States with higher minimum wage laws show faster job growth rates

305 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Many economists say that lower minimum wages boost employment rates.

Recent data shows the precise opposite: Job Growth Is Faster in States With Higher Minimum Wage

Why are these economists wrong? Is there some sort of factor they overlooked?

Here's a restatement of the classic economic view of minimum wages

  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
    Of course higher wages leads to job growth. People have more disposable income, therefore they spend more. Their increased spending creates increased demand for goods and services. Increased demand creates the need for more people to supply that demand. More people needed equals more jobs.

    I'm still baffled as to why some people keep clinging to moronic zombie economic theories like that espoused by Friedman and his ilk

    It has never worked anywhere it's been tried, but still they cling to it.. What's even sadder is around half of the population actually believe this stupidity.

    Decreased income = decreased spending = decreased demand = decreased employment
    Increased income = increased spending = increased demand = increased employment.

    It really is that simple.

    The 1% are not job creators. A thriving middle class with disposable income are the people who create jobs.
    Signature
    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
    So that blind people can hate them as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457482].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

      It really is that simple.
      I hear this kind of rhetoric mostly from people who have never actually had to meet a payroll.

      Or who has never gone hungry because they paid their people first.

      Or who has never had to worry night after night if they are going to be in business next month because of the lack of money.

      ...

      ...


      I'm sorry, like most other things in life, it's really not that simple.

      Joe Mobley
      Signature

      .

      Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457520].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        I hear this kind of rhetoric mostly from people who have never actually had to meet a payroll.

        Or who has never gone hungry because they paid their people first.

        Or who has never had to worry night after night if they are going to be in business next month because of the lack of money.

        ...

        ...


        I'm sorry, like most other things in life, it's really not that simple.

        Joe Mobley
        You are only looking at it from one perspective, an employer. Running an enterprise that is not making sufficient revenue to pay it's employees minimum wage and it does not improve perhaps should not be in business.

        A drop off in business can happen, life of hard knocks, but if your doing well, would it not be better to pay your employees a good salary and if times get hard, at least be honest and say well I can't afford to pay you so much and let them decide if they are prepared to take a pay cut and see if you can't ride the storm together.

        If nothing improves or looks like it will, then it will fold anyway. That's life.

        Whateverpedia's view was just sound, world economics, the big picture.
        Signature

        Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457539].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

          Whateverpedia's view was just sound, world economics, the big picture.
          More of that "simple", though inaccurate thinking.


          Joe Mobley
          Signature

          .

          Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457547].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            I'm an employer, a boss, and a consumer.

            Although I pay way more than minimum wage (even if it went to $15 an hour).......

            As an employer, I don't like the government, or any part of it, telling me how much I have to pay my people.

            But you know what? This economy is about more than just what I want. Just because something benefits me personally, doesn't mean it's the best idea for everyone.

            And if I stopped thinking about my own selfish needs for a second, I'd see that a higher minimum wage really will stimulate the economy. Labor is a small percentage of the cost in any business.


            And, yes, I've had problems making payroll in the dim past. The solution is to run my business better.

            And of course the 1% create jobs. They are the employers...who else are you going to work for? But of course, better wages means more spending, which means more demand, which means more jobs. which means more profit for the employers.

            But the buying has to happen first. That's what fuels the economy. Lower costs do not create jobs. Lower taxes do not create jobs. Demand for more production creates jobs. Maybe not for me...personally...this week, but for an economy? That's how it works. And the fastest and most certain way to increase buying, is to increase wages, across all lines and industries.

            Without my employees, who would do the work I don't know how to do? And without me, who would pay them? It's not an either/or thing.

            But from a purely unselfish point of view (something that isn't natural for me), yes, better wages helps everyone.
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457568].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

              I'm an employer, a boss, and a consumer.

              Although I pay way more than minimum wage (even if it went to $15 an hour).......

              As an employer, I don't like the government, or any part of it, telling me how much I have to pay my people.

              But you know what? This economy is about more than just what I want. Just because something benefits me personally, doesn't mean it's the best idea for everyone.

              And if I stopped thinking about my own selfish needs for a second, I'd see that a higher minimum wage really will stimulate the economy. Labor is a small percentage of the cost in any business.


              And, yes, I've had problems making payroll in the dim past. The solution is to run my business better.

              And of course the 1% create jobs. They are the employers...who else are you going to work for? But of course, better wages means more spending, which means more demand, which means more jobs. which means more profit for the employers.

              But the buying has to happen first. That's what fuels the economy. Lower costs do not create jobs. Lower taxes do not create jobs. Demand for more production creates jobs. Maybe not for me...personally...this week, but for an economy? That's how it works. And the fastest and most certain way to increase buying, is to increase wages, across all lines and industries.

              Without my employees, who would do the work I don't know how to do? And without me, who would pay them? It's not an either/or thing.

              But from a purely unselfish point of view (something that isn't natural for me), yes, better wages helps everyone.
              I have heard about your Dounut Profit Sharing Scheme.
              Signature

              Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457618].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    the 1% definitely create a crap load of jobs. The .01%... those are ones who may to may not be creating jobs any MORE jobs, DIRECTLY.

    Many of them actively manage their money and their investments, and they absolutely still create jobs. Warren Buffet, for example. Bill Gates before he retired.

    Many of them created crap loads of jobs before they retired.

    And some few of them are just spending inherited money. Paris Hilton.

    But even the ones spending inherited money, are INDIRECTLY creating jobs, both by spending extravagantly. And also by having they money professionally managed.

    They certainly create jobs. Implying otherwise implies you are a whining sour grapes liberal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457542].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rondo
    Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

    Many economists say that lower minimum wages boost employment rates.
    So let's put these economists on minimum wages.

    Andrew
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457590].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by rondo View Post

      So let's put these economists on minimum wage.

      Andrew
      Bread and water.

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457601].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
    The city I live in, Mountain View California, just voted to raise the minimum wage over the next three years to $15 an hour. I have a small crew of guys I work with who make minimum wage. One of them hasn't had a raise in 7 years.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457629].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    It's funny to see how folks react to minimum wage.

    Raising min. wage doesn't just happen like some magic show. The cost increase jacks up the cost of living which defeats the whole point of a massive wage hike across the board. Do people really believe they'll make $15 per hour min. wage at McDonalds & the prices on the menu will stay the same? That's a fantasy world.

    No business is going to stay in business while eating a 50% cost increase on labor.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457647].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      It's funny to see how folks react to minimum wage.

      Raising min. wage doesn't just happen like some magic show. The cost increase jacks up the cost of living which defeats the whole point of a massive wage hike across the board. Do people really believe they'll make $15 per hour min. wage at McDonalds & the prices on the menu will stay the same? That's a fantasy world.

      No business is going to stay in business while eating a 50% cost increase on labor.
      Rubbish, the profit margins these companies enjoy is colossal. Labor costs compared to profit is a drop in the bucket.
      Signature

      Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457651].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

        Rubbish, the profit margins these companies enjoy is colossal. Labor costs compared to profit is a drop in the bucket.

        That's thinking like someone that earns min. wage.

        Employers aren't going to reduce their way of life to appease employees. The whole point of creating a business is profit. What you'll end up doing is forcing businesses into closing their doors, laying off employees and/or raising prices.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457678].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
          Originally Posted by yukon View Post

          That's thinking like someone that earns min. wage.

          Employers aren't going to reduce their way of life to appease employees. The whole point of creating a business is profit. What you'll end up doing is forcing businesses into closing their doors, laying off employees and/or raising prices.
          When it turns to greed and exploitation (because you can) which it does for a lot of businesses then it's ethically wrong and does not work anyway. As I said before. Any business that would likely fold with that sort of extra outlay should have given up already.

          I used to work in several superstores in the UK. The sort of salary that store workers get there and in a lot of countries is the pits. That's a prime example of huge profit's, minimal labor costs.
          Signature

          Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457685].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

            When it turns to greed and exploitation (because you can) which it does for a lot of businesses then it's ethically wrong and does not work anyway.
            ah well here we go. Now we are getting into socio- political ideologies that businesses are evil and greedy for looking at profits. No doubt some are but given the failure rates of small business startups as a business owner I can't just project profits into the future. I might cover expenses and them some this year and then listen to you say I can cover $250,000 - its no problem - and be belly up three years down the road through nothing I can control and never be able to be in business again
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457707].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      It's funny to see how folks react to minimum wage.

      Raising min. wage doesn't just happen like some magic show. The cost increase jacks up the cost of living which defeats the whole point of a massive wage hike across the board. Do people really believe they'll make $15 per hour min. wage at McDonalds & the prices on the menu will stay the same? That's a fantasy world.

      No business is going to stay in business while eating a 50% cost increase on labor.
      Obamacare was proof of that.

      It's a large factor in the current economy.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457653].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      Raising min. wage doesn't just happen like some magic show. Do people really believe they'll make $15 per hour min. wage at McDonalds & the prices on the menu will stay the same? That's a fantasy world.
      We don't agree much but on this you are right and obviously right. IF i am a franchisee and I have the choice between opening a store in an $8 per hour area or Tim's area at $15 I am going to the other area. 5 people on staff for 20 hours is a $35 per hour increase or $700 per day $21,000 per month. Busy stores have more than five. thats nothing to sneeze at.

      Unless i can charge more and pass it to the customer OR I can move more product - its a HUGE consideration. If you are in a franchise with national advertised prices on key items? good luck.

      Saying your point is rubbish makes no sense.

      I am all for higher wages but an instant easy fix is to ratchet up the minimum in a few years? no not unless you are going to do it at the federal level and slowly.

      We are talking about five people above - what when you are looking at manufacturing where those workers don't have to be in your state and we are talking hundreds and thousands of workers? You are looking at millions of dollars annually. raising the minimum tends to bounce other salaries up as well.

      We seem to have a VERY short memory. It wasn't that long ago people were still crying about manufacturing jobs going overseas and what was the main reason?

      Cost of labor. Nice high paying jobs sound great but in the case of plants being moved out of the US it resulted in zero dollars per hour in unemployment for a lot of people. In some case small towns were wiped out and still have not recovered.

      federally get everyone on the same minimum and raise annually. Communities going too high, too fast are going to hear a sucking sound as particularly manufacturing jobs move on out.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457673].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        We don't agree much but on this you are right and obviously right. IF i am a franchisee and I have the choice between opening a store in an $8 per hour area or Tim's area at $15 I am going to the other area. 5 people on staff for 20 hours is a $35 per hour increase or $700 per day $21,000 per month. Busy stores have more than five. thats nothing to sneeze at.

        Unless i can charge more and pass it to the customer OR I can move more product - its a HUGE consideration

        Saying your point is rubbish makes no sense.

        I am all for higher wages but an instant easy fix is to ratchet up the minimum in a few years? no not unless you are going to do it at the federal level and slowly.

        We are talking about five people above - what when you are looking at manufacturing where those workers don't have to be in your state and we are talking hundreds and thousands of workers? You are looking at millions of dollars annually.

        We seem to have a VERY short memory. It wasn't that long ago people were still crying about manufacturing jobs going overseas and what was the main reason?

        Cost of labor.

        federally get everyone on the same minimum and raise annually. Communities going too high, too fast are going to hear a sucking sound as particularly manufacturing jobs move on out.
        I would think a Mc'burger in a good location would do 700 bucks in an hour or so, or more. You see so many of them fold due to the location not working out, or too much saturation/competition around them. It's all about location/placement. Nope, if your not making that sort of money minimum then it's not going to survive anyway.

        Will be watching the results of the various states implementation's with interest. According to stats, it pans out as being good in the long run. If it works, then do it.
        Signature

        Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457683].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

          I would think a Mc'burger in a good location would do 700 bucks in an hour or so, or more. You see so many of them fold due to the location not working out,
          It really has nothing at all to do with how much they do in an hour. It has to do with how much More they do per hour over the lower labor cost area. You are reasoning like the franchisee should be looking to just cover his costs. He had to invest good money and a whole lot of time just to have the right to own a mcdonald's

          If I have the choice to save $21,000 a month in labor costs unless that area stands to do a ton load more in sales than ANY other lower labor cost area option I am taking it. quarter million a year is not something I can just not look at simply because I should be able to cover it. I'm not in business just to cover

          Now if its federally going up everywhere then lower versus higher labor costs don't factor in as much over the long term
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457688].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

          According to stats, it pans out as being good in the long run. If it works, then do it.
          ...but it doesn't work.

          Minimum wage in 1938 was $0.25 per hour. So... in order to live off $0.25 per hour everything else in the world had to be priced accordingly just like it does today. Raise min. wage, the cost of living increases, guaranteed.

          There has to be balance and in order for that balance to happen someone has to eat the cost of inflation and it sure as heck won't be the business owner If they plan on staying in business.

          With your idea each time federal min. wage increases the business owner would take a loss on profit. That's not a strategy, that's bankruptcy. Keep in mind every business isn't Walmart or McDonalds, mom and pop businesses will fail first.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457699].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by yukon View Post


            Minimum wage in 1938 was $0.25 per hour. So... in order to live off $0.25 per hour everything else in the world had to be priced accordingly just like it does today. Raise min. wage, the cost of living increases, guaranteed.
            Cost of living will increase anyway. I think the problem is that wages haven't been tied to annual increases like they should have been. lanfear IS right that there are some greedy people out there - they won't raise their wage EVER just because they don't have to

            Thats why I say put it at the federal level across all areas with slower increases just don't tell me it s evil for me as a businessman to look at a quarter or a million dollar difference if i can save it. Thats not evil - that just good business common sense.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457719].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
              Wow: McDonald's to shrink in U.S.

              McDonald's to shrink in U.S.

              "McDonald's (MCD) plans to close more restaurants in the U.S. than it opens this year, according to the world's biggest hamburger chain. That hasn't happened since at least 1970, according to an Associated Press review of McDonald's regulatory filings."

              Yep, let's have the government raise the cost of doing business. That'll turn those GREEDY, under-performing McDonald's franchises around, for sure.

              The mind boggles.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457731].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                McDonald's to shrink in U.S.
                Meanwhile in countries with even higher minimum wages and overall costs of doing business, including higher corporate taxes, McDonald's is thriving.

                Let that fact boggle your mind.

                DISCLAIMER: I have no problems at all with McDonald's vanishing from the face of the Earth altogether.
                Signature
                Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                So that blind people can hate them as well.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457807].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author yukon
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                  Meanwhile in countries with even higher minimum wages and overall costs of doing business, including higher corporate taxes, McDonald's is thriving.

                  Let that fact boggle your mind.

                  DISCLAIMER: I have no problems at all with McDonald's vanishing from the face of the Earth altogether.

                  Lol, where those countries have a small fraction of the amount of McDonald's compared to the US.

                  Australia has a higher min wage than the US but they only have 920 McDonalds while the US has 14,267 McDonalds.

                  Not really mind boggling let alone a worthy comparison based on the numbers.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457897].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                    Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                    Lol, where those countries have a small fraction of the amount of McDonald's compared to the US.

                    Australia has a higher min wage than the US but they only have 920 McDonalds while the US has 14,267 McDonalds.

                    Not really mind boggling let alone a worthy comparison based on the numbers.
                    So, the reason McDonald's needs to shut down some stores is that there are too many stores and they're competing with each other. Very sensible business strategy. Shut down the duds and keep the winners.
                    Signature
                    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                    So that blind people can hate them as well.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458189].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author yukon
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                      So, the reason McDonald's needs to shut down some stores is that there are too many stores and they're competing with each other. Very sensible business strategy. Shut down the duds and keep the winners.


                      To be honest there's smarter fast food businesses than McDonalds, example, in the US Yum! Brands combines two restaurants into a single stand alone building to split the cost of the property/construction. For instance KFC and Taco Bell can be in the same building by design. This also cuts down on transportation cost for delivering food/supplies because the same business owns both brands & uses the same delivery trucks.

                      No doubt McDonalds is grasping straws right now with their current US advertising campaign promoting they're selling breakfast all day. Do people really want a McGriddle at 4:00PM? I'm sure this won't last long.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458201].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                        Do people really want a McGriddle at 4:00PM? I'm sure this won't last long.
                        Apparently you haven't seen the numbers. They are killing it with this model.

                        Doesn't anyone ever watch CNBC??? :-)

                        Cheers. - Frank
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458330].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                        Originally Posted by yukon View Post


                        No doubt McDonalds is grasping straws right now with their current US advertising campaign promoting they're selling breakfast all day. Do people really want a McGriddle at 4:00PM? I'm sure this won't last long.
                        You must have never heard of IHOP. They have been serving breakfast all day for years and years.

                        Good riddance to MC Ds though. They are not greedy because of wanting profits but for selling a garbage product so bad not too long ago one of their CEOs died of colon cancer and many think its partly because he ate his product from a teen.
                        Signature

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458731].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
                      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                      So, the reason McDonald's needs to shut down some stores is that there are too many stores and they're competing with each other. Very sensible business strategy. Shut down the duds and keep the winners.
                      Yes, McDonald's has competition. Not from each other. It's a big country.

                      You've been implying that raising their costs, will somehow generate prosperity.

                      I'm asking how raising costs will turn things around for their under-performing locations. Surely, some of them should see an immediate improvement.

                      If raising the cost of doing business doesn't help the under-performers, how will it help the others?
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458642].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                  Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                  Meanwhile in countries with even higher minimum wages and overall costs of doing business, including higher corporate taxes, McDonald's is thriving.

                  Let that fact boggle your mind.

                  DISCLAIMER: I have no problems at all with McDonald's vanishing from the face of the Earth altogether.
                  There's only three countries in the world with a higher corporate tax rate then the US and two of those are debatable because in the US a corporation may have to to also pay a state tax. So the only country with a legitimate higher corporate tax rate then the US is Greece. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_by_tax_rates Now most countries that pay a higher min. wage also have much higher personal income taxes.
                  Now if you look at average income the US ranks 4th. and with median income we rank 6th.
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_average_wage
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income
                  Now here's an interesting article on min. wages.
                  This country has the best minimum wage in the world - May. 14, 2015
                  Signature

                  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                  Getting old ain't for sissy's
                  As you are I was, as I am you will be
                  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458631].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    There's only three countries in the world with a higher corporate tax rate then the US
                    I am so sick and tired of hearing the corporations piss and moan about how high the US tax rate is. It matters not one iota what the corporate tax rate is. What matters is the effective tax rate that they actually pay and many corporations not only do not pay taxes, their army of accountants and tax attorneys is so vast and skilled that they actually get a refund check from Uncle Sam, every year.

                    Cry not for the corporations. They're all doing just fine.

                    Cheers. - Frank

                    P.S. For all the Apple haters out there - Apple pays on average over $35,800,000 in taxes every single day of the calendar year according to last years' tax data. Put that in your iPod and smoke it. lol
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458668].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                      Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                      I am so sick and tired of hearing the corporations piss and moan about how high the US tax rate is. It matters not one iota what the corporate tax rate is. What matters is the effective tax rate that they actually pay and many corporations not only do not pay taxes, their army of accountants and tax attorneys is so vast and skilled that they actually get a refund check from Uncle Sam, every year.

                      Cry not for the corporations. They're all doing just fine.


                      Cheers. - Frank

                      P.S. For all the Apple haters out there - Apple pays on average over $35,800,000 in taxes every single day of the calendar year according to last years' tax data. Put that in your iPod and smoke it. lol
                      Not crying for them at all Frank

                      I do find it amusing though that people always say corporations are taxed higher in other countries when it's not true.
                      A while ago someone tried to claim that the corp. tax rate in Norway was 60% in reality it's around 25%
                      Now do you use any tax deductions? If corporations are using deductions to lessen or eliminate their tax burden then that's a problem with the tax code and is governments fault, not the corporations.
                      Signature

                      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                      Getting old ain't for sissy's
                      As you are I was, as I am you will be
                      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458697].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                        Not crying for them at all Frank

                        I do find it amusing though that people always say corporations are taxed higher in other countries when it's not true.
                        A while ago someone tried to claim that the corp. tax rate in Norway was 60% in reality it's around 25%
                        Now do you use any tax deductions? If corporations are using deductions to lessen or eliminate their tax burden then that's a problem with the tax code and is governments fault, not the corporations.
                        Well, it's a tax code that the corporate lobbyist have written and paid our elected officials to put in effect. :-) Don't lose sight of that.

                        Cheers. - Frank
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458739].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                          Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                          Well, it's a tax code that the corporate lobbyist have written and paid our elected officials to put in effect. :-) Don't lose sight of that.

                          Cheers. - Frank
                          Don't lose sight of the fact that it is our elected officials that allowed that to happen.

                          Slice it anyway you want, it still boils down to a problem caused by our government.
                          Signature

                          Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                          Getting old ain't for sissy's
                          As you are I was, as I am you will be
                          You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458783].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                            Banned
                            Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                            Don't lose sight of the fact that it is our elected officials that allowed that to happen.

                            Slice it anyway you want, it still boils down to a problem caused by our government.
                            We are the government. We elected those morons. People always talk about how rotten government is. Those desk are filled with real people (I use the term, loosely) that we sent to occupy them.

                            Stop blaming the 'government.' Blame the governed. It's our fault. All of us!

                            Cheers. - Frank
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458787].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                              Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                              We are the government. We elected those morons. People always talk about how rotten government is. Those desk are filled with real people (I use the term, loosely) that we sent to occupy them.

                              Stop blaming the 'government.' Blame the governed. It's our fault. All of us!

                              Cheers. - Frank
                              Like my father use to say "Our government is a reflection of the people who elect them".
                              But to be fair our two parties have gone above and beyond to insure we have a limited choice in who we can elect.
                              Signature

                              Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                              Getting old ain't for sissy's
                              As you are I was, as I am you will be
                              You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458817].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                Banned
                                Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                                Like my father use to say "Our government is a reflection of the people who elect them".
                                But to be fair our two parties have gone above and beyond to insure we have a limited choice in who we can elect.
                                Very true. Don't get me started. I'm off my meds! :-)

                                BTW - we also seem to have fewer and fewer Americans that are allowed to exercise their right to do the electing. If the people in power only allow people to vote that will vote for their kind in order to stay in power, that doesn't help either.

                                Cheers. - Frank
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458829].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                                  Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                  ...
                                  BTW - we also seem to have fewer and fewer Americans that are allowed to exercise their right to do the electing...
                                  Legit question from the peanut gallery - how so?
                                  Signature

                                  The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                                  Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458838].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                    Banned
                                    Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                                    Legit question from the peanut gallery - how so?
                                    Steve, you know 'how so.' You're just trying to bait me. I may look that stupid, but trust me, I'm not. :-)

                                    It makes no sense to attempt to discuss something that you have such a strong opinion on - regardless of the facts.

                                    Now - observe my newfound strength at resisting anyone's attempt to pull me into an argument where I have the facts and they have a political opinion.

                                    Watch and learn. You'll be astounded. lol

                                    Cheers. - Frank
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458847].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                                      Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                      Steve, you know 'how so.' You're just trying to bait me. I may look that stupid, but trust me, I'm not. :-)

                                      It makes no sense to attempt to discuss something that you have such a strong opinion on - regardless of the facts.

                                      Now - observe my newfound strength at resisting anyone's attempt to pull me into an argument where I have the facts and they have a political opinion.

                                      Watch and learn. You'll be astounded. lol

                                      Cheers. - Frank
                                      No, really, I'm not trying to bait you or pull you into an argument. I'm assuming from this answer you're talking about voter identification laws? I don't really have a strong opinion on those other than I am generally in favor of them when sufficient means are provided to protect legitimate citizens' interests.

                                      I think it's our duty to our way of life to ensure that every person who is eligible to vote has the opportunity to do so, and those who aren't are prevented from it.

                                      I suppose in some circles that is unreasonable, but I don't see why.
                                      Signature

                                      The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                                      Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458855].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                        Banned
                                        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                                        No, really, I'm not trying to bait you or pull you into an argument. I'm assuming from this answer you're talking about voter identification laws? I don't really have a strong opinion on those other than I am generally in favor of them when sufficient means are provided to protect legitimate citizens' interests.

                                        I think it's our duty to our way of life to ensure that every person who is eligible to vote has the opportunity to do so, and those who aren't are prevented from it.

                                        I suppose in some circles that is unreasonable, but I don't see why.
                                        I apologize. For some reason I had you pegged as someone that previously stated that voter fraud was a 'massive problem' in the US.

                                        If I'm not mistaken, you're a veteran correct? As one myself there is nothing that bothers me more than attempting to prevent legitimate voters from doing so. While I do want to assure that no fraudulent voting takes place, even though the true numbers are miniscule to the point of almost being unable to define in relationship to the size of our vote totals, I don't go for disenfranchising the poor, people of color or college students. Even shortening voting days, hours and locations is a deliberate attempt to stop people from voting and needs to be purged from the way our democracy operates.

                                        OK. You said your piece and I said mine and we weren't far off at all. No harm, no foul, no argument - and nothing further from me.

                                        You did pull me in, you sly devil. lol

                                        Cheers. - Frank
                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458879].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                                        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                                        No, really, I'm not trying to bait you or pull you into an argument. I'm assuming from this answer you're talking about voter identification laws? I don't really have a strong opinion on those other than I am generally in favor of them when sufficient means are provided to protect legitimate citizens' interests.

                                        I think it's our duty to our way of life to ensure that every person who is eligible to vote has the opportunity to do so, and those who aren't are prevented from it.

                                        I suppose in some circles that is unreasonable, but I don't see why.
                                        That's why I think voter ID cards if done the right way would do that.
                                        To me the right way would be to set them up like a bank debit card. Then if the banks can set up ATM's all over the place then the government could set up similar machines for voting and have a secure web site for voting. When you enter your card or card number with a pin code the machine or site would pull up a ballot for your state and district. Your vote would register for that district but to keep your ballot private only that you voted would register in your "account".
                                        The cards would be issued when you register.
                                        Signature

                                        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                                        Getting old ain't for sissy's
                                        As you are I was, as I am you will be
                                        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458881].message }}
                                        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                          Banned
                                          Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                                          That's why I think voter ID cards if done the right way would do that.
                                          To me the right way would be to set them up like a bank debit card. Then if the banks can set up ATM's all over the place then the government could set up similar machines for voting and have a secure web site for voting. When you enter your card or card number with a pin code the machine or site would pull up a ballot for your state and district. Your vote would register for that district but to keep your ballot private only that you voted would register in your "account".
                                          That would work for most, but not for poor, elderly blacks in the south. They don't drive, haven't seen their birth certificate in 50 years, if they ever had one in the first place and many don't have bank accounts. That said, everyone in their voting precinct knows who they are. Also, forcing college kids to vote in their hometown is real cute. lol
                                          The cards would be issued when you register.
                                          Motor voter is the wave of the future.

