a nowhere area that is actually paying minimum wage. In urban metro areas most jobs are probably higher as it would be hard to find workers for a wage that low given the cost of living. Cost of living varies wildly - a min wage hike of double the current one ignoring that is going to cause big shocks in more empty areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“The other issue is that prices vary widely from one part of the US to another. An appropriate minimum wage in NYC would not be an appropriate minimum wage in Podunkville, Arkansas. “

This to me is the biggest problem with it. It is a HUGE jump if you are in a nowhere area that is actually paying minimum wage. In urban metro areas most jobs are probably higher as it would be hard to find workers for a wage that low given the cost of living. Cost of living varies wildly - a min wage hike of double the current one ignoring that is going to cause big shocks in more empty areas.

Not necessarily. It wasn't part of my job, just something I stumbled on working for a contractor for a giant fast food chain I will not ID by name. Franchises before NYC went to $15 min were paying their low level managers absolute minimum in the Bronx, elsewhere it varied a great deal from minimum or close to that to higher in some places. In fact, one problem when minimums rose in a lot of places was that their business software could only set the minimum wage at 9.99 or lower (should make the point that what I saw was not just the software, it was that they were actually paying).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A minimum wage job needs to be able to pay its workers enough to feed, clothe and house themselves. As PP noted above, there are only so many hours a day you can work and in this new economy, people ARE expected to support themselves on minimum wage jobs. It is not heavy-handed to correct a real labor issue. With any change, there are consequences, yes. We have lost entire swaths of jobs due to technological changes. But we don't sit on our hands and let allowing businesses big and small thrive by exploiting their labor.(and please, spare us "they have a choice" argument, because they simply don't for a variety of reasons).

There is something seriously wrong in a country where people can put in a hard and honest 40+hours of work a week and still not be able to meet the basics.

Basically this. We shouldn't have a static minimum wage, that is fought over by politicians. It should be tied to productivity, inflation, something like that.

Agreed. But apparently people that can’t qualify to do more than minimum wage work should just be at risk for hunger or homelessness...because their work isn’t worth a living wage I guess?

+1. This a a question some people don’t want to acknowledge. Not every worker is capable of a certain level of output. That does not mean their contributions are worth nothing and that they are better off staying home and collecting benefits.

Actually republicans would rather they die. Tats what I’ve learned this year. They definitely don’t want to pay them benefits, and they won’t force employers to pay them fairly. So what’s the alternative?

[Anonymous]

If you can’t afford to pay your employees a living wage, your company is not profitable and your business is ALREADY a failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you can’t afford to pay your employees a living wage, your company is not profitable and your business is ALREADY a failure.

+1 No more exemptions from providing leave or healthcare. All workers have the same rights, not just those who work for huge corporations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you can’t afford to pay your employees a living wage, your company is not profitable and your business is ALREADY a failure.

Agreed. But greed.