                                          Cheers. - Frank
                                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458892].message }}
                                          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                                            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                            That would work for most, but not for poor, elderly blacks in the south. They don't drive, haven't seen their birth certificate in 50 years, if they ever had one in the first place and many don't have bank accounts. That said, everyone in their voting precinct knows who they are. Also, forcing college kids to vote in their hometown is real cute. lol
                                            Motor voter is the wave of the future.

                                            Cheers. - Frank
                                            Read what I said a little closer Frank.

                                            There wouldn't be any new requirement to register so it wouldn't be any more difficult then it is now. Also with voter machines in different locations they could be placed in areas where it would be easier for many to vote.
                                            College kids wouldn't have to vote in their home town. Like I said when you place your card and PIN in any voting machine anywhere in the country it would pull up the ballot for your district, just like atm's anywhere in the country can pull up your bank info.
                                            Plus you could vote from your smart phone or computer.
                                            It wouldn't hinder anyone from voting, but instead would make it easier for every registered voter to vote no matter where they are.
                                            Signature

                                            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                                            Getting old ain't for sissy's
                                            As you are I was, as I am you will be
                                            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458907].message }}
                                            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                              Banned
                                              Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                                              Read what I said a little closer Frank.
                                              OK. Sign me up. Just don't leave anyone out. :-)

                                              You do realize, of course, that as soon as you utter the words 'smart phone' the troglodytes will rear their ugly heads. How long do you think it will take for someone to use the word 'hack,' without actually referring to their status in the food chain?

                                              Cheers. - Frank
                                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458919].message }}
                                              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                                Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                                OK. Sign me up. Just don't leave anyone out. :-)

                                                You do realize, of course, that as soon as you utter the words 'smart phone' the troglodytes will rear their ugly heads. How long do you think it will take for someone to use the word 'hack,' without actually referring to their status in the food chain?

                                                Cheers. - Frank
                                                Frank; The only time I use the word "Hack" is when someone asks me about your writing style.
                                                Signature
                                                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                                What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458931].message }}
                                                • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                                  Banned
                                                  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                                                  Frank; The only time I use the word "Hack" is when someone asks me about your writing style.
                                                  It's embarrassing how much you want me, for both of us.

                                                  Cheers. - Frank
                                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459142].message }}
                                              • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                                                Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                                OK. Sign me up. Just don't leave anyone out. :-)

                                                You do realize, of course, that as soon as you utter the words 'smart phone' the troglodytes will rear their ugly heads. How long do you think it will take for someone to use the word 'hack,' without actually referring to their status in the food chain?

                                                Cheers. - Frank
                                                Of course
                                                But then if people can use their smart phones to place orders and pay for items, I got to think we could come up with enough security to protect your vote.
                                                Of course making voting easier for everyone doesn't actually mean everyone will vote. As it is only 50%+- of registered voters vote.
                                                Signature

                                                Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                                                Getting old ain't for sissy's
                                                As you are I was, as I am you will be
                                                You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458937].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                              Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                              We are the government. We elected those morons. People always talk about how rotten government is. Those desk are filled with real people (I use the term, loosely) that we sent to occupy them.

                              Stop blaming the 'government.' Blame the governed. It's our fault. All of us!

                              Cheers. - Frank
                              'We' sent only 537 of them - 535 Members of Congress, the President and Vice President.

                              Those 537 have spawned the countless millions of trolls, gnomes, orcs, vampires, socio-psychopaths, Village People, freeloaders, thieves, murderers, and the occasional hard-working conscientious employee that make up 'the government'.

                              It's too bad that the removal/retirement of one of the 537 doesn't force the removal/retirement of his/her spawn.
                              Signature

                              The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                              Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458821].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                Banned
                                Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                                It's too bad that the removal/retirement of one of the 537 doesn't force the removal/retirement of his/her spawn.
                                Maybe the 'Second Amendment Remedy' ain't so bad after all. It would take forever to tie that many nooses.

                                Cheers. - Frank
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458831].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                      Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                      I am so sick and tired of hearing the corporations piss and moan about how high the US tax rate is. It matters not one iota what the corporate tax rate is. What matters is the effective tax rate that they actually pay and many corporations not only do not pay taxes, their army of accountants and tax attorneys is so vast and skilled that they actually get a refund check from Uncle Sam, every year.

                      Cry not for the corporations. They're all doing just fine.

                      Cheers. - Frank

                      P.S. For all the Apple haters out there - Apple pays on average over $35,800,000 in taxes every single day of the calendar year according to last years' tax data. Put that in your iPod and smoke it. lol
                      The main reason it doesn't matter is that the corporations don't pay the taxes - their customers do.

                      ...not only do not pay taxes, their army of accountants and tax attorneys is so vast and skilled that they actually get a refund check from Uncle Sam
                      Unless the refund amount is 100% of what was paid in estimated taxes, they have 'paid taxes'.

                      If that refund amount is over what they paid in, then we need to be having a talk with our dear leaders who allowed that.
                      Signature

                      The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                      Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458835].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                        If that refund amount is over what they paid in, then we need to be having a talk with our dear leaders who allowed that.
                        Good luck getting an appointment to discuss that. lol

                        Cheers. - Frank
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458843].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                          Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                          Good luck getting an appointment to discuss that. lol

                          Cheers. - Frank
                          Just so we're clear, I am opposed in principle to government subsidizing any company or market. 'Subsidy' meaning any special treatment whether it is favorable tax laws, special provider status (no-bid contracts, etc.), or direct monetary contribution.
                          Signature

                          The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                          Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458864].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                            Banned
                            Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                            Just so we're clear, I am opposed in principle to government subsidizing any company or market. 'Subsidy' meaning any special treatment whether it is favorable tax laws, special provider status (no-bid contracts, etc.), or direct monetary contribution.
                            I am 100% agreement with that. :-)

                            Cheers. - Frank
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458874].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                  Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post


                  DISCLAIMER: I have no problems at all with McDonald's vanishing from the face of the Earth altogether.
                  And who will cry for McDonald's? I will.

                  They are a major part of my life. Them and Dunkin Donuts.

                  You're lack of compassion for my Happy Meal, sickens me. Although, your claim was first read by me as;
                  "DISCLAIMER: I have no problems at all with Kurt vanishing from the face of the Earth altogether."

                  And in that, I agree.
                  Signature
                  One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                  What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458656].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author writeaway
                Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                Wow: McDonald's to shrink in U.S.

                McDonald's to shrink in U.S.

                "McDonald's (MCD) plans to close more restaurants in the U.S. than it opens this year, according to the world's biggest hamburger chain. That hasn't happened since at least 1970, according to an Associated Press review of McDonald's regulatory filings."

                Yep, let's have the government raise the cost of doing business. That'll turn those GREEDY, under-performing McDonald's franchises around, for sure.

                The mind boggles.
                Actually, the reason for McDonald's systemic DECLINE might lie ELSEWHERE

                Consumer eating patterns are switching from fast food to Chipotle-style restaurants/fast casual.

                Also, there are news stories of franchisees becoming uneasy with Mickey D.... This might also play a role in the decline instead of wage rates.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458161].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
            Originally Posted by yukon View Post

            ...but it doesn't work.

            Minimum wage in 1938 was $0.25 per hour. So... in order to live off $0.25 per hour everything else in the world had to be priced accordingly just like it does today. Raise min. wage, the cost of living increases, guaranteed.

            There has to be balance and in order for that balance to happen someone has to eat the cost of inflation and it sure as heck won't be the business owner If they plan on staying in business.

            With your idea each time federal min. wage increases the business owner would take a loss on profit. That's not a strategy, that's bankruptcy. Keep in mind every business isn't Walmart or McDonalds, mom and pop businesses will fail first.
            You seem to be under the illusion that $7.25 an hour, the US minimum wage is a living wage, it isn't. it's poverty line. Even double that $15.00 or so is not that great these days. If Mom and Pop shops are struggling to pay even that then they are probably living on a low income too. They just like being self employed perhaps, the American dream.
            Signature

            Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457728].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author agc
              Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

              You seem to be under the illusion that $7.25 an hour, the US minimum wage is a living wage, it isn't. it's poverty line.
              You seem to be under the illusion that someone with no skills and who can't be bothered to learn any should be entitled to a comfortable middle class lifestyle.

              What they are entitled to is an equal opportunity to earn one.

              When working for minimum wage, make more than the minimum effort. Learn on the job. Learn in school. Take advantage of the programs that are available to get a higher education. Live with honor and dignity and treat the bosses money like it's your own money. Don't have 12 kids you can't afford. Dom't buy things you don't need and you can't afford on credit.

              I have to admit, my first jobs weren't minimum wage. they were LESS than minimum wage. I was 14 making $1/hr cleaning motorcycles and sweeping the floors after school. I ended up basically running the parts department within 9 months. Next job was $2/hr at another motorcycle shop, doing inventory and parts. I ended up building new motorcycles out the crate. I finally made minimum wage the last 3 months before I got out of high school.

              Did I grow up broke? Counting pennies for gas money? yup. Luckily i didn't think someone owed me a middle class life, otherwise I'd probably still be mewling around looking for pennies to roll pissing about how unfair everything is.

              And it IS unfair. But yet it isn't. Not really.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457804].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                Originally Posted by agc View Post

                You seem to be under the illusion that someone with no skills and who can't be bothered to learn any should be entitled to a comfortable middle class lifestyle.

                What they are entitled to is an equal opportunity to earn one.

                When working for minimum wage, make more than the minimum effort. Learn on the job. Learn in school. Take advantage of the programs that are available to get a higher education. Live with honor and dignity and treat the bosses money like it's your own money. Don't have 12 kids you can't afford. Dom't buy things you don't need and you can't afford on credit.

                I have to admit, my first jobs weren't minimum wage. they were LESS than minimum wage. I was 14 making $1/hr cleaning motorcycles and sweeping the floors after school. I ended up basically running the parts department within 9 months. Next job was $2/hr at another motorcycle shop, doing inventory and parts. I ended up building new motorcycles out the crate. I finally made minimum wage the last 3 months before I got out of high school.

                Did I grow up broke? Counting pennies for gas money? yup. Luckily i didn't think someone owed me a middle class life, otherwise I'd probably still be mewling around looking for pennies to roll pissing about how unfair everything is.

                And it IS unfair. But yet it isn't. Not really.
                On the surface your argument is rock solid. It does have one fatal flaw however. Not everyone in a minimum wage job is an uneducated, unskilled slacker.

                What about all the workers who are highly qualified and/or skilled who have had their jobs outsourced to India or Vietnam or anywhere else. Some of those have no choice but to take the only available jobs - minimum wage burger flipping jobs.

                It certainly isn't their fault that the jobs they trained hard for no longer exist.
                Signature
                Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                So that blind people can hate them as well.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457906].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author agc
                  Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                  On the surface your argument is rock solid. It does have one fatal flaw however. Not everyone in a minimum wage job is an uneducated, unskilled slacker.

                  What about all the workers who are highly qualified and/or skilled who have had their jobs outsourced to India or Vietnam or anywhere else. Some of those have no choice but to take the only available jobs - minimum wage burger flipping jobs.

                  It certainly isn't their fault that the jobs they trained hard for no longer exist.
                  I've been outsourced once, and reorged out once.

                  What you do, if you aren't an unskilled slacker is... wait for it... get another job. Yes, it's a set back. Every single time. Two steps forward, one step back.

                  That is of course why you don't "believe" every step forward and immediately prespend the income by borrowing to buy stuff (you dont need) just because you can now afford the payment.

                  The actual flaw in my position isn't that jobs come and jobs go... the actual flaw in my argument is that some people get dealt a short hand in the first place. They aren't ever going to but so smart or so skilled, no matter what they do. Mongo but pawn in game of life.

                  That is where subsidies and supports should come in to play.

                  But even then, I've know a fair number of dead simple people who were "successful" in the lower middle class sense of the word.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458603].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                Originally Posted by agc View Post

                You seem to be under the illusion that someone with no skills and who can't be bothered to learn any should be entitled to a comfortable middle class lifestyle.

                What they are entitled to is an equal opportunity to earn one.

                When working for minimum wage, make more than the minimum effort. Learn on the job. Learn in school. Take advantage of the programs that are available to get a higher education. Live with honor and dignity and treat the bosses money like it's your own money. Don't have 12 kids you can't afford. Dom't buy things you don't need and you can't afford on credit.

                I have to admit, my first jobs weren't minimum wage. they were LESS than minimum wage. I was 14 making $1/hr cleaning motorcycles and sweeping the floors after school. I ended up basically running the parts department within 9 months. Next job was $2/hr at another motorcycle shop, doing inventory and parts. I ended up building new motorcycles out the crate. I finally made minimum wage the last 3 months before I got out of high school.

                Did I grow up broke? Counting pennies for gas money? yup. Luckily i didn't think someone owed me a middle class life, otherwise I'd probably still be mewling around looking for pennies to roll pissing about how unfair everything is.

                And it IS unfair. But yet it isn't. Not really.
                Nope, just bringing into question that the minimum wage is not a basic, living wage.

                I see the same posturing time and time again in these threads. (aside from a few) All based on the indoctrinations of the system you are brought up with. You cling to it, defend it, bring in stats and details and make excuses for it's failings and never want to change things.

                Without any affiliations, a few people here get it, they surf over your heads and observe what goes on in the world. They see when something obviously works well. They view it as logical and sensible and fair, a better way of doing things. They don't cling on to the past ways, they embrace it.

                Ultimately, there is no place for left or right in this world, only achieving a balanced view, somewhere in the middle. What works, what is sensible. The countries that are closest to that are probably the happiest and most successful.

                How about that as a new American Dream.
                Signature

                Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458840].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author yukon
              Banned
              Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

              You seem to be under the illusion that $7.25 an hour, the US minimum wage is a living wage, it isn't. it's poverty line. Even double that $15.00 or so is not that great these days. If Mom and Pop shops are struggling to pay even that then they are probably living on a low income too. They just like being self employed perhaps, the American dream.

              You could make min. wage $100 per hour, it would still be poverty wages because once it went mainstream everything else would increase in cost (housing, food, taxes, etc...) that's the way the world works.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457860].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author agc
                Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                You could make min. wage $100 per hour, it would still be poverty wages because once it went mainstream everything else would increase in cost (housing, food, taxes, etc...) that's the way the world works.
                And the people who make out like bandits are the ones owning all the real assets. Land, Real Estate, capital equipment.

                I'm sitting on a house that costs XXXX, my payment is X (gotta love 3% rates lol). So I buy and renovate rentals until I own XXX in rentals, and am collecting XX in rent.

                I'm pretty well set, but of course I keep my day job.

                Now min wage goes up by 2x. Watch what happens here very carefully.

                My house increases in value to 2XXXX, but my payment stays the same at X. 30 yr fixed, I won't take a loan over 5 years on a variable rate. Ever.). My rentals go up in value to 2XXX. And the rent I collect goes up to 2XX. Now I'm sitting even better than pretty, my income doubled, my hard costs about the same, maybe went up by 10% as taxes and utilities increased. My tenants who got a big fat 100% raise, are now paying double the rent, their next car will cost twice as much, their food costs twice as much. Ditto insurance and clothes. Yes, gas and oil hopefully don't double, and if they used to have $200 a month left over now the probably have $500. But that 500 buys about as much as the 200 used to.

                The only real difference is that they feel better off because they remember only making half as much.

                Oh, but the inflation also drives all the money out of the bond markets at 3% mortgages, and rates go back up to 10%. Because no way are people who have hard cash going to invest it (buy buying bonds or mortgages) where it will end up being worth less than inflation. That money will all flee and head to equity market and REITS... you know, places that "inflate" with inflation.

                So while the minimum wage workers feel better off, and are for a short while, eventually inflation catches up with them. Meanwhile, everyone who owns hard assets is better off. Much better off.

                OH, and if you ever wonder why government types love raising minimum wage, it's because that national debt is a lot easier to pay off tomorrow when it's worth "half as much" with they have "twice as much of". Too bad they use that as an excuse to spend it "ten times as fast" lol.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458591].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
              Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

              You seem to be under the illusion that $7.25 an hour, the US minimum wage is a living wage, it isn't. it's poverty line. Even double that $15.00 or so is not that great these days. If Mom and Pop shops are struggling to pay even that then they are probably living on a low income too. They just like being self employed perhaps, the American dream.
              Poverty line, according to 2014 HHS numbers, is $11,670 for a one-person household.

              $7.25/hr * 52 wks * 40hrs/wk = $15,080. Quite a bit above 'poverty line'.
              Signature

              The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

              Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458800].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                Poverty line, according to 2014 HHS numbers, is $11,670 for a one-person household.

                $7.25/hr * 52 wks * 40hrs/wk = $15,080. Quite a bit above 'poverty line'.
                Never bring math into a discussion about numbers.
                Signature
                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458877].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                Poverty line, according to 2014 HHS numbers, is $11,670 for a one-person household.

                $7.25/hr * 52 wks * 40hrs/wk = $15,080. Quite a bit above 'poverty line'.
                Depends on your perception of what poverty line is. In India, that would be a kings ransom, doctors there earn that but living costs are low. Here, 15k would be $1,160 a month, don't know about the tax. Once you have paid rent and utilities here it would leave a few hundred for food, clothes, toiletries, basic medical. (perhaps not) Very basic living.
                Signature

                Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458942].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                $7.25/hr 40hrs/wk = $290 a week
                Holy sh*t! The Unemployment benefit here is $266 a week. And before you say "that's too high", that amount, in most cases,doesn't even cover rent let alone food or other bills.

                If someone advertised a job here that paid $290 a week for 40 hours work they'd get no takers. Even if someone was stupid enough to take it, that person would be paid so little that they'd still qualify for around $130 a week in "dole" payments. That combination of wages plus dole would still see them having to move back in with their parents in order to stay alive.
                Signature
                Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                So that blind people can hate them as well.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458979].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                  Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                  Holy sh*t! The Unemployment benefit here is $266 a week. And before you say "that's too high", that amount, in most cases,doesn't even cover rent let alone food or other bills.

                  If someone advertised a job here that paid $289 a week for 40 hours work they'd get no takers. Even if someone was stupid enough to take it, that person would be paid so little that they'd still qualify for around $130 a week in "dole" payments. That combination of wages plus dole would still see them having to move back in with their parents in order to stay alive.
                  I see adults working at McDonald's and I wonder how they survive. Even if minimum wage were $15 an hour, that's not much of a living.

                  I don't see how you could raise a family on it, without government subsidies. Even at $600 a week (minus taxes), I don't see how you could afford a home...any home. At least not in most of the US.
                  Signature
                  One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                  What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459001].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                    Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                    I see adults working at McDonald's and I wonder how they survive. Even if minimum wage were $15 an hour, that's not much of a living.

                    I don't see how you could raise a family on it, without government subsidies. Even at $600 a week (minus taxes), I don't see how you could afford a home...any home. At least not in most of the US.
                    I think if you cleared $2000.00 a month it would be just about doable, you would be renting and accommodation and utilities would swallow up around half of it. It would still be relatively tight. You would shop at the cheapest stores and dollar stores etc. No luxuries. Your car would be second hand if you had one.
                    Signature

                    Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459007].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                      Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                      I think if you cleared $2000.00 a month it would be just about doable, you would be renting and accommodation and utilities would swallow up around half of it. It would still be relatively tight. You would shop at the cheapest stores and dollar stores etc. No luxuries. Your car would be second hand if you had one.
                      That sounds about right.

                      Kurt is right (vomit sound), having two or more families in a house, several working children, supporting older relatives, and owning homes for generations used to be more common, and in many countries it still is.

                      But as tight as the economy is, I had to get my wife second hand, and she had to settle for a used husband.
                      Signature
                      One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                      What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459087].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                        Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                        That sounds about right.

                        Kurt is right (vomit sound), having two or more families in a house, several working children, supporting older relatives, and owning homes for generations used to be more common, and in many countries it still is.

                        But as tight as the economy is, I had to get my wife second hand, and she had to settle for a used husband.
                        Back in the good old days, when you were a nipper, many hundreds of years ago, people were much more into communal living, no marriage, shared contributions for the good of all, fornication and relationships.

                        It was the church that advocated monogamy and marriage, perhaps we lost something there.
                        Signature

                        Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459092].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                    Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                    I see adults working at McDonald's and I wonder how they survive. Even if minimum wage were $15 an hour, that's not much of a living.

                    I don't see how you could raise a family on it, without government subsidies. Even at $600 a week (minus taxes), I don't see how you could afford a home...any home. At least not in most of the US.
                    Ironically, the ones who should be campaigning for a livable (as opposed to >minimum) wage are the ones who hate their taxes going on welfare payments, and yet these seem to be the very people who oppose any increase.
                    Signature
                    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                    So that blind people can hate them as well.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459025].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                      I see adults working at McDonald's and I wonder how they survive. Even if minimum wage were $15 an hour, that's not much of a living.

                      I don't see how you could raise a family on it, without government subsidies. Even at $600 a week (minus taxes), I don't see how you could afford a home...any home. At least not in most of the US.
                      Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                      I think if you cleared $2000.00 a month it would be just about doable, you would be renting and accommodation and utilities would swallow up around half of it. It would still be relatively tight. You would shop at the cheapest stores and dollar stores etc. No luxuries. Your car would be second hand if you had one.
                      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                      Ironically, the ones who should be campaigning for a livable (as opposed to >minimum) wage are the ones who hate their taxes going on welfare payments, and yet these seem to be the very people who oppose any increase.
                      Some of this is cultural as much as it is financial in the US.


                      First, we have a divorce rate of 50%. The surest way to poverty in this country is being a single parent.


                      Then we have the American Dream where everyone wants their own home with a white picket fence. Many other cultures have 3 or even 4 generations living in the same household. There's plenty of people in Europe living in homes that are 100s of years old and have been passed down from generation to generation.


                      Two people making even $10 an hour full time with Grandma also living in the house to help provide child care can allow for a decent standard of living.


                      I've noticed a trend in some new houses being built to have an attached living space for additional family members, almost like an apartment. I think going back to having multiple generations of family under the same roof, along with a decent wage, could do a lot for many families. Maybe it's time for us to say that the American Dream may not be best for everyone?
                      Signature
                      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459061].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                        Some of this is cultural as much as it is financial in the US.


                        First, we have a divorce rate of 50%. The surest way to poverty in this country is being a single parent.


                        Then we have the American Dream where everyone wants their own home with a white picket fence. Many other cultures have 3 or even 4 generations living in the same household. There's plenty of people in Europe living in homes that are 100s of years old and have been passed down from generation to generation.


                        Two people making even $10 an hour full time with Grandma also living in the house to help provide child care can allow for a decent standard of living.


                        I've noticed a trend in some new houses being built to have an attached living space for additional family members, almost like an apartment. I think going back to having multiple generations of family under the same roof, along with a decent wage, could do a lot for many families. Maybe it's time for us to say that the American Dream may not be best for everyone?
                        Your reasonableness, lack of nationalistic bias, and selection of cultural examples to make a point.... sickens me.
                        Signature
                        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10459072].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                Poverty line, according to 2014 HHS numbers, is $11,670 for a one-person household.

                $7.25/hr * 52 wks * 40hrs/wk = $15,080. Quite a bit above 'poverty line'.
                OOOOPS! That is the OLD math!!!!!!! The NEW math is:

                $7.25/hr * 52 wks * 29hrs/wk =10,933. That is a bit BELOW the poverty line.

                WHY the difference? Some MORON thought they could change the law by redefining FULL TIME as 30HPW, and MANY companies, unable to take the seemingly minor change that means NOTHING but actually triggers MANY other laws to be complied with, now must REDUCE the amount of time people work!

                https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...342_story.html

                Steve
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460487].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    I skimmed the article OP posted. I did not see a mention of
    other factors such as reduction in corporate tax rates.
    (Not for big oil or anything like that, but for small business.)

    North Dakota is, according to a new employee of mine (from
    North Dakota), has really slowed down. Boom and bust in the
    oil business.
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457837].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      North Dakota is, according to a new employee of mine, has
      really slowed down. Boom and bust in the oil business.
      Yea but everyone already knew that was a modern day gold rush. Plus fracking is insane, it's a massive water hog & contaminates the water table.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10457866].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Will more people move to those states and take jobs? ******DUH******! The question is SUSTAINABILITY and reason!

    Let's take startbucks, for example. If the average employee doesn't sell upwards of an average of say $150.00 of product each hour, HOW do you get enough to pay them? If your coffee prices trippled, would you possibly cut back? And what if an EMPLOYEE that worked there wanted to drink the coffee? The price will go up as their wages do!

    If $150 sounds like a lot, realize that a tenth goes to the employee. You then have insurance, wastage, spoilage, pilferage, security, retail space, packaging, advertising, etc.... At mcdonalds, last I knew, you had to make over $100,000 t make a PENNY, because the license fee was so high. Apparently MOST franchises have such a fee, though mcdonalds at least used to be known as the highest. I once worked for a company about 20 years ago, and just for the space for a SMALL CART in a SMALL MALL in the middle of the hall cost over $8000/month. And DON'T FORGET! VENDORS places need to hire people ALSO, so THEIR rates have to go up!

    Frankly, with the reasoning YOU guys seem to have, and all, I am SHOCKED you don't ask for $200/hour for a minimum wage! I mean if it is SOOOOO simple that you can just PICK A PRICE, why not pick a HIGH one! IMAGINE! You work for 3 hours or so and BANG, you have enough for a months rent! Another 2 months, and BAM, you have enough for a car and insurance for a month. Of course WHO watches over the gas pumps? I guess the price of gas and other things may go up there.

    A place near me opened its doors HERE a few years back. Don't get me wrong, they have been in business for DECADES, but just opened a store HERE. They, as they OFTEN do surprisingly, opened right across the street from their biggest competitor. BOTH chains have some that are open 24 hours. Their competitor was open for 24 hours so, OF COURSE, THEY had to be open 24 hours to compete. Guess what happened this year only about a month ago. They now CLOSE! IMAGINE! They will lose ALL that night business, people will get more used to shopping at the older store and may switch prescriptions over there. They could EASILY lose over 20% of their DAILY market share simply by closing at night. And I have to wonder how much longer they will be in business. CLEARLY though, they had money problems to put that all in doubt. I wonder how many people even know they changed their hours yet. They changed the signs, and I spoke to them at length about it, but it is possible that few realize it yet.

    As for the mcgriddle, people have actually ASKED for it. It was the flip side of the coin. They sqeeze more use out of the employees and supplies by increasing the period at which they sell an item that otherwise might be an EXPENSE as spoilage.

    BTW The middle class DIES a bit under inflation! And retirees get hurt as well!

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458592].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author agc
      Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

      BTW The middle class DIES a bit under inflation! And retirees get hurt as well!
      The main reason retirees get hurt is becuase they usually have defined benefit plans, where they are paid some set amount a month. Inflation guts their buying power. On the upside, most own a home, so the inflation doesn't hit them quite as hard.

      They also get hurt because financial planners always have them all in "fixed income" which is bonds. And when rates go up, you'd think they'd make more money, but they don't because the PV or mark to market of all their current crappy yield bonds go down, and they have to sell them at a loss in order to buy new higher yielding bonds. No gain.

      Ideally they'd be in real estate, except most REITS are leveraged, and when rates go up, the REITS get slaughtered as well.

      Nowhere to hide as a retiree. Once you stop adding value to get paid, and using that to add to your savings, you can expect a decreasing standard of living from there.

      UNLESS you retire with enough investments to provide twice the income you need, AND you continue to reinvest the excess even in retirement. THEN you will be just fine.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458613].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by agc View Post

        The main reason retirees get hurt is becuase they usually have defined benefit plans, where they are paid some set amount a month. Inflation guts their buying power. On the upside, most own a home, so the inflation doesn't hit them quite as hard.
        The set amount paid a month is based on what can be paid over the expected life! If inflation goes up, they have to pay more, and that means that they come up short, unless their expected life is shorter. I mean if they will probably not see next year, they could likely take it all. If they may live another 20 years, they will likely end up getting less than 5%.

        They also get hurt because financial planners always have them all in "fixed income" which is bonds. And when rates go up, you'd think they'd make more money, but they don't because the PV or mark to market of all their current crappy yield bonds go down, and they have to sell them at a loss in order to buy new higher yielding bonds. No gain.
        It is RARE that you will get a good deal on high yield bonds. As yields go up, the value of a bond drops, on the secondary market. If you buy a bond of the same PRIMARY(face) value, you will have to pay more, even after selling the old bond. Of course there are two gotchas. 1. If you eventually redeem the bond, you will generally get face value. 2. A LOT of people buy funds that eventually will tend to buy bonds with a more current yield. If the yield goes up, you lose less as time goes on.

        Nowhere to hide as a retiree. Once you stop adding value to get paid, and using that to add to your savings, you can expect a decreasing standard of living from there.
        Yeah, but that ranges from posh to DESTITUTE! Inflation will only help move the needle to destitute.
        The money I make now in even 1900 would be to them like Buffet to a homeless person now. But in a decade or two, what I make in a year may seem like NOTHING.

        UNLESS you retire with enough investments to provide twice the income you need, AND you continue to reinvest the excess even in retirement. THEN you will be just fine.
        Assuming investments work out, and inflation isn't TOO bad.

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460452].message }}
  • I guess we are talkin' about the tradeoff between what we perceive as the value of an individual an' what they got to offer, versus an arbitrary construct of worth, invented by people.

    There are cool employers who take care of their people, but there are also harvesters of souls in exchange for black pixels on spreadsheets.

    I am in favor of some kinda baseline or else where do you stand to fix on a ceilin'?

    Top end gotta be open, not the bottom, cos the bottom open is a pit.

    Problem is, how do you level out without bustin' the pants offa the current order?

    Minimum wage is a bar raised, an' plenty can't or won't jump.

    Guess I am on the sidea progress here.

    I figure it is a fair bar to hang between two equally lofted poles.

    I am no expert in economics, but I figure it has gotta be about people.

    If I am wrong, then people are about economics.

    Chicken an' egg.
    Signature

    Lightin' fuses is for blowin' stuff togethah.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10458878].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author candoit2
    States with higher minimum wage laws show faster job growth rates
    That's one way to twist it. Here is another.

    States with faster growth rates higher the minimum wage to attract workers to maintain growth.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460109].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by candoit2 View Post

      That's one way to twist it. Here is another.

      States with faster growth rates higher the minimum wage to attract workers to maintain growth.

      If life was only that easy...

      Washington has the highest US min. wage of $9.47, the federal min. wage is $7.25. Nobody is moving out of state for a $2.22 pay raise. Would you leave your family & friends in another state for $4,600 a year? I wouldn't.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460184].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post


        If life was only that easy...

        Washington has the highest US min. wage of $9.47, the federal min. wage is $7.25. Nobody is moving out of state for a $2.22 pay raise. Would you leave your family & friends in another state for $4,600 a year? I wouldn't.
        I can't imagine someone moving to another state for a slightly higher paying minimum wage job.

        But to some people, $4,000 a year more is a big deal. It may make the difference between living in a decent apartment instead of a toilet. Or buying a car that is dependable.

        When I used to sell in people's homes, I ran into couples where only one worked, at a minimum wage job. Maybe they even had a child. I have no idea how they survived.

        Do I think the Government should tell businesses how much to pay employees? No.

        But employers make up a very small percentage of the population. And raising the minimum wage will benefit a huge chunk of the population...."Needs of the many"..

        At first, paying employees more, does cost more. But now, employees can afford to spend more. Not just my employees, but maybe a third (wild guess) of the work force.

        The more they buy, the more demand on suppliers...the more profit to employers...literally everyone wins.

        It's the change that's hard, for some.
        Signature
        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460226].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          I can't imagine someone moving to another state for a slightly higher paying minimum wage job.

          But to some people, $4,000 a year more is a big deal. It may make the difference between living in a decent apartment instead of a toilet. Or buying a car that is dependable.



          Good luck with that, a uhaul alone cost about $1,000 moving a few states away. Then you have to setup utilities, rent deposit, etc... & most likely driving a piece of crap car on min. wage earnings.

          Not a smart move for min. wage especially moving away from family/friends.

          Lol, math...

          $4,000 - 25% (tax) = $3,000 / 52 weeks (year) = $57

          Lmao, enjoy the $57 a week in another state. Don't spend it all in one place.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460321].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by yukon View Post

            Good luck with that, a uhaul alone cost about $1,000 moving a few states away. Then you have to setup utilities, rent deposit, etc... & most likely driving a piece of crap car on min. wage earnings.

            Not a smart move for min. wage especially moving away from family/friends.
            Yes......as you may have read...I was agreeing with you.


            Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

            I can't imagine someone moving to another state for a slightly higher paying minimum wage job.
            $4,000 more a year would help. But it isn't worth moving to another state, in my opinion....and in Yukon's opinion, as well.
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460331].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author candoit2
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post


        If life was only that easy...

        Washington has the highest US min. wage of $9.47, the federal min. wage is $7.25. Nobody is moving out of state for a $2.22 pay raise. Would you leave your family & friends in another state for $4,600 a year? I wouldn't.
        No I would not move to another state for that much. I did not mean it that way. However if you had 2 married people that is $9,200 a year extra. I'd do it for that lol. That is approx 30% increase in household income. That is huge for someone struggling to get by. Housing costs would need to be similar or lower though.

        A min wage job can be filled by anyone. You don't have to attract people out of state for that.

        It can make enough of a difference to get someone local to take the job rather than depend solely in some form on the gov't.

        Not much incentive to go work a min wage job if you get a similar payout to do nothing. It can make a difference. If the locals don't want it, then any immigrants who would be working min wage anyways will choose that state over others and fill the jobs.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460933].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    US federal min. wage is $7.25 per hour.








    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460197].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    The article is a year and a half old. Hard to say without seeing the research,
    but it could be that the economies of those states were growing for a number
    of reasons. My state, Colorado, has a minimum wage of $8.23 per hour, and our
    economy has been doing well for a few years.

    Denver and suburbs, Boulder, Fort Collins, Colorado Springs are pretty good
    sized cities. Good tech, real estate, mining, oil and gas, and tourism industries.
    Desirable state to live in because of the mountains....
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460202].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      The article is a year and a half old. Hard to say without seeing the research,
      but it could be that the economies of those states were growing for a number
      of reasons. My state, Colorado, has a minimum wage of $8.23 per hour, and our
      economy has been doing well for a few years.

      Denver and suburbs, Boulder, Fort Collins, Colorado Springs are pretty good
      sized cities. Good tech, real estate, mining, oil and gas, and tourism industries.
      Desirable state to live in because of the mountains....

      Are you suggesting $0.98 increase on min. wage boosted the local economy?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460210].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        Are you suggesting $0.98 increase on min. wage boosted the local economy?
        Nooooooo. I don't think our minimum wage is very high. I doubt we are one of the states in
        the study.

        I am saying our growth is for other reasons such as being a desirable place to live and
        good jobs available in many sectors. Also, good time zone for conducting national and
        international business. Good centralized location for transportation...Business friendly
        state and local government - for the most part.

        The states in the study could have similar reasons for growth that is not related
        to their minimum wage.


        LOL - I missed the grin emoticon.
        Signature

        "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460224].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Yea, big picture and medium to long term IMHO, incrementally raising the min wage and then indexing it for inflation should be part of a comprehensive plan to boost the general economy and won't even come close to destroying the economy and the benefits are many.

    As a small business person I'd rather operate in a thriving economy instead of a sluggish one and suppressing wages won't help getting to a thriving economy.
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460266].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      Yea, big picture and medium to long term IMHO, incrementally raising the min wage and then indexing it for inflation should be part of a comprehensive plan to boost the general economy and won't even come close to destroying the economy and the benefits are many.

      As a small business person I'd rather operate in a thriving economy instead of a sluggish one and suppressing wages won't help getting to a thriving economy.
      The Stalin Model for the Control and Coordination of Enterprises in a Socialist Economy

      Yes. We can all look back and see how well state controlled wages worked in the former Soviet Union.

      Next, we'll be hearing about price controls, from the peanut gallery here.

      Rock on, comrades!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460295].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

        The Stalin Model for the Control and Coordination of Enterprises in a Socialist Economy

        Yes. We can all look back and see how well state controlled wages worked in the former Soviet Union.

        Next, we'll be hearing about price controls, from the peanut gallery here.

        Rock on, comrades!
        Big diffs in economies. While the American economy is dynamic the Soviet economy was not. I'm not the only one in saying that a incremental raise in the min wage won't destroy the economy and will provide a lot of benefits for almost everyone involved.

        You have no proof that an incremental rise in the min wage and then indexing it to inflation will destroy or even hurt the economy.

        Ok, I'll agree to disagree on the min wage.

        Are you also against...

        - Investing in our infrastructure?

        - Going Green??

        - Upgrading our electrical grid?


        Also???


        Let me know please.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460330].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          You have no proof that an incremental rise in the min wage and then indexing it to inflation will destroy or even hurt the economy.
          Oh, Yes I do.

          Remembering Nixon's Wage and Price Controls | Cato Institute

          I lived through those times and I remember them well.

          I remember the terrible wave of inflation that wage and price controls brought down
          on all of us, very nearly destroying the economy. In fact, the economy didn't fully
          recover from that fiasco for over 20 years - Well into Clinton's presidency.

          We can't afford more of that. Especially now.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460427].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

            Oh, Yes I do.

            Remembering Nixon's Wage and Price Controls | Cato Institute

            I lived through those times and I remember them well.

            I remember the terrible wave of inflation that wage and price controls brought down
            on all of us, very nearly destroying the economy. In fact, the economy didn't fully
            recover from that fiasco for over 20 years - Well into Clinton's presidency.

            We can't afford more of that. Especially now.
            Sounds like slice (Nixon) was ordering a FREEZE on prices and wages ---- not incrementally increasing the min wage. But if you want to conflate the two totally different issues - be my guest.
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460435].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              Sounds like slice (Nixon) was ordering a FREEZE on prices and wages ---- not incrementally increasing the min wage. But if you want to conflate the two issues - be my guest.
              Sorry, I misread your post.

              We can however, look directly at the largest wage increase, (indexed to inflation) up to that time (1968) and see the inflationary spike it created.

              The minimum wage reached its (inflation-adjusted) historic high in 1968, when it was raised from $1.40 to $1.60 per hour

              The inflationary spike that followed that increase, eroded purchasing power of the dollar, There is your proof of damage to the economy, brought about by an indexed wage increase.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460653].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                Sorry, I misread your post.

                We can however, look directly at the largest wage increase, (indexed to inflation) up to that time (1968) and see the inflationary spike it created.

                The minimum wage reached its (inflation-adjusted) historic high in 1968, when it was raised from $1.40 to $1.60 per hour.

                The inflationary spike that followed that increase, eroded purchasing power of the dollar,

                There is your proof of damage to the economy, brought about by an indexed wage increase.

                Historic high in 1968? Looks like the CPI was already rising in 1968 then rose a little bit more, declined and then rose again - about August of 1971.

                Looks like it took 3 years for a mere 20 cent raise in the min wage to spike inflation. Did it destroy the economy? The answer is no.


                According to this chart job creation did not suffer during the time in question as 10 million jobs were created between 1968 and 1976. Not bad when there were a lot less people in the nation.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_c...idential_terms


                Nixon's wage and price freeze and the oil shock price hikes of 1973 had more to do with the spike in inflation in the decade of the 1970s than the raise in the min wage.


                On Aug. 15, 1971, in a nationally televised address, Nixon announced, “I am today ordering a freeze on all prices and wages throughout the United States.”


                BTW...

                600 economists and 7 Nobel prize winners don't think it would be a bad thing to raise the min wage.

                Seven Nobel Economists Endorse a $10.10 Minimum Wage - Businessweek
                Signature

                "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460693].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author yukon
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                  600 economists and 7 Nobel prize winners don't think it would be a bad thing to raise the min wage.

                  Seven Nobel Economists Endorse a $10.10 Minimum Wage - Businessweek


                  This is funny because no economist or Nobel prize winners are living on min. wage. That's like me saying it's ok for you to live on a park bench while I live in a mansion on the hill. $10.10 is poverty no matter how much it's sugar coated. Poverty wages has to always exist regardless of how high min. wage goes. Everyone can't be a winner & everyone won't be a winner.

                  You want to know something else that's funny about min. wage increases. The folks making $15 today will be screwed & one step closer to poverty. When federal min. wage increases nobody else gets a forced raise which puts those folks closer to the bottom of the pay scale while inflation keeps climbing higher.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460726].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                    Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                    This is funny because no economist or Nobel prize winners are living on min. wage.

                    That's like me saying it's ok for you to live on a park bench while I live in a mansion on the hill. $10.10 is poverty no matter how much it's sugar coated. Poverty wages has to always exist regardless of how high min. wage goes. Everyone can't be a winner & everyone won't be a winner.

                    You want to know something else that's funny about min. wage increases. The folks making $15 today will be screwed & one step closer to poverty. When federal min. wage increases nobody else gets a forced raise which puts those folks closer to the bottom of the pay scale while inflation keeps climbing higher.
                    Right, so what do they have to personally gain by advocating for one and on top of that they are trained in the ways of understanding economies. The fact that they are not going to making min wage seems immaterial to me - but you find it funny.


                    It may also be funny to you but...

                    Actually most economists say a raise in the minimum wage will cascade throughout the economy as other employers will be forced to at least gradually raise wages themselves - just like well paid union members pulled up wages for everyone when at least 30% of all workers were union - but now it's down to only about 10%.

                    They are also not buying into the notion of inflation running wild if the rate is gradually raised.

                    I hope we get back to an economy where the youngsters are the majority of the ones making min wage. They can be the non winners you speak of.
                    Signature

                    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460734].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author yukon
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                      Right, so what do they have to personally gain by advocating for one?


                      It may be funny to you but...

                      Actually most economists say a raise in the minimum wage will cascade throughout the economy as other employers will be forced to at least gradually raise wages themselves - just like strong, well paid union members pulled up wages for everyone when at least 30% of all workers were union - but now it's down to only about 10%.

                      They are also not buying into the notion of inflation running wild if the rate is gradually raised.

                      I hope we get back to an economy where the youngsters are the majority of the ones making min wage. They can be the non winners you speak of.

                      Everyone doesn't work with a union. Most folks are at the mercy of fending for their own raises without a majority vote.

                      I'm willing to bet Claude's last nickel that inflation will out pace any voluntary employer pay raises across the board when federal min. wage increases.

                      The price of food alone is already out of control, add higher min. wages for the guy at the grocery store stocking the eggs (or whatever) & the price of food will climb higher because no business is going to eat the extra expense of a min. wage hike.

                      Imagine a small grocery store with 50 employees all making min. wage, a $3 per hour min. wage payroll increase for each employee comes out to $312,000 a year for the exact same work being done. ZERO gain on productivity. The customers will eat every penny of that $312,000 a year. Guaranteed.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460763].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
                        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                        The customers will eat every penny of that $312,000 a year. Guaranteed.
                        No...they won't. Not if I am in a competitive market. I can't raise the cost of eggs to $3, if my competitors are selling them for $2. Same with booze, cigs, whatever.

                        I can't raise my prices, just because my costs have gone up. Initially, I'm going to "eat it" and hope I can find the money, somewhere else. That generally translates into laying people off, to meet the bottom line.

                        I have witnessed this story with more than one biz owner.

                        Sometimes they just get fed up and close the doors. Not as much fun as folks imagine.
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460781].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                          Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                          No...they won't. Not if I am in a competitive market. I can't raise the cost of eggs to $3, if my competitors are selling them for $2. Same with booze, cigs, whatever.
                          If you are talking about the grocer or food wholesaler. I have to agree. I've given it a lot of thought, and I cannot see how they would benefit from a minimum wage hike. But I think nearly every retail store (except grocery stores), would benefit from a slightly better paid customer base. I know I would benefit...even if I had to pay my employees $5 an hour more. Why? Because I have two employees...and tens of thousands of customers.

                          And most businesses have an exponentially larger number of paying customers than employees.

                          Restaurants would certainly benefit, because more people could eat at restaurants. Although the raw food prices would go up. But Grocers? Farmers? Food wholesalers? They are at the beginning of the chain....and they would lose.

                          Not every idea is perfect. Maybe an exemption for food grower employees.

                          I just realized that my posts make my interest in the issue look stronger than it really is.

                          Take care.
                          Signature
                          One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                          What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460796].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author yukon
                          Banned
                          Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                          No...they won't. Not if I am in a competitive market. I can't raise the cost of eggs to $3, if my competitors are selling them for $2. Same with booze, cigs, whatever.

                          I can't raise my prices, just because my costs have gone up. Initially, I'm going to "eat it" and hope I can find the money, somewhere else. That generally translates into laying people off, to meet the bottom line.

                          I have witnessed this story with more than one biz owner.

                          Sometimes they just get fed up and close the doors. Not as much fun as folks imagine.

                          News Flash: Federal min.wage impacts every business owner. It's not optional.
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460824].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
                            Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                            News Flash: Federal min.wage impacts every business owner. It's not optional.
                            Slow down, Flash. Read my post again.

                            Not disagreeing that minimum wage hikes affect all businesses.

                            I AM disagreeing that customers will foot all of it, per your "small grocery store" example.

                            Regarding $100 minimum wage hikes, this economy isn't like the German economy in 1925. We can't handle a "wheelbarrow full of dollars just to buy a loaf of bread", situation. Just the price of fuel alone, in such a scenario would "shut it down".

                            Our whole "just in time system" would be done.

                            I hope to God we never have to test that.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460921].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                    Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                    When federal min. wage increases nobody else gets a forced raise which puts those folks closer to the bottom of the pay scale while inflation keeps climbing higher.
                    That statement is true. To someone already making $20 an hour, by working for years at the same job....it doesn't seem fair to raise the minimum and not everyone's wage. That makes sense to me.

                    What is flawed is thinking that if Joe gets a $5 raise, that hurts me. And if I make more money, does that help you? Only if I buy more, and you work for a company that sells something I might buy. But eventually, all money gets spent.

                    We already have a safety net. Even the lowest of the low can still get enough to survive...at least not starve (in the US, I mean) The purpose is to improve that safety net.

                    Pretty much everyone that gets paid minimum wage in the US today, does work that is hard enough, that I wouldn't do it for $100 an hour.

                    Paying someone $8 an hour, doing work that makes them sweat?

                    To me, that's miserly. But it's just an opinion. And to me, there is nothing wrong with being miserly. And there is nothing wrong with thinking (or not) about the rest of the people, and how they live.
                    Signature
                    One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                    What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460769].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author yukon
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                      That statement is true. To someone already making $20 an hour, by working for years at the same job....it doesn't seem fair to raise the minimum and not everyone's wage. That makes sense to me.

                      What is flawed is thinking that if Joe gets a $5 raise, that hurts me. And if I make more money, does that help you? Only if I buy more, and you work for a company that sells something I might buy. But eventually, all money gets spent.

                      We already have a safety net. Even the lowest of the low can still get enough to survive...at least not starve (in the US, I mean) The purpose is to improve that safety net.

                      Pretty much everyone that gets paid minimum wage in the US today, does work that is hard enough, that I wouldn't do it for $100 an hour.

                      Paying someone $8 an hour, doing work that makes them sweat?

                      To me, that's miserly. But it's just an opinion. And to me, there is nothing wrong with being miserly. And there is nothing wrong with thinking (or not) about the rest of the people, and how they live.


                      You're missing the boat, err... point.

                      The guy making $15 per hour is losing money when the federal min. wage jacks up the price on everything sold in the US. Money doesn't magically appear out of thin air. He's also one step closer to min. wage.

                      The next min. wage hike will be the new baseline (poverty).

                      Like I said before, you can make federal min. wage $100 per hour, doesn't matter because the cost of living will increase & balance out right where it is today. Just remember, at $100 per hour min. wage you'll be paying $25 for a loaf of bread If you have a coupon.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460831].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                        You're missing the boat, err... point.

                        The guy making $15 per hour is losing money when the federal min. wage jacks up the price on everything sold in the US. Money doesn't magically appear out of thin air. He's also one step closer to min. wage.
                        .
                        I'll give this a shot.

                        Most things sold in the US are made in other countries. And nearly all manufacturing jobs in the US pay far more than minimum wage.

                        Minimum wage workers tend to be retail clerks, restaurant workers, low level manual laborers. So, the total percentage of people being paid more because of a raised minimum wage, is pretty small.

                        And labor isn't most of the cost of goods sold. So raising the minimum wage of McDonalds workers to $15 and hour, will increase the price of a big Mac....but not by much. Maybe 15 cents (I read a report that did the math, and it sounded rational). But the price of most goods wouldn't be affected. Most people already earn more than $15 an hour.

                        You are right about money not appearing out of thin air. There would be no more money, and no less money. But more money would be spent. A healthy economy just means that money moves faster...not that there is more of it.

                        So......I might have to pay a quarter more for a McDonalds hamburger. A steak may cost a dollar more.

                        But to give millions of other people a better life? I'll suffer through it. It isn't all about me.
                        Signature
                        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10461796].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
                          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                          I'll give this a shot.

                          Most things sold in the US are made in other countries. And nearly all manufacturing jobs in the US pay far more than minimum wage.

                          Minimum wage workers tend to be retail clerks, restaurant workers, low level manual laborers. So, the total percentage of people being paid more because of a raised minimum wage, is pretty small.


                          Union wages very often use the minimum wage as a peg rate, meaning an employee is paid minimum wage plus $12 an hour or whatever. The total affect is more than you've stated here.
                          Signature

                          Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10461821].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                            Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

                            Union wages very often use the minimum wage as a peg rate, meaning an employee is paid minimum wage plus $12 an hour or whatever. The total affect is more than you've stated here.
                            I didn't know that. I should thank you for bring it to my attention.

                            But my fragile self image forces me to hate you for correcting me.
                            ------


                            In the example you give, the person's wage may go up 10%. Maybe a tad more.

                            Although, you are right (I looked it up), the effect on union wages would be there, it isn't a huge factor in determining the sale price of the product made, or the effect on the economy. and 11% of US workers are in a union.

                            So, it would matter. And your correction of my post made it more accurate. But I think the effect on prices would still be small.

                            I'm sure there are conclusive unbiased studies out there about the real impact of a higher minimum wage.
                            Signature
                            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462063].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
                              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                              I didn't know that. I should thank you for bring it to my attention.

                              But my fragile self image forces me to hate you for correcting me.
                              ------


                              In the example you give, the person's wage may go up 10%. Maybe a tad more.

                              Although, you are right (I looked it up), the effect on union wages would be there, it isn't a huge factor in determining the sale price of the product made, or the effect on the economy. and 11% of US workers are in a union.

                              So, it would matter. And your correction of my post made it more accurate. But I think the effect on prices would still be small.

                              I'm sure there are conclusive unbiased studies out there about the real impact of a higher minimum wage.

                              10%? It depends on the change to minimum wage. However, it seems naïve to me to think that a 10% wage increase for 11% of the US population plus whatever % increase to all minimum wage workers wouldn't have a significant impact on prices.


                              Earlier, I found a few studies that discuss this, but chose not to link to any because the discussion would just devolve into a rants about source bias.


                              My part here, however, is done. No more discussion for me.
                              Signature

                              Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462091].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

                                10%? It depends on the change to minimum wage. However, it seems naïve to me to think that a 10% wage increase for 11% of the US population plus whatever % increase to all minimum wage workers wouldn't have a significant impact on prices.


                                Earlier, I found a few studies that discuss this, but chose not to link to any because the discussion would just devolve into a rants about source bias.


                                My part here, however, is done. No more discussion for me.
                                Let's do a little math. I'm going to look up the numbers as I go, and have no idea where they will take me. Ok, let's go.....

                                2.6% of all workers are at or below minimum wage. This includes hourly and salaried employees. (Pew Research) $15 an hour is roughly double the current minimum wage. Let's go with that.

                                11% of all workers are in a union. No idea how many have their pay pegged to the minimum wage, but let's say 100% (to be as fair as possible). Lets say that all union workers make 15% more (a high estimate, I think) because of the higher minimum wage.

                                So...
                                2.6% make twice as much per hour. .026 X 2 = a 5.2% increase from these guys.
                                11% make 15% more per hour. .11 X .15 = a 1.6 % increase in wages from these guys.

                                That averages out to a 3.4% increase in wages from these two groups. A 3.4% increase in all wages paid, because of these two groups.

                                What percentage of what we buy, goes to pay wages? I couldn't find a real study. But let's take a high labor business, restaurants. I'm being as generous as I can. I looked up "restaurant labor cost percentage". In this case, it's 30% of the sales goes to labor cost. In most businesses, that 30% would be of the costs, not the sales made.

                                Let's assume that all businesses have a 30% labor cost. That's ridiculous, but let's be on the high side. Ready? If the cost of labor in the price you pay for something is 30%...and 3.4% is how much more the labor costs, if we increase the minimum wage to $15....that a 1.02% increase in the cost of goods.

                                1% increase.

                                And that's assuming;

                                Every product bought in the US is made in the US. (That's silly, but I figured that in)

                                All union worker's wages go up 15% because of the bump in the minimum wages. (silly, but as fair as I can be)

                                All services and products bought in the US have a 30% labor cost. (Silly again, but I'll go with that.)

                                And this doesn't assume any increase in spending, because wages are higher
                                . More spending would mean more business. I'm trying to make this as bulletproof as I can.

                                So, let's go with the highest hypothetical price increase I can imagine, based on real math. 1%.

                                Are you willing to pay one percent more, for what you buy...to give millions of people in the US, a better life?

                                If I made a huge error in my math, please let me know. And honestly, I had no idea how it would turn out. As far as I knew, it could have shown a 50% increase in the cost of goods.

                                I tried to be as unbiased as I could. And even if I was conservative, and off by 100%...that's still just a 2% increase in our purchase prices......slightly inconvenient, but again....millions would benefit.




                                A garage owner just came into the store. I asked him the percentage of his costs that went to labor. He has a 6 bay garage. He said, "I pay my guys $35-$45 an hour. All my costs are doubled to arrive at the sale price. 40% of my costs is in labor, or 20% of my sales".

                                Of course, the rest goes to the cost of parts, overhead, taxes, and a net profit (I didn't have the nerve to ask about that)
                                Signature
                                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462168].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                                  Given the prices that people pay in other countries for the same goods, America already has it artificially good for what they pay for stuff anyway thanks to rampant consumerism.
                                  Signature

                                  Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462186].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                          I'll give this a shot.

                          Most things sold in the US are made in other countries. And nearly all manufacturing jobs in the US pay far more than minimum wage.

                          Minimum wage workers tend to be retail clerks, restaurant workers, low level manual laborers. So, the total percentage of people being paid more because of a raised minimum wage, is pretty small.

                          And labor isn't most of the cost of goods sold. So raising the minimum wage of McDonalds workers to $15 and hour, will increase the price of a big Mac....but not by much. Maybe 15 cents (I read a report that did the math, and it sounded rational). But the price of most goods wouldn't be affected. Most people already earn more than $15 an hour.

                          You are right about money not appearing out of thin air. There would be no more money, and no less money. But more money would be spent. A healthy economy just means that money moves faster...not that there is more of it.

                          So......I might have to pay a quarter more for a McDonalds hamburger. A steak may cost a dollar more.

                          But to give millions of other people a better life? I'll suffer through it. It isn't all about me.
                          I second that notion.

                          I also have no problem paying a little bit more for stuff so that millions can have a better life. As far as I'm concerned I'd simply be doing my part in helping to engender a much better general economy for me and the average American Joe.

                          (general economy means the economy outside of wall street)
                          Signature

                          "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462155].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post


                          So......I might have to pay a quarter more for a McDonalds hamburger. A steak may cost a dollar more.

                          Or you may have to use a computer kiosk to place your order. If you think companies aren't going to find ways to eliminate as many $15/hour minimum wage jobs as possible, well...

                          How much does unemployment pay per hour?

                          Hardee’s and Microsoft pilot customer self-order kiosks running on Windows
                          Signature

                          Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462381].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                            Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                            Or you may have to use a computer kiosk to place your order. If you think companies aren't going to find ways to eliminate as many $15/hour minimum wage jobs as possible, well...

                            How much does unemployment pay per hour?

                            https://news.microsoft.com/2015/01/1...ng-on-windows/
                            Dennis; I understand that concern. My wife brought that up to me, when I told her about my post.

                            Could a few jobs be lost? Maybe, I haven't figured that out, or researched it.

                            But I think this is true;

                            Can automation replace jobs? Sure, just like it always has. All farm equipment takes away jobs, almost all machines take away jobs. Technology takes away some jobs and replaces it with other jobs. It's been that way for about 100 years. And except in a major recession, there is always a demand for workers. Turnover at minimum wage jobs is pretty brisk.
                            It's just an observation.
                            Signature
                            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462388].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                              Dennis; I understand that concern. My wife brought that up to me, when I told her about my post.

                              Could a few jobs be lost? Maybe, I haven't figured that out, or researched it.

                              But I think this is true;

                              Can automation replace jobs? Sure, just like it always has. All farm equipment takes away jobs, almost all machines take away jobs. Technology takes away some jobs and replaces it with other jobs. It's been that way for about 100 years. And except in a major recession, there is always a demand for workers. Turnover at minimum wage jobs is pretty brisk.
                              It's just an observation.
                              Yep, those jobs could be lost with or without a minimum wage increase, but I think doubling the cost of unskilled labor will hasten it along.

                              But what do I know? Don't answer that.
                              Signature

                              Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462415].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                Banned
                                Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                                But what do I know? Don't answer that.
                                Crap! For once I thought I'd get an easy one. :-(

                                Cheers. - Frank
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462421].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                                  Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                  Crap! For once I thought I'd get an easy one. :-(

                                  Cheers. - Frank
                                  From one vet to another, you don't want the easy ones, they just make you soft and lazy. Too many and the next thing you know you'll be so feeble you have to look for easy ones to . . . hey, wait a minute.
                                  Signature

                                  Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462462].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                  Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                  Crap! For once I thought I'd get an easy one. :-(

                                  Cheers. - Frank
                                  ....he said, slurping his tapioca pudding.
                                  Signature
                                  One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                  What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462491].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                              Dennis; I understand that concern. My wife brought that up to me, when I told her about my post.

                              Could a few jobs be lost? Maybe, I haven't figured that out, or researched it.

                              But I think this is true;

                              Can automation replace jobs? Sure, just like it always has. All farm equipment takes away jobs, almost all machines take away jobs. Technology takes away some jobs and replaces it with other jobs. It's been that way for about 100 years. And except in a major recession, there is always a demand for workers. Turnover at minimum wage jobs is pretty brisk.
                              It's just an observation.
                              I have a feeling much of the talk about automation by the fast food industry is just spin against increasing the minimum wage and that the automation will come regardless of the minimum wage. This just lets them pass the blame for having fewer jobs and making it the "fault" of those that get paid more because of raising the minimum wage.

                              Where the automated change makers because of past minimum wage increases? How about those automated drink machines that pour ice and soft drinks?

                              Also, automation isn't limited to minimum wage jobs. There's a number of higher paying jobs that are becoming obsolete due to improvements in software, computers and machinery.

                              In the future self driving vehicles will likely replace many jobs like truck driving and cab drivers. Uber is investing a lot in this tech. In the case of Uber it isn't a minimum wage that's the issue, it's any wage/profit. And I have a feeling it's the same for many businesses.
                              Signature
                              Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                              Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462471].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                                I have a feeling much of the talk about automation by the fast food industry is just spin against increasing the minimum wage and that the automation will come regardless of the minimum wage. This just lets them pass the blame for having fewer jobs and making it the "fault" of those that get paid more because of raising the minimum wage.

                                Where the automated change makers because of past minimum wage increases? How about those automated drink machines that pour ice and soft drinks?
                                As usual, smart questions.

                                I have the same feeling about the "automation talk". It's a manufactured concern.

                                But I don't know that for a fact. Maybe there is something to it and I'm missing it. That's always my first question, "what could they know that I don't?". It's the first place I go, especially in discussions (like this one) where I'm not an expert.

                                When Riffle mentioned the Unions sometimes peg their pay to the minimum wage, it didn't change my mind, but it certainly changed the math. And the math could have changed my mind.


                                Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                                But what do I know? Don't answer that.
                                About this? My guess is, about as much as I do.
                                Signature
                                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462499].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                                  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                                  As usual, smart questions.

                                  I have the same feeling about the "automation talk". It's a manufactured concern.

                                  But I don't know that for a fact. Maybe there is something to it and I'm missing it. That's always my first question, "what could they know that I don't?". It's the first place I go, especially in discussions (like this one) where I'm not an expert.

                                  When Riffle mentioned the Unions sometimes peg their pay to the minimum wage, it didn't change my mind, but it certainly changed the math. And the math could have changed my mind.




                                  About this? My guess is, about as much as I do.
                                  And the math could uncover the truth. How much do the kiosks cost and at what cost is it that they are a good investment to replace a $15 per hour worker but not a $7.85 per hour worker?

                                  My hunch is that the kiosks would also be profitable replacing a $7.85 an hour worker, it will just take more time to pay for the investment. But I don't think it will take long either way.

                                  How much more expensive is it to have a "kiosk" than what the device the counter person uses now? What's the difference between these "kiosks" and grocery stores opening self scanning lanes concerning the expense and tech needed for the "self scanners"?

                                  Also, how about apps for mobile? And what about ordering online? Some of the pizza chains here have had 50% off any online order. I think these technologies exist regardless of any increase in the minimum wage.

                                  I'm not against automation to reduce costs by any means. I just don't accept the spin that raising the minimum wage is the reason for the new tech.
                                  Signature
                                  Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                                  Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462513].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                    Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                                    I think these technologies exist regardless of any increase in the minimum wage.

                                    I'm not against automation to reduce costs by any means. I just don't accept the spin that raising the minimum wage is the reason for the new tech.
                                    I'm pretty certain of that myself. The new tech comes first, and becomes the justification for a point of view.

                                    I just found out that including this year, 9 of the last ten "hottest years ever recorded" were in the last ten years. 2015? Yup...hottest year yet.

                                    Tomorrow, it's going to be 35 degrees at the north pole. The Terrifying Storm That Will Melt the North Pole This Week - The Atlantic

                                    My wife and I were talking about the "minimum wage hike idea".

                                    She asked, "Do you really care?" I had to admit that it was mostly intellectual curiosity about the math. I told her it wouldn't really affect us, either way.

                                    She said, "What about record high murders?" I told her we don't live in Baltimore or a big city. And we could always move, if it becomes a local problem.

                                    She said, "What about ISIS?', and I even admitted that I don't think about it much, because we aren't where they are striking. I know, self centered , narrow minded Claude.

                                    And, as we were having this discussion, we saw that the North Pole was going to get a heat wave (relatively). And I said, "That bothers me. Because no matter how we live, where we move to, or how well we protect ourselves....there is no escape. How many years in a row can it be the hottest year on record...until we die?"

                                    It's the only problem that worries me. More than cancer. More than a heart attack. Anyway, have a nice day.
                                    Signature
                                    One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                    What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462542].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                                      I'm pretty certain of that myself. The new tech comes first, and becomes the justification for a point of view.

                                      I just found out that including this year, 9 of the last ten "hottest years ever recorded" were in the last ten years. 2015? Yup...hottest year yet.

                                      Tomorrow, it's going to be 35 degrees at the north pole. The Terrifying Storm That Will Melt the North Pole This Week - The Atlantic

                                      My wife and I were talking about the "minimum wage hike idea".

                                      She asked, "Do you really care?" I had to admit that it was mostly intellectual curiosity about the math. I told her it wouldn't really affect us, either way.

                                      She said, "What about record high murders?" I told her we don't live in Baltimore or a big city. And we could always move, if it becomes a local problem.

                                      She said, "What about ISIS?', and I even admitted that I don't think about it much, because weren't where thy are striking. I know, self centered , narrow minded Claude.

                                      And, as we were having this discussion, we saw that the North Pole was going to get a heat wave (relatively). And I said, "That bothers me. Because no matter how we live, where we move to, or how well we protect ourselves....there is no escape. How many years in a row can it be the hottest year on record...until we die?"

                                      It's the only problem that worries me. More than cancer. More than a heart attack. Anyway, have a nice day.
                                      In addition to the tech for the kiosks, I think it's also cultural with people accepting the self service kiosks. I think younger people, with experience with apps and computer tech, will probably accept it more quickly than older folks. Again, my guess is that there's enough people now that will not only accept the kiosks but actually welcome them.


                                      I do have to say I don't understand what's so special about the tech? People order at restaurants all the time online already. Again, it may be more cultural than technological.


                                      And things like heart disease and cancer scare me far more than ISSIS or Al Queda. It's the same concept as "pot odds" in poker.
                                      Signature
                                      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                                      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462552].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author yukon
                                      Banned
                                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                                      I'm pretty certain of that myself. The new tech comes first, and becomes the justification for a point of view.

                                      I just found out that including this year, 9 of the last ten "hottest years ever recorded" were in the last ten years. 2015? Yup...hottest year yet.

                                      Tomorrow, it's going to be 35 degrees at the north pole. The Terrifying Storm That Will Melt the North Pole This Week - The Atlantic
                                      If it makes you feel any better the South Pole forecast for Jan. 6th 2016 is -26 F.
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462632].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                                    Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                                    And the math could uncover the truth. How much do the kiosks cost and at what cost is it that they are a good investment to replace a $15 per hour worker but not a $7.85 per hour worker?

                                    My hunch is that the kiosks would also be profitable replacing a $7.85 an hour worker, it will just take more time to pay for the investment. But I don't think it will take long either way.

                                    How much more expensive is it to have a "kiosk" than what the device the counter person uses now? What's the difference between these "kiosks" and grocery stores opening self scanning lanes concerning the expense and tech needed for the "self scanners"?

                                    Also, how about apps for mobile? And what about ordering online? Some of the pizza chains here have had 50% off any online order. I think these technologies exist regardless of any increase in the minimum wage.

                                    I'm not against automation to reduce costs by any means. I just don't accept the spin that raising the minimum wage is the reason for the new tech.
                                    Most machine's like automated drink making machines and food dispensers are leased anyway, as they require regular maintenance and refilling. So apart from the electricity used (which you could soon figure out anyway) they are passive moneymakers. You would already know if they would undercut 2 minimum wage workers working a food kiosk.
                                    Signature

                                    Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462656].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                                I have a feeling much of the talk about automation by the fast food industry is just spin against increasing the minimum wage and that the automation will come regardless of the minimum wage. This just lets them pass the blame for having fewer jobs and making it the "fault" of those that get paid more because of raising the minimum wage.

                                Where the automated change makers because of past minimum wage increases? How about those automated drink machines that pour ice and soft drinks?

                                Also, automation isn't limited to minimum wage jobs. There's a number of higher paying jobs that are becoming obsolete due to improvements in software, computers and machinery.

                                In the future self driving vehicles will likely replace many jobs like truck driving and cab drivers. Uber is investing a lot in this tech. In the case of Uber it isn't a minimum wage that's the issue, it's any wage/profit. And I have a feeling it's the same for many businesses.
                                I have a feeling you're right.
                                Automation of jobs has been going on for as long as there's been jobs. If not automation then efficiency.
                                When I started in the landscaping field a mowing crew was at least 3 people, the last company I worked for I was the mowing crew and I could get a lawn done in less time then the old 3 person crew. It wasn't because I was faster it was because the equipment became more efficient.
                                Really when you look at companies like McD's saying they are going to automate they are just completing a circle. Before McD's we had automats which McD's replaced. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat
                                Signature

                                Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                                Getting old ain't for sissy's
                                As you are I was, as I am you will be
                                You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10463753].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                  Banned
                                  Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                                  Before McD's we had automats which McD's replaced. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat
                                  Wow! Automats. I doubt many folks here have ever seen the inside of an Automat.When I was a kid and an avid stamp collector I used to head into center-city to a place called Earl. P. Apfelbaum's. They were one of the oldest philatelic companies in the country. I would spend hours looking through their collections of early American stamps, then go next door to the Horn and Hardart Automat, before catching the El, home.

                                  Great memories. :-)

                                  Cheers. - Frank
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10463782].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                                    Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                    Wow! Automats. I doubt many folks here have ever seen the inside of an Automat.When I was a kid and an avid stamp collector I used to head into center-city to a place called Earl. P. Apfelbaum's. They were one of the oldest philatelic companies in the country. I would spend hours looking through their collections of early American stamps, then go next door to the Horn and Hardart Automat, before catching the El, home.

                                    Great memories. :-)

                                    Cheers. - Frank
                                    When I was a kid my parents would bring me to NYC at least once a month. Three things we always did where get a street pretzel, have lunch at an Automat and have a dinner at Luchows. Like you said great memories and ones not many have.
                                    Signature

                                    Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                                    Getting old ain't for sissy's
                                    As you are I was, as I am you will be
                                    You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465504].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
                  TLTheLiberator;10460693]Historic high in 1968? Looks like the CPI was already rising in 1968 then rose a little bit more, declined and then rose again - about August of 1971.
                  Easy, now. The CPI, while rising, got a real boost AFTER the indexed wage increase. It was well over 6% by December of 1969.
                  That's real important to the story.


                  Looks like it took 3 years for a mere 20 cent raise in the min wage to spike inflation. Did it destroy the economy? The answer is no.
                  Did it hurt those on a fixed income whose purchasing power was eroded by inflation? Yes, it did. Damage Done.

                  Twenty cents per hour in those days, wasn't "mere". Remember, the previous wage increase of $1.40 was also index adjusted. That mere .20 increase, remains the largest indexed increase (adjusted for inflation) of record

                  According to this chart job creation did not suffer during the time in question as 10 million jobs were created between 1968 and 1976. Not bad when there were a lot less people in the nation.
                  We went through a recession in 1967-1968. People were looking for work at the time.

                  The indexed wage increase did not benefit them.

                  Nixon's wage and price freeze and the oil shock price hikes of 1973 had more to do with the spike in inflation in the decade of the 1970s than the raise in the min wage.
                  There were all sorts of factors in the 70's, including the Vietnam War, the war on poverty, etc. The inflationary fuse had already been ignited by indexed wages as I previously touched on.

                  On Aug. 15, 1971, in a nationally televised address, Nixon announced, “I am today ordering a freeze on all prices and wages throughout the United States.”

                  Yes, I remember hearing it on the radio at the time. I knew it was destined to fail.


                  BTW...

                  600 economists and 7 Nobel prize winners don't think it would be a bad thing to raise the min wage.

                  So what? It's easy to vote a raise for somebody when it doesn't come directly out of YOUR pocket. You look like a great guy and someone else gets to pay for it.

                  Is this a great country, or what?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460761].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                    Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                    TLTheLiberator;10460693]Historic high in 1968? Looks like the CPI was already rising in 1968 then rose a little bit more, declined and then rose again - about August of 1971.
                    Easy, now. The CPI, while rising, got a real boost AFTER the indexed wage increase. It was well over 6% by December of 1969.
                    That's real important to the story.


                    Looks like it took 3 years for a mere 20 cent raise in the min wage to spike inflation. Did it destroy the economy? The answer is no.
                    Did it hurt those on a fixed income whose purchasing power was eroded by inflation? Yes, it did. Damage Done.

                    Twenty cents per hour in those days, wasn't "mere". Remember, the previous wage increase of $1.40 was also index adjusted. That mere .20 increase, remains the largest indexed increase (adjusted for inflation) of record

                    According to this chart job creation did not suffer during the time in question as 10 million jobs were created between 1968 and 1976. Not bad when there were a lot less people in the nation.
                    We went through a recession in 1967-1968. People were looking for work at the time.

                    The indexed wage increase did not benefit them.

                    Nixon's wage and price freeze and the oil shock price hikes of 1973 had more to do with the spike in inflation in the decade of the 1970s than the raise in the min wage.
                    There were all sorts of factors in the 70's, including the Vietnam War, the war on poverty, etc. The inflationary fuse had already been ignited by indexed wages as I previously touched on.

                    On Aug. 15, 1971, in a nationally televised address, Nixon announced, “I am today ordering a freeze on all prices and wages throughout the United States.”

                    Yes, I remember hearing it on the radio at the time. I knew it was destined to fail.


                    BTW...

                    600 economists and 7 Nobel prize winners don't think it would be a bad thing to raise the min wage.

                    So what? It's easy to vote a raise for somebody when it doesn't come directly out of YOUR pocket. You look like a great guy and someone else gets to pay for it.

                    Is this a great country, or what?
                    One of their jobs is to opine on the economy and I'm sure they have a better idea of what works, what causes what etc., in the economy than you.

                    Besides, I'm sure you can find at least a small group of economists to support what you're in to.

                    BTW...

                    Many anti-min-wage types seem to have no problems with the U.S. and state taxpayers footing the bill to subsidize profitable companies who pay their workers a low wage.

                    Basically it works like this. Companies pay a low wage and many of those workers still have to ask for and get some type of gov assistance - which BTW is taxpayer assistance.

                    $153 Billion Per Year?

                    https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...-wage-workers/

                    It's just another negative economic phenomenon related to low wages. Are you OK with this one also?

                    Or maybe you didn't know?
                    Signature

                    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10461142].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author agc
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      Yea, big picture and medium to long term IMHO, incrementally raising the min wage and then indexing it for inflation should be part of a comprehensive plan to boost the general economy and won't even come close to destroying the economy and the benefits are many.

      As a small business person I'd rather operate in a thriving economy instead of a sluggish one and suppressing wages won't help getting to a thriving economy.
      As a small business person, bankrupting the large employers, or causing them to undergo yet another wave of offshoring, isn't going to help get a thriving economy either. But don't take my word for it. Ask Detroit how that union wage thing worked out for them in the auto industry.

      The ONLY way to have a thriving long term viable economy is to have BOTH strong employers AND strong employees.

      Foisting weak employees off at inflated costs isn't going to make for long term strength in the employers.

      If you want to do something that actually helps, form a lynch mob and march on city hall to get get the cry baby whiners thrown out of the educational system. Start teaching actual employable skills in the schools. Don't be afraid to grade with a red pen and give D's and F's when they're deserved. Don't be afraid to enforce some kind of socially acceptable behavior among the little heathens.

      Then, just maybe, you'll get actual organic wage growth as stronger workers are actually worth increased pay.

      You can't fix the price of a globally traded resource locally and still have globally competitive businesses. I'm sure down at the deli you don't much care about the price of tea in China. But I guarantee down the street where they're trying to make globally competitive widgets, wPhones, wStoves, or wApps, they care very very much.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460418].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by agc View Post

        As a small business person, bankrupting the large employers, or causing them to undergo yet another wave of offshoring, isn't going to help get a thriving economy either. But don't take my word for it. Ask Detroit how that union wage thing worked out for them in the auto industry.

        The ONLY way to have a thriving long term viable economy is to have BOTH strong employers AND strong employees.

        Foisting weak employees off at inflated costs isn't going to make for long term strength in the employers.

        If you want to do something that actually helps, form a lynch mob and march on city hall to get get the cry baby whiners thrown out of the educational system.

        Start teaching actual employable skills in the schools. Don't be afraid to grade with a red pen and give D's and F's when they're deserved. Don't be afraid to enforce some kind of socially acceptable behavior among the little heathens.

        Then, just maybe, you'll get actual organic wage growth as stronger workers are actually worth increased pay.

        You can't fix the price of a globally traded resource locally and still have globally competitive businesses. I'm sure down at the deli you don't much care about the price of tea in China. But I guarantee down the street where they're trying to make globally competitive widgets, wPhones, wStoves, or wApps, they care very very much.
        From everything I've heard the large employers are the last ones that would be negatively affected by gradually raising the min wage. Corp America is doing quite well.

        Didn't you know?




        How to Measure Corporate America

        Weak employees?

        IMHO, 80% of the jobs in America can be done well by anyone with a high school diploma and decent training. And IMHO, they're no weaker than the factory workers who were very lucky to be a part of the post WW2 boom and they are better educated.


        And yes, the entire educational system could do a better job.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460455].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          From everything I've heard the large employers are the last ones that would be negatively affected by gradually raising the min wage. Corp America is doing quite well.
          OK, so you now want the large companies to get richer, and the competition to DIE!?!?!?!? Can you make up your mind please?


          Weak employees?

          IMHO, 80% of the jobs in America can be done well by anyone with a high school diploma and decent training.
          So WHY DON'T THEY?

          And IMHO, they're no weaker than the factory workers who were very lucky to be a part of the post WW2 boom and they are better educated.
          So why do you feel that is so lucky? Taxes were lower, they had fewer of these artificial shelters, income was lower, expenses were relatively high for the government, etc... So what do you figure was better?

          And yes, the entire educational system could do a better job.
          AGAIN, WHY DON'T THEY? The US pays a FORTUNE and things are just getting WORSE! Seriously, there is NO National Education Association! Oh SURE, there IS a place CALLED that! And their "motto" is "Dedicated to great public schools for every student.". But the REALITY is that it is the UNION for higher pay and benefits for people associated with a place saying it is for better education. And YEAH, the public schools seem NICE, but SO WHAT? The idea is supposed to be the EDUCATION!

          OK, on this LAST one, here is part of an answer!


          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460510].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            [DELETED]
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460524].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author yukon
              Banned
              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              I have no clue what you mean in your first comment. Take your meds and get a gal.

              Lmao, nothing better than a little Warrior Forum trash talk.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460546].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author agc
              Srsly?

              Just because someone doesn't agree with your kumbaya liberal crap means they must be some kind of racist nazi? WTF?

              You may want to think twice before going there. The ban hammer has been swinging hard lately.

              How about you go revise your post and then there won't be anything actionable when the mods finally swing by.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460553].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author yukon
                Banned
                Originally Posted by agc View Post

                Srsly?

                Just because someone doesn't agree with your kumbaya liberal crap means they must be some kind of racist nazi? WTF?

                You may want to think twice before going there. The ban hammer has been swinging hard lately.

                How about you go revise your post and then there won't be anything actionable when the mods finally swing by.




                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460576].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by agc View Post

                Srsly?

                Just because someone doesn't agree with your kumbaya liberal crap means they must be some kind of racist nazi? WTF?
                It isn't like that and TL should be fine. You are taking it out of context to who he was speaking to. You probably missed the beauty of a thread that was deleted which included how people of certain colors smell. TL said that of anyone else I'd be with you but he didn't
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460580].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  It isn't like that and TL should be fine. You are taking it out of context to who he was speaking to. You probably missed the beauty of a thread that was deleted which included how people of certain colors smell. TL said that of anyone else I'd be with you but he didn't
                  And yesterday he tried starting a another thread in which folks were asked if they were racist by some strange video which said weird stuff like all blacks, whites and asians looked alike. That thread lasted about an hour.
                  Signature

                  "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460629].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                    And yesterday he tried starting a another thread in which folks were asked if they were racist by some strange video which said weird stuff like all blacks, whites and asians looked alike. That thread lasted about an hour.
                    I missed that doozy
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460635].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                      I missed that doozy
                      That it was.
                      Signature

                      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460639].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
              [DELETED]
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460605].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by seasoned View Post


                As for adolf jr? Since you couldn't be talking about the WWI/WWII guy, because YOU are more like him than I am,




                Maybe the anger wasn't about losing to a black guy, but simply because he LOST! Hitler 'shook hands' with black 1936 Olympic hero Jesse Owens | Daily Mail Online

                Should a took a picture and hung it over the gas chambers so all the Jews going in would a felt better.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460628].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  [IMG]Should a took a picture and hung it over the gas chambers so all the Jews going in would a felt better.
                  I simply didn't mention that, but he did what people of his ilk ALWAYS do! They pick a group to attack, and get others to attack it. So hitler picked the jewish people. He ALSO had everyone spy on families, twisted things, and was against free speech! YEP, he and I would NOT have gotten along, but he DOES sound like some I have heard from, not that I like THEM either.

                  HECK, for a time they may even have called themselves by the last two words in the original name, "Workers party".

                  Steve
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460766].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          From everything I've heard the large employers are the last ones that would be negatively affected by gradually raising the min wage.
          I'm all on board for that......slower. Over night to $15 and up IMO just gets short term CEOs looking to impress stockholders spinning work overseas.That destroyed countless small towns all over this country

          Plus to be perfectly honest might sound strange but I don't want my children making $20 hour flipping burgers. A few people in this thread are right it s not much for a family but given in many places you can get a one bedroom or studio for $800 that leaves more thane enough room for immature young adults to decide to go that route and waste some years skipping a further education or at least not working as hard as they should on it.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460573].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
            Until such a time that robots take it all over in my imaginary utopia, the menial jobs will still be there and need people to do them. Their is no shortage of people to do them either. Not everyone is intelligent, motivated or predisposed enough to absorb any quality of education. So, thankfully for the rest of us, there is still someone to haul off your trash or serve you at the fast food window.

            Now, if things were different, and we all had equally high IQ's, motivation, common sense and potential intelligence and the education system was good enough to realize our potential, then we would all turn out to be over qualified and not do or want to do the menial work. Thing is, there would not be enough stimulating work to go round and the menial work still needs doing.

            Now look at this though as an example. A person of very average intelligence gets a low paid job in large retail store. Just by doing the work though, day in, day out, over time, they become very familiar with the store running, the merchandising, the till systems etc. But most importantly, they gain product knowledge and how to advise and deal with customers. Not because of latent intelligence though, just by repetition. The knowledge is rammed into them just by doing it day in, day out.

            So, they then become an asset to the store, they make a difference, they work hard, they provide good service and advice and help increase the stores bottom line. But still, the management still pays them $7.25 an hour and do not see them as management material. They just see them as being efficient enough at what they do. The management don't see that simply raising their salary and conditions to keep them on would be a good thing for the store.

            So, when the new factory assembly line up the road opens down the road paying $15.00 an hour for shift work, they leave like a shot. No loyalty, why should they at that salary. All that learned experience gone to waste.

            I say, reward even the menial if it's done well and increases your bottom line and it is essential that it is in place. It's just good business sense.
            Signature

            Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460632].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

              Until such a time that robots take it all over in my imaginary utopia, the menial jobs will still be there and need people to do them. Their is no shortage of people to do them either. Not everyone is intelligent, motivated or predisposed enough to absorb any quality of education. So, thankfully for the rest of us, there is still someone to haul off your trash or serve you at the fast food window.

              Now, if things were different, and we all had equally high IQ's, motivation, common sense and potential intelligence and the education system was good enough to realize our potential, then we would all turn out to be over qualified and not do or want to do the menial work. Thing is, there would not be enough stimulating work to go round and the menial work still needs doing.
              Let me first say I know that was most likely written with the best of intentions however its hard not to detect the strong scent of elitism. I took an IQ test and was invited to join Mensa. I never did for four reasons

              A) At the time I was in college and studying under a professor that pointed us to the deficiencies of any IQ test - Intelligence is not any one thing quantified in any test

              B) I had and have a number of relatives that would never pass it not because they could never ever go through it but because they would be unable to overlook the abstractness of it and it having no direct relationship to real life. Some of them have gone on to be incredible business men.

              C) I grew up with people who through a a variety of circumstance saw their mental abilities greatly improve. Change their circumstance and they soared PARTICULARLY their home life and their teacher. I'd get into a third reason but its a subjects off limits here

              D) seen too many inner city kids that would be slated for these menial jobs that suck at school and would flop on an IQ test but they know every single word, inflection and meaning of ANYTHING you put into rap song. IF you found away to put a quadratic equation in a rap and it was cool enough they'd learn it.

              If the idea is to give people more money because they are too stupid to do any other job so lets just remove the incentive for them to do what we think they can't than count me out.

              Unfortunately and again I accept it was unintentioned (I hope) but given who presently holds these jobs ( minorities, immigrants etc) that way of thinking also ends up having at some point some very racial connotations given who we know does those jobs now.

              and its just entirely too elitist without solid science to back up that we can even quantify intelligence or the many factors that leads to level most non-menial jobs require.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460682].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    People see a dollar, they love to think they should be the one to decide how it should be spent.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460542].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    If owned my hotel, I'd pay my people at east bout $2 more per hour. They are getting just above
    minimum wage-except housekeepers who can hustle can get 12 to 18 per hour (but they are rare).

    As it is, I am amazed at the hard work people do for the hotel. I do believe in the concept of
    having a tight, efficient crew that is paid a bit more than average for the type of business.
    Something to be said for gaining and earning employee loyalty, competence, and not constantly
    training new people...

    I have also seen the ones who work the system to get all the entitlements. I have to do more
    government paper work for them than I do for my other employees, even after they no longer work
    here. I had one of the system abusers offer the hotel her old projection TV because she has a
    new 55" flat screen. Grrr

    I'm against government mandated much of anything. A high minimum wage would kill some businesses.
    Some businesses are just low margin or very seasonal and economy dependent. A lot of independent
    hoteliers have to do the housekeeping and desk and maintenance - especially if the economy goes south.
    We have $50,000 in annual property taxes regardless of the economy, and so on with utilities...

    -----

    As asides, poor Claude because Yukon would give away Claude's last nickel and really make him poorer
    than Animal44. LOL


    $4000 more per year more might not be incentive to move to another state, but $8,000 more might
    for dual income homes?

    Nobody should be compared to, or called Hitler like. Just can't ever forget or minimize the evil.
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10460871].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10461727].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10461770].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post


      Since when have we been allowed to make obscene posts?

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462166].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        Since when have we been allowed to make obscene posts?

        Cheers. - Frank
        I'm using your post to make a point, because I love you.

        I have no problem at all with someone making a million times more per year than I do. And I find nothing wrong with income inequality. To me, it's all just math.

        If someone makes a million times more money than I do, what does that mean? It essentially means that they contributed a million times more to society in terms of goods and services.

        They almost certainly provided at least a million times more jobs than I did.

        How do I know? Because a huge section of the population gave them that money, for something in return. That means it was earned.

        But that's just the front of it. Earning billions of dollars benefits the world, because of what you had to provide the world, to get the billions.

        But, now that they have that money, what do they do? Some they keep, some they pass on to their kids, some they donate. But a lot of it, they spend. And the money they spend goes to create even more jobs, for the businesses that supply these billionaires.

        In fact, if didn't have the wealthiest 1%....who would we work for? The biggest companies have the most jobs.

        Sure, I'm self employed.....but most people can't live that way. Most think in terms of a job, working for someone else. Those jobs are given by companies, and the companies are started and owned by wealthy people.

        Really, I'm just working this out for myself. I just wanted to quote someone.
        Signature
        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462235].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          I'm using your post to make a point, because I love you.

          I have no problem at all with someone making a million times more per year than I do. And I find nothing wrong with income inequality. To me, it's all just math.

          If someone makes a million times more money than I do, what does that mean? It essentially means that they contributed a million times more to society in terms of goods and services.

          They almost certainly provided at least a million times more jobs than I did.

          How do I know? Because a huge section of the population gave them that money, for something in return. That means it was earned.

          But that's just the front of it. Earning billions of dollars benefits the world, because of what you had to provide the world, to get the billions.

          But, now that they have that money, what do they do? Some they keep, some they pass on to their kids, some they donate. But a lot of it, they spend. And the money they spend goes to create even more jobs, for the businesses that supply these billionaires.

          In fact, if didn't have the wealthiest 1%....who would we work for? The biggest companies have the most jobs.

          Sure, I'm self employed.....but most people can't live that way. Most think in terms of a job, working for someone else. Those jobs are given by companies, and the companies are started and owned by wealthy people.

          Really, I'm just working this out for myself. I just wanted to quote someone.
          "they contributed a million times more to society in terms of goods and services."

          The man who made millions selling the pet rock is a prime example.
          Signature

          Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462248].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          I'm using your post to make a point, because I love you.

          I have no problem at all with someone making a million times more per year than I do. And I find nothing wrong with income inequality. To me, it's all just math.

          If someone makes a million times more money than I do, what does that mean? It essentially means that they contributed a million times more to society in terms of goods and services.

          They almost certainly provided at least a million times more jobs than I did.

          How do I know? Because a huge section of the population gave them that money, for something in return. That means it was earned.

          But that's just the front of it. Earning billions of dollars benefits the world, because of what you had to provide the world, to get the billions.

          But, now that they have that money, what do they do? Some they keep, some they pass on to their kids, some they donate. But a lot of it, they spend. And the money they spend goes to create even more jobs, for the businesses that supply these billionaires.

          In fact, if didn't have the wealthiest 1%....who would we work for? The biggest companies have the most jobs.

          Sure, I'm self employed.....but most people can't live that way. Most think in terms of a job, working for someone else. Those jobs are given by companies, and the companies are started and owned by wealthy people.

          Really, I'm just working this out for myself. I just wanted to quote someone.
          I love you, but you're spewing tripe.

          Read your own drivel, again - very slowly. It's ludicrous - especially this, "How do I know? Because a huge section of the population gave them that money, for something in return. That means it was earned."

          Apparently you've never learned how most wealthy people got that way and stay that way. The only thing you left out was the word, 'widgets.' Its 2015. Get with the program!

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462252].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

            I love you, but you're spewing tripe.

            Read your own drivel, again - very slowly. It's ludicrous - especially this, "How do I know? Because a huge section of the population gave them that money, for something in return. That means it was earned."

            Apparently you've never learned how most wealthy people got that way and stay that way. The only thing you left out was the word, 'widgets.' Its 2015. Get with the program!

            Cheers. - Frank
            Balderdash! You sniveling Jacobite!

            OK, now I'm not joking. I'm thinking of the billionaires I know of (maybe 6). They made their money by selling something to millions of people....providing services to millions.....providing entertainment to millions... or investing for thousands.

            I'm seriously trying to think of a way to make a billion dollars without providing goods or services to people that pay for them. The only possible exception I can think of is playing the stock market.

            I'm perfectly willing to learn. I have no expertise in making a billion dollars. I just go by what I see. How do most billionaires get that way?

            I should mention that I was thinking of business billionaires. I wasn't considering Royalty, Taking over a country, inheriting wealth.

            Help me... What am I missing?
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462370].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post


              Help me... What am I missing?
              I think your latest book is going to have you well on your way.
              Signature

              "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462373].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

              I have no expertise
              There ya' go. No superfluous words. You're at your best when you're pithy.

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462400].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author writeaway
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          I'm using your post to make a point, because I love you.

          I have no problem at all with someone making a million times more per year than I do. And I find nothing wrong with income inequality. To me, it's all just math.

          If someone makes a million times more money than I do, what does that mean? It essentially means that they contributed a million times more to society in terms of goods and services.

          They almost certainly provided at least a million times more jobs than I did.

          How do I know? Because a huge section of the population gave them that money, for something in return. That means it was earned.

          But that's just the front of it. Earning billions of dollars benefits the world, because of what you had to provide the world, to get the billions.

          But, now that they have that money, what do they do? Some they keep, some they pass on to their kids, some they donate. But a lot of it, they spend. And the money they spend goes to create even more jobs, for the businesses that supply these billionaires.

          In fact, if didn't have the wealthiest 1%....who would we work for? The biggest companies have the most jobs.

          Sure, I'm self employed.....but most people can't live that way. Most think in terms of a job, working for someone else. Those jobs are given by companies, and the companies are started and owned by wealthy people.

          Really, I'm just working this out for myself. I just wanted to quote someone.
          Great point, Claude.

          But this all turns on the assumption that the money was EARNED through a value for value exchange.

          There is another way of looking at it though.

          According to this view, money isn't really EARNED nowadays... They claim that the system is RIGGED to pick winners and losers.

          According to their view, the world works on a ZERO SUM game system--for some to gain, others have to lose.

          I'm not sure about this ... because oftentimes, when people aim to make more money, they end up (like you said above) putting in motion a series of actions that EXPAND the amount of available resources to everyone else.

          Another way to look at this is the PARETO PRINCIPLE or 80/20 rule
          There will ALWAYS be a minority of people who will be responsible for the majority of the results.

          20% of basketball players account for 80% of the results... people aren't picketing these great players...

          20% of singers and celebrities get 80% of the media attention and fame... there's no flood of people with pitchforks up in arms about this disparity...

          With that said, I do agree that schemes to pick winners and losers or otherwise put overly burdensome ARTIFICIAL CONTROLS distort results for EVERYBODY

          While GOOD INTENTIONS are definitely worthy of praise, often the CURE is worse than the DISEASE due to the distortions and UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES this produces.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462253].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

            According to this view, money isn't really EARNED nowadays... They claim that the system is RIGGED to pick winners and losers
            The only way I can see that it is rigged is one of two ways;
            1) For some people, because of race or geography, cannot get access to the same resources as most others. Or at least it's made more difficult for them.

            2) There is a network at the highest end, (let's call it the top 1% or even the top .1%)

            These people tend to buy from each other, sell to each other, invest in each other's ideas, and do joint ventures with each other. They network with each other, and understand how each other thinks. This creates something of a barrier to others, who are not part of this group. It doesn't make massive success impossible, but the road isn't paved.

            That's what I know. And I don't know about billionaires, really. But I know about millionaires. All of them that I know made their money in real estate or by exchanging goods and services for money. And even the real estate guys could fall under the "exchanging" umbrella, from a certain point of view.

            Anyway, I brought out Big Frank's Ire......and even having Frank disagree with me, is better than a creme filled donut any day.


            Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

            According to their view, the world works on a ZERO SUM game system--for some to gain, others have to lose.
            I don't believe that. But good evidence, and a few examples, could change my mind.

            The only way I can see that is when gambling....or playing poker.....or if you're a vampire.

            (OK, vampire was a joke)
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462375].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author writeaway
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      How much of that rise in productivity is due to data/software automation?

      If so, don't past historical periods show a massive rise in the top 1%'s net worth due to shifts in technology?

      For example, in the industrial revolution's many different stages (pre-railroad, post-railroad, electricity age, oil age, etc etc) the net worth gap between the 1% and everyone else expanded then stabilized
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462189].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

        How much of that rise in productivity is due to data/software automation?

        If so, don't past historical periods show a massive rise in the top 1%'s net worth due to shifts in technology?

        For example, in the industrial revolution's many different stages (pre-railroad, post-railroad, electricity age, oil age, etc etc) the net worth gap between the 1% and everyone else expanded then stabilized

        Don't know the details of your questions about the shifts in technology but the latest rise (since 1980) has IMHO, been fueled by tax policy shifts at the national level.

        For example, if the top tax rate is cut from 70% down to 28% (but it rose back up to about 39% - but still an almost 50% reduction) ...

        ...that would lead to high earners keeping a whole lot more of the money they earn and then to also put that extra money into investments that would be taxed at a lower capital gains rate.

        The two times in American history when the gulf between the wealthy and everyone was at its widest, along with the 1% having its greatest share of national income...

        ...the first time in the 1920s was followed by the great depression and the second time it occurred at the onset of the great recession - circa 2007.

        - Twice, extreme income inequality has lead to BIG economic problems for the average Joe.

        See it in this chart...



        Source: Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, “Income Inequality in the United States, 1913-1998,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 2003. Updated to 2008 at http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/saez.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462216].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rondo
    Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

    But, now that they have that money, what do they do? Some they keep, some they pass on to their kids, some they donate. But a lot of it, they spend. And the money they spend goes to create even more jobs, for the businesses that supply these billionaires.
    Nope. They don't. Not in proportion anyway - They don't buy 500 cars or 500 homes. Just a few of each. This is why 'trickle down' doesn't work. Much of their money remains sheltered somewhere, either on Wall St or on a Caribbean island.

    Andrew
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462409].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author agc
      Originally Posted by rondo View Post

      Nope. They don't. Not in proportion anyway - They don't buy 500 cars or 500 homes. Just a few of each. This is why 'trickle down' doesn't work. Much of their money remains sheltered somewhere, either on Wall St or on a Caribbean island.

      Andrew
      The part you miss, and it's a really really (really) big part, is that the money sheltered elsewhere is not held in cash. No rich person leaves too much laying around as cash. Rather, it's all INVESTED. As in buying equities or bonds. Those invested funds go to companies that need the money to finance operations and growth, said operations and growth requiring.... wait for it... employees and wages and economic production of GDP.

      The real question is... where is it invested? If it's sheltered somewhere else, chances are it's invested somewhere else too.

      Is that what you really want? All that money fleeing to safer havens and invested in building economies other than ours????? Or would you rather that money held here, and that it be invested into companies here in the US that create economic activity here in the US?

      Because guess what... governments don't like to believe it, and socialists especially don't like to believe it... but the same way that wages are a competitively priced commodity... economies and tax regimes are also competitively shopped commodities.

      Want to attract investment dollars? Well you better put together a risk / reward environment that competes well against other alternatives.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462469].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
      Originally Posted by rondo View Post

      Nope. They don't. Not in proportion anyway - They don't buy 500 cars or 500 homes. Just a few of each.

      This is why 'trickle down' doesn't work. Much of their money remains sheltered somewhere, either on Wall St or on a Caribbean island.

      Andrew
      You're right!

      It is the major reason trickle down economics does not work. And if it isn't sheltered, a whole lot of their excess money is going into investments that really don't affect the general U.S. economy.

      If its the stock market, lots of corps are simply using the money to buy back their stock or maybe dole it out as dividends to their shareholders - not investing in new plants, workers etc.

      How about the huge secondary market for some markets? Where all they're doing is trading back and forth among themselves.

      Other markets such as foreign markets and the currency - which is huge, has nothing to do with money somehow getting into the general economy.

      The U.S. gov bond market exploded when the yearly deficit was 1.4 trillion in 2009 but now the yearly deficit down to about 400 billion at the end of 2016.

      So money from our wealthy actually going into/investing and helping the U.S. general economy isn't anything to write home about.

      Even if the U.S. economy was in much better shape I don't see a lot of the wealthy's money going into it anyways - when they don't really have to and there are so many other options available.

      Since the major policy shifts of the 1980s came into play,...

      ... TDE (trickle down economics) has only run the country into the ground while exacerbating the destructive phenomenon called income inequality.

      And when IE is seriously exacerbated, guess what has happened?

      Major economic disruptions such as the great depression and the great recession that take years to recover from.
      Signature

      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10463690].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    Let's do some more math just for fun. Let's say a kiosk replaces a single worker. Let's also say that there's two 8 hour shifts a day, 7 days a week.


    Using 4.3 weeks in a month, that's about 480 "man hours" per month.


    480 x $15.00 = $7200
    480 x $7.85 = $3768
    -----------------------------
    $3432 - The difference per month between the two wages.


    We also need to consider the cost of equipment a human worker needs, such as the push button order system and cash register. This is kind of hard to factor in, since the equipment is probably already installed, but it should still be considered, especially for new stores.


    So, how much does a kiosk cost? And at what price point is it a good investment for replacing workers at $15 and hour but not $7.85 an hour?
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10462533].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dvduval
    Part of the issue here is there is a huge amount of wealth being held on the sidelines rather than invested in the economy. Big corporations get huge tax breaks and then give huge bonuses to their executives who then go get a mansion or an island or a fancy car but it does nothing for the local economy. If anything the local economy suffers because the executives spend more time cutting jobs locally and sending jobs overseas.

    If wages are raised and that money is recirculated through the local economy then it is great for the local economy. The small business owner that worries now may not have suc problems as they predict because the people who got a raise spend even more money at their business.

    But right now you have corporations getting tax breaks locally and taking that money overseas. So the wage thing doesn't necessarily solve anything if that continues. Where can prove helpful is win the big corporation has to instead pay their workers locally and reduce the amount of money they send out of the economy locally.

    It is a complicated issue but if small and medium-sized businesses start paying their employees right, and money is circulated to the local economy, rather than bleeding out money to other countries, it could be a wonderful thing and I think these statistics are showing just how wonderful it has been for some cities.
    Signature
    It is okay to contact me! I have been developing software since 1999, creating many popular products like phpLD.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10464288].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CruxisKnight
    It feels like the higher minimum wage isn't exactly the cause for faster job growth rates, but it's how people react to the increase. In the short term there is faster growth rate perhaps due to a misconception that it will incite economic growth but in the long term does it actually work?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465419].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by CruxisKnight View Post

      It feels like the higher minimum wage isn't exactly the cause for faster job growth rates, but it's how people react to the increase. In the short term there is faster growth rate perhaps due to a misconception that it will incite economic growth but in the long term does it actually work?

      Agreed, it's a temporary smokescreen designed to temporarily shut people up & get others voted into public office.

      It's a classic race to the bottom.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465511].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        Agreed, it's a temporary smokescreen designed to temporarily shut people up & get others voted into public office.

        It's a classic race to the bottom.
        I think that we have collectively established in this thread the following things:

        Yes, doubling the minimum wage will stimulate the economy. It puts more spending power in the the pockets of the people that drive it. US!

        Doing so might drive up prices to be 1 percent more?, most likely far less, it's probably a gross overprojection.. A hundred percent increase in spending power far outstrips a small 1 percent raise in prices anyway.

        Anyone who is in business and says that they cannot afford to pay it to there employees is most likely deluding themselves that they should be in business for themselves. They are not making a decent profit. Either that or they are greedy and just want more profit for themselves.

        The $7.25 an hour minimum wage or quite a bit above it is not a living wage.

        I see the above appraisal as a viable, sensible and logical view.
        Signature

        Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465544].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

          I think that we have collectively established in this thread the following things:

          Yes, doubling the minimum wage will stimulate the economy. It puts more spending power in the the pockets of the people that drive it. US!

          Doing so might drive up prices to be 1 percent more?, most likely far less, it's probably a gross overprojection.. A hundred percent increase in spending power far outstrips a small 1 percent raise in prices anyway.

          Anyone who is in business and says that they cannot afford to pay it to there employees is most likely deluding themselves that they should be in business for themselves. They are not making a decent profit. Either that or they are just greedy and just want more profit for themselves.

          The $7.25 an hour minimum wage or quite a bit above it is not a living wage.

          I see the above appraisal as a viable, sensible and logical view.



          I see you've been collaborating with Claude.

          Bottom of the barrel is still bottom of the barrel no matter how you sugarcoat min. wage.

          Yes $7.25 is in fact a living wage, folks have been living off that amount for years. Min. wage is a shitty lifestyle but that's life, everyone can't be Warren Buffett.

          Sure it's viable but it doesn't matter because $15 or whatever amount will soon be the new bottom of the barrel min. wage lifestyle that sucks. Once it goes mainstream everything that can be bought in the US increases in price. That's how the economy works.

          I know you think the min. wage money just magically appears on a paycheck but it doesn't, the money comes from employer profits. The employer profits come from customers. The employer controls the customer prices based on expenses. Min. wage hikes are expenses.

          Welcome to inflated prices. So the min. wage folks with a big raise are still struggling with the new cost of living.

          Really looking at the dollar amount on min. wage is meaningless, the cost of living percentage keeps everything the same as far as buying power.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465561].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by yukon View Post

            I see you've been collaborating with Claude.

            Bottom of the barrel is still bottom of the barrel no matter how you sugarcoat min. wage.

            Yes $7.25 is in fact a living wage, folks have been living off that amount for years. Min. wage is a shitty lifestyle but that's life, everyone can't be Warren Buffett.

            Sure it's viable but it doesn't matter because $15 or whatever amount will soon be the new bottom of the barrel min. wage lifestyle that sucks. Once it goes mainstream everything that can be bought in the US increases in price. That's how the economy works.

            I know you think the min. wage money just magically appears on a paycheck but it doesn't, the money comes from employer profits. The employer profits come from customers. The employer controls the customer prices based on expenses. Min. wage hikes are expenses.

            Welcome to inflated prices. So the min. wage folks with a big raise are still struggling with the new cost of living.

            Really looking at the dollar amount on min. wage is meaningless, the cost of living percentage keeps everything the same as far as buying power.
            And 600 economists and 7 Nobel Prize winners seriously disagree with you but - what do they know right?

            You are Yukon.
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465644].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author yukon
              Banned
              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              And 600 economists and 7 Nobel Prize winners seriously disagree with you but - what do they know right?

              Thanks for the propaganda, you can redeem it for $8 a gallon milk. Don't forget to thank the min. wage guy stocking the milk cooler at the grocery store. Ask him how his day is going.







              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              You are Yukon.
              Nailed it.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465665].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author agc
              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              And 600 economists and 7 Nobel Prize winners seriously disagree with you but - what do they know right?
              Right. Everyone who knows anything agrees with you. So why isn't it already in place then? Snap! That's right. Because its not as obvious as you like to think it is.

              Everyone (including the economists) understand that increasing minimum wage is an inflationary tactic. Everyone. Some think, oh hey, a 90% increase in minimum wage will only be 1% inflation. Others think it's more. Much more.

              But hey, what do I care. All my hard assets are in real estate. Bump the min wage to $15 and within a few years I'm raking it in big. Probably 30% to 50% rent increases. I'll make out like a bandit, guaranteed. And since my house payment is 30 yr fixed, my cost of living will barely move.

              And all my tech work is being done in Russia, India, the Philippines. Those prices won''t be affected by your brilliant wage hike. And my tech stuff is priced in dollars, so again I personally make out like a bandit.

              The socialists all think rich people want the minimum wage low so they can steal from the poor. Hardly. Raise the minimum wage, drive inflation up, and the rich make out like bandits. Mostly they try to talk you out of such silliness for your own good.

              Who get's hurt are all the low income retirees (who get inflated to hell), and anyone who makes a living brokering labor. Fast food, big box retail, small service businesses. Best buy is already taking a pummeling from Amazon. Why? RENT and LABOR. I know, let's double the labor cost, and drive a good round of rent increasing inflation. If we're lucky we can finish em off in no time.

              But hey, go ahead. Double the minimum wage. I personally can't wait.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465685].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

          I think that we have collectively established in this thread the following things:

          Yes, doubling the minimum wage will stimulate the economy. It puts more spending power in the the pockets of the people that drive it. US!

          Doing so might drive up prices to be 1 percent more?, most likely far less, it's probably a gross overprojection.. A hundred percent increase in spending power far outstrips a small 1 percent raise in prices anyway.

          Anyone who is in business and says that they cannot afford to pay it to there employees is most likely deluding themselves that they should be in business for themselves. They are not making a decent profit. Either that or they are greedy and just want more profit for themselves.

          The $7.25 an hour minimum wage or quite a bit above it is not a living wage.

          I see the above appraisal as a viable, sensible and logical view.
          What we're really established is that some folks are living in fantasy and haven't the slightest experience in owning or running a business. If someone thinks a small business with 3 minimum-wage employees that's barely getting by could absorb a $45,000 increase in payroll, they're delusional.

          Sheesh. Why do I bother.
          Signature

          The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

          Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10465884].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

            What we're really established is that some folks are living in fantasy and haven't the slightest experience in owning or running a business. If someone thinks a small business with 3 minimum-wage employees that's barely getting by could absorb a $45,000 increase in payroll, they're delusional.

            Sheesh. Why do I bother.
            Steve; That specific example....

            The owner of that business would either have to reduce employees, charge more, or have the employees work 39 hours, instead of forty.....or go out of business.

            My guess, if this minimum wage increase ever went into effect, is that small businesses would be exempt. Or there would be a minimum number of employees. But that's just a guess.

            The fascinating part of this debate is that, as always, it divides cleanly along political lines.

            To one side, it's a terrible idea, and every thought about it, is how terrible it is. On the other side, every thought is how wonderful it is.

            My only conclusion is that neither side actually thinks. It's just an observation, but it's based on years of empirical evidence. Does any rational person really believe that one side is always right, and the other side is always wrong? Really?

            Does anyone really do research, other than what their side spews out?

            Why do we keep hearing about this as a debate? Because it raises money for candidates, on both sides.
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10466585].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author ThomM
              Does anyone really do research, other than what their side spews out?
              Yep and the results are always the same. Some groups of people benefit and other groups don't. One thing is always constant. The states that increase min. wage increase what they take in from taxes. Then there's this, Nonprofit employer: Workers requested reduced hours to stay in... | www.kirotv.com
              In most places the increase would be enough for people receiving some type of welfare to be making over the limit to collect benefits but still not enough to survive without some type of welfare.
              Not to mention through out the history of our min. wage laws it has purposely or not targeted different ethnic groups making it harder for them to gain employment.
              Signature

              Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
              Getting old ain't for sissy's
              As you are I was, as I am you will be
              You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10466681].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                Personally, I don't even want a minimum wage at all. I think the agreement the employer has with the employee is sacred and private.

                And what is a good minimum wage? Is the employer obligated to pay more than the work is worth, to guarantee a good life for the employee? Personally, I don't think so.

                Remember when it was a new law, that we all have automobile insurance? Personally, I thought it was perfectly OK to not have insurance. I'm serious.

                Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare (or whatever it's called now).....are taxing the strong to help the weak. I really think this way. Intellectually, I'm a complete capitalist.

                So, why do I argue that a higher minimum wage benefits nearly all of us in business, and really helps the least productive (meaning the services they provide pay the least)?

                Because it isn't all about me. Helping others that are unfortunate, even lazy slime balls that refuse to take care of themselves...as long as it doesn't cost me an arm and a leg...makes sense to me. The math I used earlier is just how it worked out. Math has no political affiliation. Real research has no political bias.

                My personal bias is to let the weak starve. Let evolution re-emerge. Survival of the fittest. Even if I'm one of those that would starve.

                But do I think it's OK for me to force other to see the world as I do? No.

                To me, that's wrong. And if there is a minimum wage, that's just part of the rules. If it rises to $15 an hour, we'll adapt. If it stays where it is, most of us are still OK.

                Should I be forced to pay taxes to help people I'll never met? In my opinion, no. But I pay, willingly, because it benefits others. Again, the world isn't just about what I want.

                To Steve Johnson;

                You have shown yourself to be reasonable and articulate. So I ask you,

                What minimum wage is fair? Should there be any minimum wage? Should it stay the same? Should it be raised? Should some businesses be exempt? Should there be a minimum number of employees before it applies? And why do you think that?

                Just saying "$15 an hour...Bad" doesn't help. Being angry doesn't help. Months ago, you have a phenomenal argument for the right to bear arms in public (if I remember ). It was persuasive.

                Does it matter to you if the lowest income workers make more?

                It really doesn't to me. But then I did some math, and the impact is minimal. And I'm perfectly willing to change my mind on that, with a good argument. The argument you gave in post #179, was terrible. A very specific rare hypothetical.

                I know I can sound like a condescending jerk, but my questions are sincere.


                Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                Yep and the results are always the same. Some groups of people benefit and other groups don't.
                Yes. And I am probably in the group that won't benefit. But if others benefit, why would I/you/we be against it?
                Signature
                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10466817].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                  Personally, I don't even want a minimum wage at all. I think the agreement the employer has with the employee is sacred and private.

                  And what is a good minimum wage? Is the employer obligated to pay more than the work is worth, to guarantee a good life for the employee? Personally, I don't think so.

                  Remember when it was a new law, that we all have automobile insurance? Personally, I thought it was perfectly OK to not have insurance. I'm serious.

                  Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare (or whatever it's called now).....are taxing the strong to help the weak. I really think this way. Intellectually, I'm a complete capitalist.

                  So, why do I argue that a higher minimum wage benefits nearly all of us in business, and really helps the least productive (meaning the services they provide pay the least)?

                  Because it isn't all about me. Helping others that are unfortunate, even lazy slime balls that refuse to take care of themselves...makes sense to me. The math I used earlier is just how it worked out. Math has no political affiliation. Real research has no political bias.

                  My personal bias is to let the weak starve. Let evolution re-emerge. Survival of the fittest.

                  But do I think it's OK for me to force other to see the world as I do? No.

                  To me, that's wrong. And if there is a minimum wage, that's just part of the rules. If it rises to $15 an hour, we'll adapt. If it stays where it is, most of us are still OK.

                  Should I be forced to pay taxes to help people I'll never met? In my opinion, no. But I pay, willingly, because it benefits others. Again, the world isn't just about what I want.






                  Yes. And I am probably in the group that won't benefit. But if others benefit, why would I be against it?
                  I'm against state mandated wages myself Claude.
                  That and the other things you mentioned that you say help the weak I say they help them stay weak.
                  One of the things about a min. wage and people thinking it's good for the workers and economy is that in the end things stay the same, just with different numbers.
                  Those that benefit and those that don't may be different people then you think. For example a large business that can afford the increase could benefit if their composition is a smaller start up that can't yet afford the increase. It can decrease competition which does nothing to improve the economy.
                  Historically increasing minimum wage has also been a disadvantage to youth trying to enter the work force, in particular black teens.
                  You know yourself as an employer that you want to get your monies worth from your employees no matter what you pay them. With jobs still scarce even if hiring at min. wage you want to invest that money in someone with some type of experience. You want the insurance of getting your monies worth that an experienced worker brings over one just entering the job market for the first time.
                  Signature

                  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                  Getting old ain't for sissy's
                  As you are I was, as I am you will be
                  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10466844].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    I'm against state mandated wages myself Claude.
                    That and the other things you mentioned that you say help the weak I say they help them stay weak.
                    I see the flaw. You think the weak can be made stronger. I disagree. I don't think you can strengthen the weak. Or even change their world outlook. People get comfortable being dependent on others. Changing that takes a generation, maybe two. But minimum wage earners aren't weak. They are just doing a job that doesn't pay well. And if I can make their lives a little easier. And if it doesn't cost me much, I'm all for it.

                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    One of the things about a min. wage and people thinking it's good for the workers and economy is that in the end things stay the same, just with different numbers.
                    They stay the same, because it becomes the new normal. Social Security, Medicare, forced car insurance coverage became the new normal. We don't even think about those things. But at one time, they were all controversial. And things did change.

                    The economy may change a little, it may not. (with an increase), but it would change for those people who are paid more.

                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    Those that benefit and those that don't may be different people then you think. For example a large business that can afford the increase could benefit if their composition is a smaller start up that can't yet afford the increase. It can decrease competition which does nothing to improve the economy.
                    It would decrease competition, but not the competition that matters. The bigger employers would simply adjust to the new normal....just like always. And again, if by some miracle the law gets passed...there will undoubtedly be exceptions, exemptions, minimum number of employees...that sort of thing. The law would have to have those things, if it has any chance of getting passed. So, all this worry is probably academic.

                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    Historically increasing minimum wage has also been a disadvantage to youth trying to enter the work force, in particular black teens.
                    With jobs still scarce even if hiring at min. wage you want to invest that money in someone with some type of experience.
                    Most minimum wage jobs are beginner jobs. Or at least jobs almost anyone could do. Usually boring hard jobs that are not enjoyable. Would it cause employers to have to pay more for jobs with experience or training? That very possible. Maybe probable.

                    I still don't get where the idea that raising the minimum would be disadvantageous to black teens. The turnover in these jobs is fast, they are always hiring. Maybe you see something I don't.

                    By the way, maybe another reason I think this is a good idea, is that I see what people do for $7.25 an hour. I wouldn't do any of it for $50 an hour. Maybe that's why $15 seems more fair to me. But that's just from my perspective.
                    Signature
                    One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                    What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467145].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                      ... So, all this worry is probably academic. ...
                      And gives us something to talk about on yet another New Year's Day.

                      I'm just thankful to be around for another one
                      Signature

                      The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                      Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467178].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                        And gives us something to talk about on yet another New Year's Day.
                        And with that in mind, I'll throw this log into the fire...

                        If there should be a minimum wage, should there also be a maximum wage?

                        On average, CEO's earned 29 times more than their employees in 1978. In the last 10 years it's gone up to 231 times more (according to this story on HP).
                        Signature

                        Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467212].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                          Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                          And with that in mind, I'll throw this log into the fire...

                          If there should be a minimum wage, should there also be a maximum wage?

                          On average, CEO's earned 29 times more than their employees in 1978. In the last 10 years it's gone up to 231 times more (according to this story on HP).

                          I'm very very much against capping what someone makes. What a good CEO does can be worth 1,000 times what a skilled worker does for the company. And it doesn't matter what others get paid. What one person's value is...has no relationship to what another person's value is (to the company/economy)

                          This issue alone, if it became close to being a law, might make me switch sides.
                          Signature
                          One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                          What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467236].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                            Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                            What a good CEO does can be worth 1,000 times what a skilled worker does for the company.
                            Putting on my shareholder here, I thoroughly agree. A good CEO is worth their weight in gold, platinum and diamonds. The real issue of CEO pay is the many dud CEO's, who, despite poor performance, still get multi-million dollar pay rises to reward their incompetence (Hewlett Packard), or outright criminality (Enron).
                            Signature
                            Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                            So that blind people can hate them as well.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467445].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                              Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                              Putting on my shareholder here, I thoroughly agree. A good CEO is worth their weight in gold, platinum and diamonds. The real issue of CEO pay is the many dud CEO's, who, despite poor performance, still get multi-million dollar pay rises to reward their incompetence (Hewlett Packard), or outright criminality (Enron).
                              I told my wife about this exchange, and she brought up something I may have missed. I keep thinking of CEOs as the founder of the company, essentially the owner. It's just the way I think of it. I keep forgetting that there are Boards of Directors that vote to increase their salaries and bonuses, as the company itself fails. These are essentially employees of the company, that are raping it, regardless of how they perform.

                              These Employee CEOs, in my opinion, should still have no cap on what they make. But if the business is failing, their compensation should reflect that. Again, just an opinion that I would never try to make law.

                              And this evening, I see you brought up the same point.



                              Guys; Seriously, the government wants to increase the minimum wage to $9 an hour, not $15. So.....the $15 gets bandied about, but it's not really what's being proposed. Of course, I just read one report.
                              Signature
                              One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                              What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468517].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                          Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                          And with that in mind, I'll throw this log into the fire...

                          If there should be a minimum wage, should there also be a maximum wage?

                          On average, CEO's earned 29 times more than their employees in 1978. In the last 10 years it's gone up to 231 times more (according to this story on HP).
                          No.

                          If you own stock in a company, then you have an interest in what the CEO is paid. If you think it's too much, you take it up with the Board of Directors or bring it up at the annual shareholders meeting.

                          If you don't any of the company's stock, it's none of your business what the company pays its CEO. None whatsoever.

                          I think there are probably a great many CEOs who are overpaid compared to the value they bring. But it's not my concern. If the shareholders and BoD want to overpay them, that's their prerogative.
                          Signature

                          The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                          Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467272].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
                          Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                          And with that in mind, I'll throw this log into the fire...

                          If there should be a minimum wage, should there also be a maximum wage?

                          On average, CEO's earned 29 times more than their employees in 1978. In the last 10 years it's gone up to 231 times more (according to this story on HP).
                          I also don't think there should be a cap on salary.

                          I don't think it wise for executives/business owners to be crass about their income.
                          That is sometimes not good for morale and productivity. I'm not talking about the
                          jealous types who make a big deal about their boss driving a fancy car.

                          I'm talking about when rank and file employees are going through a lot of sacrifices
                          to keep the doors open. When Coors was making a lot of changes to lower pay,
                          benefits, and eliminating or outsourcing skilled positions, they had a long article
                          with photos in one of the major papers about the new CEO that included descriptions
                          of his home and vacation homes..... To the tool and die maker who had been there
                          for 20 something years and was told the only job left for him was on the production
                          line, with a significant pay cut, doing work a monkey could do (I did it). it's not a good move.

                          In terms of impact on the company, of course exec compensation should not bankrupt
                          or inhibit the company.

                          In terms of impact on the economy, I'd be surprised if high executive compensation
                          makes a statistically significant impact as compared to a really high minimum wage.
                          Small sample size of executives compared to very large sample size of rank and file.

                          But, there are other impacts on the economy from a lot of the people who earn more than
                          they can spend. The talent to create and help, and the ability to invest in start ups or other
                          companies and charities... They aren't all into lavish things only.

                          --

                          I tend to agree with Claude that the math would speak for itself and also say that
                          agendas and special interests interfere. As do random situations/events, and there
                          is no one size fits all. If it were not for those, there could be statistically optimal points
                          for wages which would facilitate a healthy economy - not too much inflation, not
                          stagflation, not businesses having to go out of business because the minimum wage
                          is too high.

                          --

                          I've had unrealistic employees who try to make the work and income the hotel provides their
                          sole source of income for all their wants (private school, nicer car) and needs
                          (as opposed to just needs). Pressuring me for more rooms to clean, more money
                          per room, more hours ... One person cannot do all the work that needs to be done
                          here and the realistic income a good employee can expect is enough for to help with
                          some household expenses. Not really good income for a single person if this is their only
                          source of income.

                          Dan
                          Signature

                          "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467321].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                      I see the flaw. You think the weak can be made stronger. I disagree. I don't think you can strengthen the weak. Or even change their world outlook. People get comfortable being dependent on others. Changing that takes a generation, maybe two. But minimum wage earners aren't weak. They are just doing a job that doesn't pay well. And if I can make their lives a little easier. And if it doesn't cost me much, I'm all for it.



                      They stay the same, because it becomes the new normal. Social Security, Medicare, forced car insurance coverage became the new normal. We don't even think about those things. But at one time, they were all controversial. And things did change.

                      The economy may change a little, it may not. (with an increase), but it would change for those people who are paid more.



                      It would decrease competition, but not the competition that matters. The bigger employers would simply adjust to the new normal....just like always. And again, if by some miracle the law gets passed...there will undoubtedly be exceptions, exemptions, minimum number of employees...that sort of thing. The law would have to have those things, if it has any chance of getting passed. So, all this worry is probably academic.



                      Most minimum wage jobs are beginner jobs. Or at least jobs almost anyone could do. Usually boring hard jobs that are not enjoyable. Would it cause employers to have to pay more for jobs with experience or training? That very possible. Maybe probable.

                      I still don't get where the idea that raising the minimum would be disadvantageous to black teens. The turnover in these jobs is fast, they are always hiring. Maybe you see something I don't.

                      By the way, maybe another reason I think this is a good idea, is that I see what people do for $7.25 an hour. I wouldn't do any of it for $50 an hour. Maybe that's why $15 seems more fair to me. But that's just from my perspective.
                      The Impact on the Young
                      The effect of the minimum wage and the increase in the percentage of industry that it covers have had a significant, deleterious impact on the young worker. Between 1948 and 1955 the unemployment rate for young males was about 6 or 7 percentage points higher than the general rate of unemployment and there was no significant difference between the unemployment rates of blacks and whites. After 1955, when the minimum wage was raised sharply, not only did the difference between the general unemployment rate and that of the young white male rise to 9 or 10 percentage points, but the unemployment rate of black teenagers rose even more sharply reaching a differential of between 15 and 20 percentage points as compared to the general rate of unemployment.
                      After the increase of 1968, the difference between white teenagers and the general rate went up to from 10 to 12 percentage points; black teenage unemployment rose still more. Since 1973 the unemployment rate for black teenagers has been from 25 to 35 percentage points above the general rate. The Minimum Wage Law | Foundation for Economic Education
                      AS for helping people with the other things, I have no problem helping people either Claude. But I'd rather help them to get back on their feet then to continuously help them stay down.
                      Over time I've given people jobs and a place to live when they where down with the understanding that they where temporary until they got back on their feet. Some took advantage and did just that. Some didn't and tried to milk it and ended up back on the street. Those that wanted to better themselves I bent over backwards to help. Sometimes they where people I knew, other times they where strangers that a friend would recommend. That's why the help is called a safety net and not a way of life.
                      If a small business with three minimum wage employees is struggling to get by, that's a fair indication that sooner, rather than later, that business is going to go under irrespective of whether they raise or lower the wages.
                      Not really true. Some businesses have ups and downs determined by different factors such as weather or the economy. Sometimes when a small business is just starting out in can be a struggle until it has established itself.
                      Signature

                      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                      Getting old ain't for sissy's
                      As you are I was, as I am you will be
                      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467840].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
                        Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                        Some businesses have ups and downs determined by different factors such as weather or the economy. Sometimes when a small business is just starting out in can be a struggle until it has established itself.
                        Sometimes there are perfect storms. Some people in Colorado are currently trying to
                        get liquor sales in grocery stores. If it happens and pricing gets more competitive, and
                        a minimum wage increase also gets enacted (don't know of any plans), we'll see a lot
                        of independent stores go under.

                        Probably will see a lot of stores go under just with grocery stores selling liquor.
                        Signature

                        "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467858].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                          Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

                          Sometimes there are perfect storms. Some people in Colorado are currently trying to
                          get liquor sales in grocery stores. If it happens and pricing gets more competitive, and
                          a minimum wage increase also gets enacted (don't know of any plans), we'll see a lot
                          of independent stores go under.

                          Probably will see a lot of stores go under just with grocery stores selling liquor.
                          True. Sometimes people have businesses just because it fits their passion.
                          I remember seeing an interview back when San Fran raised it's min. wage. The guy owned a small book store because he loved books. He employed a couple of college students (at min. wage) that also loved books. He barely made enough to pay the bills and his employees. He was worried that the higher min. wage would be to much and would close him down.
                          Not every business is owned by someone looking to make it rich.
                          I started my landscaping business because I don't like working for someone else and I love doing that type of work. As time went on it also gave me a tool to help people that needed it. I did a lot of work for older, retired people at extremely low rates. I also over time had 4 different employees. When I got out of the business I gave it to a friend that was working for me with the understanding that he would do the same, use it to help others.
                          More then once I've gone back to work for him because I was the one needing the help. With both of us a sharp raise in min. wage would mean helping less people both as employees and with customers.
                          Signature

                          Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                          Getting old ain't for sissy's
                          As you are I was, as I am you will be
                          You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468004].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                  Personally, I don't even want a minimum wage at all. I think the agreement the employer has with the employee is sacred and private.

                  And what is a good minimum wage? Is the employer obligated to pay more than the work is worth, to guarantee a good life for the employee? Personally, I don't think so.

                  Remember when it was a new law, that we all have automobile insurance? Personally, I thought it was perfectly OK to not have insurance. I'm serious.

                  Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare (or whatever it's called now).....are taxing the strong to help the weak. I really think this way. Intellectually, I'm a complete capitalist.

                  So, why do I argue that a higher minimum wage benefits nearly all of us in business, and really helps the least productive (meaning the services they provide pay the least)?

                  Because it isn't all about me. Helping others that are unfortunate, even lazy slime balls that refuse to take care of themselves...as long as it doesn't cost me an arm and a leg...makes sense to me. The math I used earlier is just how it worked out. Math has no political affiliation. Real research has no political bias.

                  My personal bias is to let the weak starve. Let evolution re-emerge. Survival of the fittest. Even if I'm one of those that would starve.

                  But do I think it's OK for me to force other to see the world as I do? No.

                  To me, that's wrong. And if there is a minimum wage, that's just part of the rules. If it rises to $15 an hour, we'll adapt. If it stays where it is, most of us are still OK.

                  Should I be forced to pay taxes to help people I'll never met? In my opinion, no. But I pay, willingly, because it benefits others. Again, the world isn't just about what I want.

                  To Steve Johnson;

                  You have shown yourself to be reasonable and articulate. So I ask you,

                  What minimum wage is fair? Should there be any minimum wage? Should it stay the same? Should it be raised? Should some businesses be exempt? Should there be a minimum number of employees before it applies? And why do you think that?

                  Just saying "$15 an hour...Bad" doesn't help. Being angry doesn't help. Months ago, you have a phenomenal argument for the right to bear arms in public (if I remember ). It was persuasive.

                  Does it matter to you if the lowest income workers make more?

                  It really doesn't to me. But then I did some math, and the impact is minimal. And I'm perfectly willing to change my mind on that, with a good argument. The argument you gave in post #179, was terrible. A very specific rare hypothetical.

                  I know I can sound like a condescending jerk, but my questions are sincere.




                  Yes. And I am probably in the group that won't benefit. But if others benefit, why would I/you/we be against it?
                  My example in #179 was personal experience. I owned a painting company a number of years ago that did highly competitive production painting of new construction homes. I employed four journeyman painters, four apprentice-level painters, and three non-skilled people that were learning the trade.

                  The last full year before I sold the company, I took out about $75K. I paid the journeymen painters $22/hr, the apprentices $12/hr, and the gofers $6/hr (min wage was $5.15 then). After expenses, the net profit on sales of $851K was 1.22% (~$10K), which went into a profit sharing account and was distributed at year-end to employees.

                  If the minimum wage had doubled to $10, it would have added $24K to my payroll. I would have had to:
                  • lay off one gofer and cut the hours of the ones who were left or,
                  • cut the pay of the journeyman and apprentice painters to make up for the shortfall or,
                  • cut what I took out of the business personally or,
                  • raised prices to compensate or,
                  • looked for places to cut expenses
                  I would have had to go with #1. I couldn't cut the pay of my pro guys, they would have left. I'm not going to take a cut in what I take home, it's not like I was getting rich. I couldn't raise prices, the market was locked in. I likely could have cut $4-$5K in materials expenses by using cheaper materials, but most of my costs were locked in.


                  I know my experience is my own, and not illustrative of every business that employs non-skilled labor at minimum wage. But I would wager there are enough small businesses that would face the same dilemma I would that would have made the same decision I would have - lay someone off, or cut hours, or both.


                  The rise in the minimum wage may help those who are still working, but immeasurably harms those who lose hours or their jobs because the business can't absorb it.


                  And for Mr. ianfear63, who said
                  Anyone who is in business and says that they cannot afford to pay it to there employees is most likely deluding themselves that they should be in business for themselves. They are not making a decent profit. Either that or they are greedy and just want more profit for themselves
                  : I gave you the numbers from the last full year I owned the company. You tell me: was I deluding myself that I should be in business? The company made a nice living for me and at least 8 other people; three other people benefited from jobs that paid more than the minimum wage. What would you have done? Closed up shop and fired everyone because you were delusional about owning a small business?



                  Claude:


                  I recognize the need for a minimum wage, human nature being what it is. There have been a number of studies on the effects of raising the minimum wage; of course, since economics is basically theory, conclusions are never the same and rarely agree. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage. One of the problems I see is that no study can be effectively controlled - there are always outside forces that can't be accounted for and whose effects on the data are unknown.


                  I personally think a lot of the backing for a doubling of the minimum wage comes from folks who haven't the first clue - and don't care - about its effect on business and the economy in general. They are only driven by ideology rather than logic, common sense, or any concept of cause and effect. They think businesses can $hit money on command, and that any profit amount is obscene. They only care that their objective was obtained, not about the consequences.


                  Cynical, I'm sure, but I've been around the block too many times to be trusting of ideologues.
                  Signature

                  The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                  Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467174].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                    Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                    They are only driven by ideology rather than logic, common sense, or any concept of cause and effect. They think businesses can money on command, and that any profit amount is obscene. They only care that their objective was obtained, not about the consequences.
                    I think they care about the consequences, but not the consequences to business owners.

                    Most lefties (a lefty myself on many issues) Think that all business is big business, and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed. A very flawed perception.

                    There is also the idea (that I think is probable) that the biggest proponents of the idea would never have to pay anything as a consequence of the raise. There is bias and agenda on both sides of the issue. There is a reason nearly every business owner friend of mine is on the Right.

                    Thanks for the obviously well thought out post. Have a good year.
                    Signature
                    One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                    What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467209].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post


                      Most lefties (a lefty myself on many issues) Think that all business is big business, and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed. A very flawed perception.
                      That's kind of a silly statement Claude. You don't really believe that do you?
                      Signature
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467999].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                        That's kind of a silly statement Claude. You don't really believe that do you?
                        Tim; What do you think I'm saying? I suspect you are thinking I meant something I didn't. I didn't mean center left, I meant hard left. The ones we see on TV. When I say Right, I also mean the extremists.

                        I maybe shouldn't have said, "Most lefties". I maybe should have said, "Most leftie commentates on TV". They tend to try to appeal to the active part of the Left, as does the TV station that appeals to the Right.

                        That doesn't mean they are lying, or misrepresenting. But the "raise minimum wage" crowd does have a certain point of view about business owners, and their relationship with employees. And it's biased. Just like the other side.
                        And TV commentators are employees. And have an employee mentality. Not evil, not bad, just different from the employers.
                        Signature
                        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468512].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                          Tim; What do you think I'm saying?
                          I think you are saying exactly what you said which wss a sweeping generalization of "lefties". "Most lefties think that all business is big business, and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed."

                          Now, in your explanation you first said you were talking about leftie tv commentators. Then you edited the post to say you meant hard left, then added you meant extremists. ( I can see what Kurt is talking about when he says you keep changing your posts. Lol )

                          So, when you say lefty you mean extremists? You said you are a lefty on some issues. Are you an extremist on these issues?

                          Just stop, Claude. Lol Even if you did mean hard left extremist tv commentators, I still think it's a silly comment. Show me one commentator who has said all businesses are big businesses and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed. Since "most" think this, it should be easy to find one example.

                          There have been polls on the politial affiliation of small business owners and a good percentage say they are progressives or Democrats. Maybe in Wooster they are all righies except for you, but there are millions of others who are not.
                          Signature
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468706].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author agc
                            Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                            I think you are saying exactly what you said which wss a sweeping generalization of "lefties". "Most lefties think that all business is big business, and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed."
                            Let me fix that up for you:

                            Based on the way the conduct and present themselves, it would appear that most lefties think that all business is big business, and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed.

                            Now that I can state with confidence.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468724].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                              Originally Posted by agc View Post


                              Based on the way the conduct and present themselves, it would appear that most lefties think that all business is big business, and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed.
                              Slightly better than what Claude said but still off imo. I guess I should ask your definition of lefty though. Are you talking about hard left extremist tv commentators who have more hair than Claude or do you have your own definition?
                              Signature
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468733].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                                Slightly better than what Claude said but still off imo. I guess I should ask your definition of lefty though. Are you talking about hard left extremist tv commentators who have more hair than Claude or do you have your own definition?

                                Tim; I think most people are closer to the middle. Reasonable, not insane, kind people...who happen to have a different opinion.

                                But that's not who gets the press. That's not who is being interviewed. When I say Lefty, I mean someone who is solidly in that corner, without thought, without considering other points of view.

                                I do tend to edit my posts, if I re-read them and see that they convey something different than what I meant. I know it can look like I'm changing my mind...but I'm not.
                                Signature
                                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469234].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                            Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                            ...
                            There have been polls on the politial affiliation of small business owners and a good percentage say they are progressives or Democrats. Maybe in Wooster they are all righies except for you, but there are millions of others who are not.
                            A 'good percentage' being ~20%?

                            My first good belly laugh of the year, thanks.
                            Signature

                            The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                            Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468774].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                              A 'good percentage' being ~20%?
                              More of those who identify themselves as independent lean to the left these days. There's one poll that has the percentages of small business owners as 38% Gop, 30% Democrats and 25% Independent. With the independents leaning left the percentages are probably closer than you think.

                              You're probably looking at the nsba poll which showed the percentages at 22, 38 and 25 I believe. First of all, that was an unscientific online poll. Secondly, there are the independents who may identify more with progressives.

                              One of the reasons why more small business owners are affiliated with the gop or right leaning is likely the fact that most business owner's are older white males.

                              Here's an article about a scientific poll of small business owners. 61% are in favor of increasing the federal minimum wage to $10.10, even though the same poll puts the gap between those who are gop and dem at 15%.

                              http://www.businessforafairminimumwa...l-minimum-wage
                              Signature
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468803].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                            Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                            So, when you say lefty you mean extremists? You said you are a lefty on some issues. Are you an extremist on these issues?

                            Just stop, Claude. Lol Even if you did mean hard left extremist tv commentators, I still think it's a silly comment. Show me one commentator who has said all businesses are big businesses and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed. Since "most" think this, it should be easy to find one example.

                            There have been polls on the politial affiliation of small business owners and a good percentage say they are progressives or Democrats. Maybe in Wooster they are all righies except for you, but there are millions of others who are not.
                            Smart points, worthy of a sincere answer.

                            So, when you say lefty you mean extremists? You said you are a lefty on some issues. Are you an extremist on these issues?

                            No. In almost no case. But on very specific "yes or no" issues, I tend to be on the liberal side. Or rather, they tend to agree with what I see as reasonable. But it isn't always like that.

                            Show me one commentator who has said all businesses are big businesses and all employees are victims of the business owner's greed. Since "most" think this, it should be easy to find one example.

                            You would think so, wouldn't you? I can't think of a specific instance, or a specific commentator. But I watch MSNBC, nearly every day. And I see, on the panels, and in the stories, that business is treated more like the enemy. When you see a story about employees picketing a business, or demonstrating in front of a business, the story is, "Employees are taken advantage of". I've never seen a different slant. Most of the commentators get the facts right. They don't lie. But the slant of the story sides with the employees. And in most cases, I side with the employer. Why? Because in most cases, the employer is keeping it's agreement, and the employees want change. I get having the opposite opinion. And I get why the story slants that way...99% of viewers are employees.


                            There have been polls on the politial affiliation of small business owners and a good percentage say they are progressives or Democrats.

                            In very specific industries, liberals dominate. Health food stores, for example. But the majority of business owners are on the right. I see that at every convention I've ever spoken at. Every trade show I've attended. Some of the speakers are blatant about it.

                            Some towns/states are more liberal. So, yes, polls there would show more liberals. But if you go to a big national convention of business owners (like I used to as a job), you see easily 80-90% are on the right. It's just like 90% of actors are on the left.

                            I hang out with people that I don't agree with on virtually any issue. And I keep it to myself.
                            Yes, my town is strongly on the right...There is one other business owner in town that leans left. And he and I have to talk in whispers. It would literally kill our businesses.
                            Signature
                            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469253].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
            Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

            If someone thinks a small business with 3 minimum-wage employees that's barely getting by could absorb a $45,000 increase in payroll, they're delusional.
            If a small business with three minimum wage employees is struggling to get by, that's a fair indication that sooner, rather than later, that business is going to go under irrespective of whether they raise or lower the wages.
            Signature
            Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
            So that blind people can hate them as well.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10467436].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    Does it matter my definition?

    To me, they are self defining through their one dimensional thinking, partisan approach, and aggressive promotion of programs that they can barely begin fathom the consequences of.

    By and large I ignore them, because through their own antics they have rendered themselves completely irrelevant to anyone actually working on real policy.

    FWIW, I have the same disdain for the nutcakes on the right who somehow think that a return to feudalism would be preferable to trying to find ways to slow down the growing economic gap.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10468744].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Wow what a discussion!

    On one side you have the detractors of a min wage increase who claim that immediately jumping the min wage from $7.85 to $15 per hour would hurt the economy. I agree with them and that's why I'm in favor of a gradual increase - in order to cushion the small business owner etc.

    The detractors have been going round and round invoking a worst case scenario - such as an immediate big raise (like doubling) of the rate and inflation exploding - as if that's exactly how it would be done at the federal level.

    About 20 states (I think) have agreed to gradually raise the rate but I don't think many states are going to just jump to the big increase instead of gradually raising it but maybe some local cities/towns are doing it.

    BTW, some states have pre-empted cities in their own state by passing legislation against raising the min wage by the local govs.

    One good thing about the issue is that states can take it upon them themselves to raise the rate for its citizens even if it never gets done at the national level.


    So...

    But despite 600 economists and 7 Nobel Prize winners saying that gradually raising the rate won't destroy the economy, lead to massive jobs losses and/or cause inflation to explode, the detractors continue to insist that it will.

    The detractors on this issue remind me of the detractors of man-made climate.

    I also think it's incumbent upon every serious business person to examine the economic issues and determine which general economic philosophy is best for their business short, medium and long term and the people they love and care about.

    Perhaps we could break down the basic economic philosophies and examine their effects on the American economy and the average Joe?
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469120].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      I also think it's incumbent upon every business person to examine the economic issues and determine which general economic philosophy is best for their business short, medium and long term.
      Most have but one outlook: "The more I can keep for myself and my family, by refusing to compensate you with what you need to take care of your family, the better off my family's life will be. I am happy to operate this way, knowing that the government that I slam at every opportunity, will compensate for my greed by giving you food stamps and other 'hand-outs' to make up for it. I'd love to stay and chat, but it's now time for me to go and gripe about all the government hand-outs that the 'takers' rob the government of."

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469127].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        Most have but one outlook: "The more I can keep for myself and my family, by refusing to compensate you with what you need to take care of your family, the better off my family's life will be.

        I am happy to operate this way, knowing that the government that I slam at every opportunity, will compensate for my greed by giving you food stamps and other 'hand-outs' to make up for it. I'd love to stay and chat, but it's now time for me to go and gripe about all the government hand-outs that the 'takers' rob the government of."

        Cheers. - Frank
        I hear you Frank and actually Tim found a poll that found that 60% of small business owners don't have a problem with the min wage being gradually raised. I think you're speaking of the 35% who are not on board and probably will never be on board for various reasons like the attitudes you sighted.

        Look at the support by region:



        The poll and story are here.

        National Poll: Small Business Owners Favor Raising Federal Minimum Wage | Business For a Fair Minimum Wage

        But I guess anyone with the wherewithal can drum up a poll that says the opposite.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469143].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          I hear you Frank and actually Tim found a poll that found that 60% of small business owners don't have a problem with the min wage being gradually raised. I think you're speaking of the 35% who are not on board and probably will never be on board for various reasons like the attitudes you sighted.
          Precisely. I'm not one for preaching to the choir. Life is short and I prefer to spend my time irritating those that I have a strong difference of opinion with.

          How am I doing???

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469155].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author ThomM
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          I hear you Frank and actually Tim found a poll that found that 60% of small business owners don't have a problem with the min wage being gradually raised. I think you're speaking of the 35% who are not on board and probably will never be on board for various reasons like the attitudes you sighted.

          Look at the support by region:



          The poll and story are here.

          National Poll: Small Business Owners Favor Raising Federal Minimum Wage | Business For a Fair Minimum Wage

          But I guess anyone with the wherewithal can drum up a poll that says the opposite.
          So why do they feel the need for the government to tell them to raise their employees wages instead of just doing it themselves?
          Signature

          Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
          Getting old ain't for sissy's
          As you are I was, as I am you will be
          You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469173].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

            So why do they feel the need for the government to tell them to raise their employees wages instead of just doing it themselves?
            I wouldn't be surprised if many who feel it should be raised have raised it for their business.


            The poll is about if they would like it to be raised across the board or not - not something about their need to have the gov tell them to do it.
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469181].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author ThomM
              Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

              I wouldn't be surprised if many who feel it should be raised have raised it for their business.


              The poll is about if they would like it to be raised across the board or not - not something about their need to have the gov tell them to do it.
              It's none of their business how others run their own business.
              If they willingly on their own raised their employees wage, then they should back other businesses being able to make the same decision on their own and not by force of government mandates.
              If you out source any of you online business to someone in the Philippines and someone else decides to out source to only people in the US should the government step in and mandate you only out source to people in the US?
              Signature

              Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
              Getting old ain't for sissy's
              As you are I was, as I am you will be
              You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469230].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                It's none of their business how others run their own business.
                If they willingly on their own raised their employees wage, then they should back other businesses being able to make the same decision on their own and not by force of government mandates.

                If you out source any of you online business to someone in the Philippines and someone else decides to out source to only people in the US should the government step in and mandate you only out source to people in the US?
                I disagree.

                It is my business if I believe you're positions are a danger to my health and my wealth. What is the political process about anyway? One thing it is clearly about is deciding how we are going to run this country.
                Signature

                "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469249].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                  Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                  I disagree.

                  It is my business if I believe you're positions are a danger to my health and my wealth. What is the political process about anyway? One thing it is clearly about is deciding how we are going to run this country.
                  What myself and my employees decide they should be paid and are willing to work for has nothing to do with your health or wealth. It's really only the business of the employer and the employee as to what that employee is paid.

                  One thing it is clearly about is deciding how we are going to run this country.
                  How? By having the government make every decision for a business and individual? What's next, the government determining the cost of everything you buy? Yep because that's worked so well so far.
                  Signature

                  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                  Getting old ain't for sissy's
                  As you are I was, as I am you will be
                  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469370].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    How? By having the government make every decision for a business and individual? What's next, the government determining the cost of everything you buy? Yep because that's worked so well so far.
                    Thom...Buddy.

                    The government creates regulations and laws, not to control us, but mostly to protect the weak from predators. It's why there are laws (except when it's to give a political result)

                    When you said this; "What's next, the government determining the cost of everything you buy? Yep because that's worked so well so far" Don't you see what you did?

                    You made up a hypothetical situation, and then fought against it. I cannot remember the Latin words to describe this flaw in reasoning. But you set up a straw man, just to knock it down.

                    I know you're passionate about this. I can tell in your post (the first half I completely agreed with).....but come back later, and you'll see what I mean.

                    I know how much people love it, when I point these things out. It's the best way I know to make friends...friends that won't talk to me..invite my over for Holidays....OK, friends that hate me. There I said it.

                    Downton Abbey is new tonight. I watch it, because I am a real man....that wears frilly silk shirts.

                    Honest to God, the first two years I saw it listed, I thought it was Downtown Abbey.
                    Signature
                    One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                    What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469523].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                      Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                      Thom...Buddy.

                      The government creates regulations and laws, not to control us, but mostly to protect the weak from predators. It's why there are laws (except when it's to give a political result)

                      When you said this; "What's next, the government determining the cost of everything you buy? Yep because that's worked so well so far" Don't you see what you did?

                      You made up a hypothetical situation, and then fought against it. I cannot remember the Latin words to describe this flaw in reasoning. But you set up a straw man, just to knock it down.

                      I know you're passionate about this. I can tell in your post (the first half I completely agreed with).....but come back later, and you'll see what I mean.

                      I know how much people love it, when I point these things out. It's the best way I know to make friends...friends that won't talk to me..invite my over for Holidays....OK, friends that hate me. There I said it.

                      Downton Abbey is new tonight. I watch it, because I am a real man....that wears frilly silk shirts.

                      Honest to God, the first two years I saw it listed, I thought it was Downtown Abbey.
                      Claude most regulations on businesses where created by the different business lobbies. The idea that business are predators just waiting to pray on the weak is very outdated. That's like thinking without a min. wage law businesses would be able to force people to work for 50 cents an hour. The flaw in that thinking is business have to compete for employees just like they have to compete for business.
                      Actually I didn't make up a hypothetical situation. Government attempting price fixing happened with gas in the 70's and with rent control currently like in NYC.
                      Actually I'm not passionate about this, I really have no reason to be. It's something I enjoy discussing but it really doesn't matter to me if the min. wage is raised or not. I'm also retired and have no plans about starting a business again.
                      My only hope is that raising the min. wage will raise the cost of living seeing how not having the cost of living going up in 2015 is the reason why nobody on S.S. is getting any type of raise this year
                      Signature

                      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                      Getting old ain't for sissy's
                      As you are I was, as I am you will be
                      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469736].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      But despite 600 economists and 7 Nobel Prize winners saying that gradually raising the rate won't destroy the economy, lead to massive jobs losses and/or cause inflation to explode, the detractors continue to insist that it will.
      Please don't trust those commie-yokels. We all know that they are in league with the 97% of scientists that state that global warming is irrefutable and that human activity as it relates to carbon emissions is a major factor, when in reality we all know the main problem is cow farts. Additionally, how can you say there's such a thing as 'global warming' when, look - it's snowing outside!

      The liberal-loons never cease to amaze!

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469165].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        Please don't trust those commie-yokels. We all know that they are in league with the 97% of scientists that state that global warming is irrefutable and that human activity as it relates to carbon emissions is a major factor, when in reality we all know the main problem is cow farts. Additionally, how can you say there's such a thing as 'global warming' when, look - it's snowing outside!

        The liberal-loons never cease to amaze!

        Cheers. - Frank

        (Since 600 trained economists, 7 Nobel Prize winners and the majority of small business people disagree with them...)

        Ut-oh Frank, here come the detractors, on queue with their trademark, nonsensical, irrelevant, snarky, non-productive and very corny questions.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469186].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          Ut-oh Frank, here come the detractors, on queue with their trademark, nonsensical, irrelevant, snarky, non- productive and very corny questions.
          Well, I can't be too rough on them, seeing as how I have an abundance of trademarked, nonsensical, irrelevant, snarky, non-productive and very corny statements.

          Just an effort to keep things moving along. I get bored, easily!

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469216].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    Min wage should be raised to meet inflation that has already happened.

    It should not be raised ahead of inflation causing that inflation to then happen.

    As for miserly scrooges not wanting to pay workers guess what? That's their job. As for greedy workers wanting to make as much as possible for the work they do quess what? That's their job.

    End of the day, the company wants to make more money than they pay, enough so that they can show a profit. but they also have a responsibility to maintain a "healthy" balance sheet so they can access credit when they need it, and can meet their obligations to suppliers and employees. If the money is coming in, then it can go out in employee pay. But now each employee has to show his or her own worth to make sure he gets paid and not some other guy. That's his own responsibility. If you want to make more money, you have to make yourself worth more to the company.

    This is always the part left out by the lefties. To them, a living age should be legislated. Joe Dumbass should be able to be a complete screw up, causing more damage on the job site than he produces in economic value, yet somehow the company should find it in their heart (or better be compelled) to provide him a decent living? This is where it breaks down.

    Personally, I always think that if a company pays me $1, I should produce $2 of economic benefit for them.

    If I see them getting less benefit, I expect my days might be numbered.

    If I see them making $10 for what I do for $1, I know (or at least think) I can charge more. And I will. If not here, I'll shop it somewhere else, and they'll take it.

    If nobody else is taking me up on it, then odds are I'm not the one producing the $10 of benefit after all. That evil company has probably invested in "stuff" that is supporting me, and the other companies don't have that stuff, and that's why they won't realize the same benefit. So I'm not really producing the $10 by myself. The company is and I'm just too naive to see it.

    Ironically, that is the same relationship with government. Go do that same job under a different government and realize dramatically different results.

    This is the part the righties get wrong. You have to support and maintain the economic systems (governments) that make your business possible, and that costs money and is aggravating.

    In the US, the economic systems work better than any place else in the world. The social systems are somewhat creaky and broken. But you can't fix the social systems by monkeying with the economic system. The economics are the goose laying the golden eggs. Don't kill the goose.

    End of the day, the real problem is that nobody is teaching life skills. Not in school. Not at home. Not anywhere. Want to fix the problem? Get out there and teach people how to be responsible for their own support. You can live on minimum wage. It's just not pleasant. You can support a family on two minimum wages. It's just not pleasant.

    I personally don't think it should be pleasant. If all you can be bothered to produce in this world is the minimum value, I fail to understand why you should be entitled to more than the minimum payment.

    If you want to separate the can'ts from the can't be bothereds, then yea, ok. Explain to me how to sort them out. I'm all for helping the can'ts. Not so much the can't be bothereds.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469192].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
      Originally Posted by agc View Post

      Min wage should be raised to meet inflation that has already happened.

      It should not be raised ahead of inflation causing that inflation to then happen.

      As for miserly scrooges not wanting to pay workers guess what? That's their job. As for greedy workers wanting to make as much as possible for the work they do quess what? That's their job.

      End of the day, the company wants to make more money than they pay, enough so that they can show a profit. but they also have a responsibility to maintain a "healthy" balance sheet so they can access credit when they need it, and can meet their obligations to suppliers and employees. If the money is coming in, then it can go out in employee pay. But now each employee has to show his or her own worth to make sure he gets paid and not some other guy. That's his own responsibility. If you want to make more money, you have to make yourself worth more to the company.

      This is always the part left out by the lefties. To them, a living age should be legislated. Joe Dumbass should be able to be a complete screw up, causing more damage on the job site than he produces in economic value, yet somehow the company should find it in their heart (or better be compelled) to provide him a decent living? This is where it breaks down.

      Personally, I always think that if a company pays me $1, I should produce $2 of economic benefit for them.

      If I see them getting less benefit, I expect my days might be numbered.

      If I see them making $10 for what I do for $1, I know (or at least think) I can charge more. And I will. If not here, I'll shop it somewhere else, and they'll take it.

      If nobody else is taking me up on it, then odds are I'm not the one producing the $10 of benefit after all. That evil company has probably invested in "stuff" that is supporting me, and the other companies don't have that stuff, and that's why they won't realize the same benefit. So I'm not really producing the $10 by myself. The company is and I'm just too naive to see it.

      Ironically, that is the same relationship with government. Go do that same job under a different government and realize dramatically different results.

      This is the part the righties get wrong. You have to support and maintain the economic systems (governments) that make your business possible, and that costs money and is aggravating.

      In the US, the economic systems work better than any place else in the world. The social systems are somewhat creaky and broken. But you can't fix the social systems by monkeying with the economic system. The economics are the goose laying the golden eggs. Don't kill the goose.

      End of the day, the real problem is that nobody is teaching life skills. Not in school. Not at home. Not anywhere. Want to fix the problem? Get out there and teach people how to be responsible for their own support. You can live on minimum wage. It's just not pleasant. You can support a family on two minimum wages. It's just not pleasant.

      I personally don't think it should be pleasant. If all you can be bothered to produce in this world is the minimum value, I fail to understand why you should be entitled to more than the minimum payment.

      If you want to separate the can'ts from the can't be bothereds, then yea, ok. Explain to me how to sort them out. I'm all for helping the can'ts. Not so much the can't be bothereds.
      Once again...

      600 trained economists, 7 Nobel Prize winners and the majority of small business people disagree with you.

      But I'm sure the Wall Street Journal and others agree with you. I bet you can even find a survey or two that agrees with your position.

      And once again...

      ... the (so-called dumb-ass/lazy ass) fast food worker of today is better educated than the factory worker of the past who made out like gangbusters because the economy and environment was so much better for them.

      And...

      I have a feeling your economic philosophy will perhaps not kill the golden goose but it will certainly stop the goose from growing the way it can and should grow.
      Signature

      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469214].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      Originally Posted by agc View Post

      Min wage should be raised to meet inflation that has already happened.

      It should not be raised ahead of inflation causing that inflation to then happen.
      I agree with that100% and so did the last gop presidential candidate. It's a reasonable solution that could easily be done and then this issue wouldn't keep coming up for discussion year after year.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469233].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author agc
        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

        I agree with that100% and so did the last gop presidential candidate. It's a reasonable solution that could easily be done and then this issue wouldn't keep coming up for discussion year after year.
        So what would that number be?

        I found one chart (cleverly) keyed to 1968, which happens to be the inflation adjusted peak, and which happens to precede and some would say trigger, 10 years of stagflation. Typical politically motivated data cherry picking and manipulation. I consider that to be flat out lying. No integrity, no honor, no interest in the actual truth. Its like taking the starting price of YHOO as $100+ in 2001 instead of going back to when it was $1.50 in 1997. It completely changes the perspective to selectively omit parts of the past you find inconvenient.



        Gotta love the skewed commentary slickly glossing over the assumptions baked into the cooked data.

        Approximately 450,000 workers in Minnesota earn less than the inflation-adjusted minimum wage of $8.46 an hour.
        Here's another chart (plus some reasonably balanced commentary) that goes back to the depression era origin. It shows that at 7.25 it has kept pace with inflation reasonable well for over 60 years.



        » Federal Minimum Wage, 1938-2014

        And what would that number be if we discount the rate in effect before and during recessions? (ie adjust for the obvious screwups we can see with hindsight)?

        According to the chart above, it's already too high and should be lowered back to about $6. Or at least wait for inflation to catch up before bumping it again.



        Lookong at the DOL numbers, closer to $6 is too low and over $8 is probably too high. This seems about right actually.



        About Minimum Wage - U.S. Department of Labor


        We're between 7 and 8 now. Raising it to $7.75 seems prudent. Then wait and see, and bump it again if things are going well. If THAT were the political discourse, there would be no ruckus.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469258].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
          Originally Posted by agc View Post

          We're between 7 and 8 now. Raising it to $7.75 seems prudent. Then wait and see, and bump it again if things are going well. If THAT were the political discourse, there would be no ruckus.
          Possibly the most intelligent thing I've read here. Raise it a little, see what's changed. Raise it a little more, see what's changed.

          I wish I had said it...or even thought it.
          Signature
          One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

          What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469274].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

            Possibly the most intelligent thing I've read here. Raise it a little, see what's changed. Raise it a little more, see what's changed.

            I wish I had said it...or even thought it.
            The minimum wage has been raised 22 times (I think) since 1938. We should have a pretty good idea of what happens by now. What we don't know is what will happen if it's raised significantly.
            Signature
            Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
            Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469279].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
              Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

              The minimum wage has been raised 22 times (I think) since 1938. We should have a pretty good idea of what happens by now. What we don't know is what will happen if it's raised significantly.
              It could be raised faster. Meaning small raises (maybe $1-$1.50) at a time, faster than inflation. Maybe once a year, to see what effect it has. See if problems crop up....I pulled "once a year" out of thin air.

              The only problem I see with doubling it (along with obvious benefits) is that it would be very difficult to lower it.

              It's not a concern for me, but I can see how it might be a factor.
              Signature
              One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

              What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469309].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                I pulled "once a year" out of my ass as the only things that are thin in my life are my hair and my intelligence.
                STOP MAKING THIS SO EASY!!!

                Cheers. - Frank
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469322].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                It could be raised faster. Meaning small raises (maybe $1-$1.50) at a time, faster than inflation. Maybe once a year, to see what effect it has. See if problems crop up....I pulled "once a year" out of thin air.

                The only problem I see with doubling it (along with obvious benefits) is that it would be very difficult to lower it.

                It's not a concern for me, but I can see how it might be a factor.
                It would (will be) virtually impossible to lower it.


                Also, for some it isn't just a case of raising the minimum wage, it's how much? While I'm for an increase, I think $15 is too much.


                I'd also like to see some real ideas for low income housing, which would give low income earners a better standard of living and more spending power. Things like 3D printing could do a lot...but on the other hand, 3D printing will impact construction jobs dramatically, which typically pay pretty well.
                Signature
                Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469362].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                It could be raised faster. Meaning small raises (maybe $1-$1.50) at a time, faster than inflation. Maybe once a year, to see what effect it has. See if problems crop up....I pulled "once a year" out of thin air.

                The only problem I see with doubling it (along with obvious benefits) is that it would be very difficult to lower it.

                It's not a concern for me, but I can see how it might be a factor.
                You are umming and ahhing about raising a POVERTY LINE exploitive, unliveable salary slowly over several years to cautiously see how it goes??. When it finally gets to the $15.00 an hour in so many years time then that $15.00 will be worth $7.25 in real terms. It does not improve anyone's lot. The song remains the same.

                It may sound idealistic to say this, but this is why we elect representative people and administrations to run the country and make the decisions. We hope they will set some minimum standards of fairness and common decency to go by in life and business. Well, we hope they will.
                Signature

                Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469383].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                  It may sound idealistic to say this, but this is why we elect representative people and administrations to run the country and make the decisions. We hope they will set some minimum standards of fairness and common decency to go by in life and business. Well, we hope they will.
                  That's just wishful thinking. The average lawmaker couldn't care less if you live or die, well, once you exit the womb, at least. Until then, you are the most important thing on the planet. A home, food, education, healthcare - you're on your own! We have no one to blame but ourselves - we voted the bums, in!

                  "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

                  Cheers. - Frank
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469389].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                  Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                  You are umming and ahhing about raising a POVERTY LINE exploitive, unliveable salary slowly over several years to cautiously see how it goes??. When it finally gets to the $15.00 an hour in so many years time then that $15.00 will be worth $7.25 in real terms. It does not improve anyone's lot. The song remains the same.
                  Mark; I think what you said here is very important. And this is all just my opinion, which I don't believe in enough to fight for.

                  I was thinking about a solution, that actually has a chance to get passed, that makes sense to most of the people. It could get to $15 an hour in 5 years. Again, just pulling these figures out of Big Frank's ass.

                  For me? I don't believe in any minimum wage. I don't think that way. But if I were in charge of "how much minimum wage should be?" I'd raise it to $15. Why? Because it's still not very much, and I believe the most people will benefit. I like Kurt's idea of lower prices for low income housing. That's also a solution.

                  But, these ideal scenarios have no chances of getting done. These are political footballs to rally the base, and raise money for the "fight against evil" (on both sides).

                  You really want something to become law? Something that most people can live with? Slow and steady. Is it what most people want? On either side? No. But it's what most people can agree on. At least in my opinion.

                  Of course, raise it faster than inflation, or what's the point?
                  Signature
                  One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                  What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469510].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                    Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                    Mark; I think what you said here is very important. And this is all just my opinion, which I don't believe in enough to fight for.

                    I was thinking about a solution, that actually has a chance to get passed, that makes sense to most of the people. It could get to $15 an hour in 5 years. Again, just pulling these figures out of Big Frank's ass.

                    For me? I don't believe in any minimum wage. I don't think that way. But if I were in charge of "how much minimum wage should be?" I'd raise it to $15. Why? Because it's still not very much, and I believe the most people will benefit. I like Kurt's idea of lower prices for low income housing. That's also a solution.

                    But, these ideal scenarios have no chances of getting done. These are political footballs to rally the base, and raise money for the "fight against evil" (on both sides).

                    You really want something to become law? Something that most people can live with? Slow and steady. Is it what most people want? On either side? No. But it's what most people can agree on. At least in my opinion.

                    Of course, raise it faster than inflation, or what's the point?
                    While I accept what your saying as probably a realistically passable, real world way of doing SOMETHING, it does not solve anything. Raising what is poverty line wages slightly above inflation over a time period does nothing. They still remain just that. It just keeps the poverty line salary at the same level in relation to the rest of it. Inflation rates can rise and fall too.

                    When I started at the college (which I have worked at for about 10 years now), I was probably at the lowest rate they pay, over 10 years, my salary has gone up with raises by another 50 percent. Last year they decided to raise the minimum they would pay anyone significantly. All those years I spent getting those raises to go significantly above the minimum only to find a lot of the gains I had made being wiped out relatively to a newcomers starting salary. However, I did not complain or bear a grudge as I agreed that the new minimum was more realistic.
                    Signature

                    Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469533].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author yukon
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                      While I accept what your saying as probably a realistically passable, real world way of doing SOMETHING, it does not solve anything. Raising what is poverty line wages slightly above inflation over a time period does nothing. They still remain just that. It just keeps the poverty line salary at the same level in relation to the rest of it. Inflation rates can rise and fall too.

                      When I started at the college (which I have worked at for about 10 years now), I was probably at the lowest rate they pay, over 10 years, my salary has gone up with raises by another 50 percent. Last year they decided to raise the minimum they would pay anyone significantly. All those years I spent getting those raises to go significantly above the minimum only to find a lot of the gains I had made being wiped out relatively to a newcomers starting salary. However, I did not complain or bear a grudge as I agreed that the new minimum was more realistic.

                      Haven't I been saying this situation from the beginning of this thread? Jacking up min. wage only pushes more people closer to min. wage earnings & increases the cost of living.

                      Walk into any blue-collar factory in the US & ask folks that have worked there for 5+ years when the last time they had a pay raise. Usually once an employee is maxed out on the pay scale they'll sit back & wait for the rest of the world (new hires at the bottom of the pay scale) to catch up. Double the pay rate of min. wage & middle class employees are that much closer to poverty.

                      It usually takes an act of congress to get employers to increase the max. pay rate. Min. wage increases is mandatory so they're sure as heck not going to increase the high end of the pay scale at the same time, especially going from $7.25 to $15, or whatever amount.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469763].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                        Haven't I been saying this situation from the beginning of this thread? Jacking up min. wage only pushes more people closer to min. wage earnings & increases the cost of living.

                        Walk into any blue-collar factory in the US & ask folks that have worked there for 5+ years when the last time they had a pay raise. Usually once an employee is maxed out on the pay scale they'll sit back & wait for the rest of the world (new hires at the bottom of the pay scale) to catch up. Double the pay rate of min. wage & middle class employees are that much closer to poverty.

                        It usually takes an act of congress to get employers to increase the max. pay rate. Min. wage increases is mandatory so they're sure as heck not going to increase the high end of the pay scale at the same time, especially going from $7.25 to $15, or whatever amount.
                        No Yukon, do not use what I said as an example. Our starting salary was way, way, above the minimum wage anyway.
                        Signature

                        Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469784].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author yukon
                          Banned
                          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                          No Yukon, do not use what I said as an example. Our starting salary was way, way, above the minimum wage anyway.

                          Confusing... does it matter If you're making $20 or $50 an hour? Still one step backwards.


                          Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                          When I started at the college (which I have worked at for about 10 years now), I was probably at the lowest rate they pay, over 10 years, my salary has gone up with raises by another 50 percent. Last year they decided to raise the minimum they would pay anyone significantly. All those years I spent getting those raises to go significantly above the minimum only to find a lot of the gains I had made being wiped out relatively to a newcomers starting salary. However, I did not complain or bear a grudge as I agreed that the new minimum was more realistic.
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469793].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author yukon
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                It could be raised faster. Meaning small raises (maybe $1-$1.50) at a time, faster than inflation. Maybe once a year, to see what effect it has. See if problems crop up....I pulled "once a year" out of thin air.

                The only problem I see with doubling it (along with obvious benefits) is that it would be very difficult to lower it.

                It's not a concern for me, but I can see how it might be a factor.


                I don't think you get it.

                The money doesn't magically appear on paychecks. The money comes from employers who get their money from customers. The employer jacks up the price of products they're selling to compensate expenses (ex: forced min. wage hike). You can raise the min. wage a dime a month, guess what, the employer is raising his prices at the same time to compensate those dimes.

                You're chasing rainbows If you think you can outpace inflation with small min. wage increases.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469769].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Great! Another chart guy. I thought those days were over. :-)

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469275].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author agc
            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

            Great! Another chart guy. I thought those days were over. :-)
            Translation: How dare you relate my delusions back to reality.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469293].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by agc View Post

              Translation: How dare you relate my delusions back to reality.
              Trust me, - we've all seen our fair share of charts to support someone's point of view over the years.

              Give me anyone's position on any topic and an hour, and I'll find you a chart to click your heels over. :-)

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469301].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Originally Posted by agc View Post

          We're between 7 and 8 now. Raising it to $7.75 seems paltry.
          I can't spend my entire day, fixing this stuff!

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469280].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author agc
            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

            I can't spend my entire day, fixing this stuff!

            Cheers. - Frank
            Please stop trying then. You're like a monkey loose with a hammer in the economic china shop.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469289].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by agc View Post

              Please stop trying then. You're like a monkey loose with a hammer in the economic china shop.
              Sorry. Thought I was in the barnyard from all the crap I have to navigate through. :-)

              I'm always left wondering why folks are never employed in their areas of apparent immense expertise?

              Just sayin' . . . . . .

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469298].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author agc
                Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                I'm always left wondering why folks are never employed in their areas of apparent immense expertise?

                Is that a question for the ones promoting $15/hr?

                Or the ones in business who are opposed?

                Which of the above are "employed in their area of apparent immense expertise"?

                Are you Big Frank? What area of immense expertise are you employed in?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469306].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by agc View Post

                  Is that a question for ones promoting $15/hr?
                  I wouldn't pay $1 an hour for the expertise in this thread. That said, I'm sure there are a few here that would love to pay $1 an hour, anytime they could, regardless of the level of expertise that someone may possess.

                  Here's a thought. Let's eliminate the minimum wage altogether and just let the 'marketplace' sort it out.

                  And the crowd roars!

                  Cheers. - Frank
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469317].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
          Originally Posted by agc View Post

          So what would that number be?
          That is the question and those charts don't really help decide where the minimum wage should be today because it's a present day decision. In 1938 it was at 25 cents which in 2014 dollars would be $3.45. The 1938 minimum wage was a starting point, it doesn't mean that it was the ideal amount. As the middle class grew in the 40s, 50s and 60s our standard of living did too. Can you imagine trying to live on $3.45 an hour today? In my city it would take 6 people working full-time just to pay for a one bedroom apartment.

          Those charts don't say anything about where the current minimum wage should be. That's a subjective decision that should be made by our present day society and most people ( above 70%) in the US believe it should be at least $10.00.

          When social security started out the payments were also very low, but as society changed and the middle class grew, so did our standard of living and our definitions of what is a livable income.
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469795].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    Also, see the "blip and decay" on the DOL top line? That's your inflation effect right there.

    1968? Blip and a straight line of inflation right back to 1955. 10 years of going backwards instead of forwards. Did the min wage cause that? Not by itself, but it sure contributed.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469277].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    I'm not sure If anyone mentioned this or not, it's a long thread...

    The national debt will also snowball doubling min. wage. Most things the US Gov buys from US suppliers will have to increase in cost because supplier payroll will have to compensate the added expense to manufacture a product/service which again forces the buyer (US Gov) to spend more money.

    ...which means everyone will enjoy even higher taxes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469775].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      I'm not sure If anyone mentioned this or not, it's a long thread...

      The national debt will also snowball doubling min. wage. Most things the US Gov buys from US suppliers will have to increase in cost because supplier payroll will have to compensate the added expense to manufacture a product/service which again forces the buyer (US Gov) to spend more money.

      ...which means everyone will enjoy even higher taxes.
      Give me the math. What percentage of the work force will be affected by raising the minimum wage?


      Next...what percentage of the production costs will be affected by the increase in wages?


      Finally, what percentage of our US Gov spending is for these goods and services?


      I highly doubt military spending will be affected much by the minimum wage, which is our single biggest spending.


      Unless you have the actual numbers, you're just guessing. Give me the math and I'll form my own opinion. If you don't know the math, you don't have a clue.
      Signature
      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469800].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        Give me the math. What percentage of the work force will be affected by raising the minimum wage?


        Next...what percentage of the production costs will be affected by the increase in wages?


        Finally, what percentage of our US Gov spending is for these goods and services?


        I highly doubt military spending will be affected much by the minimum wage, which is our single biggest spending.


        Unless you have the actual numbers, you're just guessing. Give me the math and I'll form my own opinion. If you don't know the math, you don't have a clue.


        I get it, your upset over the dirt house thread.

        I'm not sure why you think anyone owes you detailed data. If you want it, do it, figure it out.

        If you had any common sense you would know that money doesn't magically appear on paychecks. I know you want to back up your buddies, believe me I get the whole buddy system but slow down the rant long enough to think where the money comes from (hint: buyers).

        I hope you seriously don't need other people to form your opinions for you.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469833].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
          Originally Posted by yukon View Post

          If you had any common sense you would know that money doesn't magically appear on paychecks. I know you want to back up your buddies, believe me I get the whole buddy system but slow down the rant long enough to think where the money comes from (hint: buyers).
          Do you honestly think Kurt is going to just agree with anything any of us says. He has called me to task more than anyone. Do you really think I would say something, just to agree with anyone here?

          Do you really believe that?
          Signature
          One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

          What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469970].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author yukon
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

            Do you honestly think Kurt is going to just agree with anything any of us says. He has called me to task more than anyone. Do you really think I would say something, just to agree with anyone here?

            Do you really believe that?

            You have 3 do you's in there, are you signing Doo-wop while you type?







            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470069].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by yukon View Post

          I get it, your upset over the dirt house thread.

          I'm not sure why you think anyone owes you detailed data. If you want it, do it, figure it out.

          If you had any common sense you would know that money doesn't magically appear on paychecks. I know you want to back up your buddies, believe me I get the whole buddy system but slow down the rant long enough to think where the money comes from (hint: buyers).

          I hope you seriously don't need other people to form your opinions for you.
          Do you understand even the most basic of logic? Obviously not, because your posts are so full of fallacies.


          You don't owe me anything, and I'm not sure how you thought that was my point. But again, you like to make things up so you can pretend to "win". Making up arguments that don't really exist is what's known as straw man fallacies.


          I pointed out you don't have a clue about how much raising the minimum wage will increase our taxes, which you don't, so you resort to insults and ad hominem attacks/fallacies. Facts will change my mind, not fallacies and insults.


          Reading is fundamental...I didn't ask you to form an opinion for me. I CLEARLY asked you to provide some math/facts and I'd form my own opinion. How did you miss that?


          And your "buddy system" and "buyer" comment is what's known as a red herring, which is another logic fallacy and nothing more than an attempt to distract us from the real issue, which is you don't know how much our taxes will be raised.




          But really, I was calling your bluff and that you're really clueless to how much tax money it will cost us and you were just making things up. The simple fact is, you have no facts. You say raising the minimum wage will raise taxes. I asked you "how much"...seems like a reasonable question.


          You also tossed in some straw man arguments and non sequiturs.
          Signature
          Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
          Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470062].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author yukon
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

            Do you understand even the most basic of logic? Obviously not, because your posts are so full of fallacies.


            You don't owe me anything, and I'm not sure how you thought that was my point. But again, you like to make things up so you can pretend to "win". Making up arguments that don't really exist is what's known as straw man fallacies.


            I pointed out you don't have a clue about how much raising the minimum wage will increase our taxes, which you don't, so you resort to insults and ad hominem attacks/fallacies. Facts will change my mind, not fallacies and insults.


            Reading is fundamental...I didn't ask you to form an opinion for me. I CLEARLY asked you to provide some math/facts and I'd form my own opinion. How did you miss that?


            And your "buddy system" and "buyer" comment is what's known as a red herring, which is another logic fallacy and nothing more than an attempt to distract us from the real issue, which is you don't know how much our taxes will be raised.




            But really, I was calling your bluff and that you're really clueless to how much tax money it will cost us and you were just making things up. The simple fact is, you have no facts. You say raising the minimum wage will raise taxes. I asked you "how much"...seems like a reasonable question.


            You also tossed in some straw man arguments and non sequiturs.



            That makes less sense than the dirt house thread. You wrote the same thing like 5 different ways. Next time just post the CliffsNotes, I don't care enough to keep reading a wall of repetitive babbling.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470076].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
              Originally Posted by yukon View Post

              You have 3 do you's in there, are you signing Doo-wop while you type?
              Originally Posted by yukon View Post

              That makes less sense than the dirt house thread. You wrote the same thing like 5 different ways. Next time just post the CliffsNotes, I don't care enough to keep reading a wall of repetitive babbling.
              I know it sound like I'm picking on you, but these replies are what someone says that has run out of ideas, or solid counter arguments.

              Most of us here really will listen to a good counter argument.
              Signature
              One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

              What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471326].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author yukon
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                I know it sound like I'm picking on you, but these replies are what someone says that has run out of ideas, or solid counter arguments.

                Most of us here really will listen to a good counter argument.

                Ok, I'll answer your sad question.

                Yes I honestly believe you & Kurt have each others back. You know I'm right. That's why you quoted Kurt's dirt house thread. You have his back. You picked Kurt's thread out of thousands of Warrior Forum threads because I didn't agree with Kurt in his thread.

                Does it make you feel better to read the answer?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471342].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
                  Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                  So, giving someone a raise is incestuous redistribution? Interesting perspective. I take it you never gave your employees raises?

                  I'll have to remember that one to impress people at dinner parties.
                  People actually invite you to dinner parties?

                  I gave my employees raises when they added value to the company - worked more efficiently, brought in new business, etc. No one ever got a raise simply by virtue of longevity. Giving someone a raise without their adding value necessarily causes a decrease in compensation to someone else, most often the owner or the shareholders.

                  Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                  Right. That about says it all and makes your perspective on the subject clear.

                  At what point does it cross the line from paying a person a living wage, to confiscating the business owner's wealth? $1 an hour. $2. Or, are you the generous sort that will happily pay a person $5 an hour?

                  Just wondering, is all. :-)

                  Cheers. - Frank
                  It was never my concern to pay a 'living wage'. I paid whatever I needed to in order to secure the kind of employee I needed. I never paid minimum wage because I had standards that most minimum-wage level workers couldn't or wouldn't meet.

                  If someone could make me more money, I was happy to share it. Win-win for everyone. That's also why I paid profit sharing bonuses every Christmas.

                  I already illustrated what would have happened had I been forced to increase the wages of my lowest-paid employees by 60% (diff between $6/hr and $10/hr). Not only would I have had to lay off at least one employee, there wouldn't have been any profit sharing at the end of the year because the wage increase would've eaten it up.

                  Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                  Find an organization of economists that agree with you. It shouldn't be hard to do.

                  I would have thought that folks against the min wage would have formed some type of organization simply to counter the organization that's in favor of it. They do it all the time. Your friends even tried to form an organization to counter AARP - but it met with little success.
                  Haha You keep trying, but falling short.

                  I don't think anyone here has said they were against a minimum wage. Most of us recognize the need for it.

                  Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                  Ok, I'll answer your sad question.

                  Yes I honestly believe you & Kurt have each others back. You know I'm right. That's why you quoted Kurt's dirt house thread. You have his back. You picked Kurt's thread out of thousands of Warrior Forum threads because I didn't agree with Kurt in his thread.

                  Does it make you feel better to read the answer?
                  That's a little over the line. Claude has never been a member of THAT crowd. He isn't a raw ideologue like the others. He actually thinks before he answers, and if you would read his answers you'd probably recognize a degree of intelligence that some others here don't display
                  Signature

                  The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

                  Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471422].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author yukon
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

                    That's a little over the line. Claude has never been a member of THAT crowd. He isn't a raw ideologue like the others. He actually thinks before he answers, and if you would read his answers you'd probably recognize a degree of intelligence that some others here don't display


                    I know the buddy system just as well as everyone else here.

                    I didn't even mention Claude in the original comment yet he jumped in the Kurt comment I posted to back him up. Lol, Claude hasn't even posted on the dirt house thread. Goes to show what he's up to fishing in this thread.

                    I don't care one way or the other. He wanted an answer (twice) so I gave him an answer.

                    Would it have been better If I lied?
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471572].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                    Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post



                    That's a little over the line. Claude has never been a member of MY crowd. He isn't a raw ideologue like myself. He actually thinks before he answers, and if you would read his answers you'd probably recognize a degree of intelligence that I can only dream of. Real intelligence comes from intelligence.
                    Fixed that for ya.

                    I got your back, Claude!
                    Signature
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471848].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
                      Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                      Fixed that for ya.

                      I got your back, Claude!
                      Watcha gonna' do with all that hair from Claude's back?
                      Signature

                      "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471891].message }}
                      • Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

                        Watcha gonna' do with all that hair from Claude's back?
                        Hey, this is weird.

                        I figure this is the longest runnin' post we had since the cop pouncin' on the kid in class.

                        So I checked in jus' to see how the discussion was progressin', an' lo -- we are up to Claude's back.

                        My opinion?

                        I would embroider a smiley onto my toga (if I had a toga) or mebbe fix up a stick-on mohican for the guy.

                        My other opinion?

                        I do not wish to divert this post from where it's at.

                        Jus' droppin' in.
                        Signature

                        Lightin' fuses is for blowin' stuff togethah.

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471902].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                        Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

                        Watcha gonna' do with all that hair from Claude's back?

                        Comb over. It's my last hope.
                        Signature
                        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10473068].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                          Comb over. It's my last hope.
                          Would it go over the Hump?
                          Signature

                          Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10473088].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                            Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

                            Would it go over the Hump?
                            You call it a hump, I call it a bulge. My wife calls it Oscar.
                            Signature
                            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                            What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10473102].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
                              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                              You call it a hump, I call it a bulge. My wife calls it Oscar.
                              I had a Hunch you would say that.

                              Now run along to your Campanology class Claudemodo.
                              Signature

                              Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10473127].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                        Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

                        Watcha gonna' do with all that hair from Claude's back?
                        Transplant it to his forehead.

                        Signature
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10473117].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                  Originally Posted by yukon View Post

                  Ok, I'll answer your sad question.

                  Yes I honestly believe you & Kurt have each others back. You know I'm right. That's why you quoted Kurt's dirt house thread. You have his back. You picked Kurt's thread out of thousands of Warrior Forum threads because I didn't agree with Kurt in his thread.

                  Does it make you feel better to read the answer?

                  I quoted two of your posts, from ...this...thread.



                  I'm starting to be convinced that this is really the way you think.

                  It isn't who you agree with. It's how well thought out your argument is.

                  I have one person here I think of as my friend, Big Frank. Some others may be intelligent, interesting, funny. Kurt is one of the best critical thinkers here. (OK, he might be a computer program) Of course, I agree with much of what he says.

                  Do you know the three people here that hand me my ass more than anyone? Big Frank, Riffle, and Kurt. Honorable mention to Mark.

                  And I consider that a huge favor. Rational clear thinking is the main thing that matters to me.

                  Anything else you think, is just what you imagine.

                  This is an exchange of ideas. Responses are based on the quality of the ideas posted.

                  The main value I get out of this Forum, is that these people aren't my friends. They will never be my clients. So I can speak freely, exchanging ideas.

                  I don't have anyone's back. And I don't know Kurt at all. But I strongly suspect that he doesn't need anyone to have his back, just based on how well he handles you.
                  Signature
                  One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                  What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471697].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                    I have one person here I think of as my friend, Big Frank.
                    1. Is this what is meant by 'unrequited love?'

                    2. I'm left wondering whom this statement reflects more poorly on - you or me.

                    Some others may be intelligent, interesting, funny.
                    But not as intelligent, interesting or as funny as Big Frank. Just felt the need to clear that up for you.
                    Kurt is one of the best critical thinkers here.
                    True and when Big Frank dies, Kurt will be number one.
                    Of course, I agree with much of what he says.
                    That's because you lack any semblance of original thought.
                    Do you know the three people here that hand me my ass more than anyone? Big Frank, Riffle, and Kurt. Honorable mention to Mark.
                    The other 3 guys must be Olympic weightlifters.
                    And I consider that a huge favor. Rational clear thinking is the main thing that matters to me and I can't wait to display a sample of same, at some point in the future.
                    Fixed that for you!
                    Anything else you think, is just what you imagine.
                    I think you possess delusions of adequacy.

                    Cheers, friend. - Big Frank
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10472355].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author yukon
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                    I'm starting to be convinced that this is really the way you think.

                    I've already told you the same answer twice & you're still on the fence.







                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10473360].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        According to Forbes and Fortune, 42% of the hourly work force earned less than $15 per hour.

        That's what people don't think about. The $15 demand wouldn't only raise those who earn "minimum" wage - but all those in entry level, retail, tech jobs, service work - who would be re-labeled as "minimum wage". Now those people earn $12-13-14....

        That's why people should stop trying to WIN this argument - it's a complex subject with many layers and problems to solve.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469853].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          According to Forbes and Fortune, 42% of the hourly work force earned less than $15 per hour.

          That's what people don't think about. The $15 demand wouldn't only raise those who earn "minimum" wage - but all those in entry level, retail, tech jobs, service work - who would be re-labeled as "minimum wage". Now those people earn $12-13-14....

          That's why people should stop trying to WIN this argument - it's a complex subject with many layers and problems to solve.
          I do not see it as complex.

          Given that $15.00 an hour becomes the new minimum wage payable to everyone as a starting salary , despite it being still called the "minimum wage", it would affect peoples lives immensely because it is just about a livable salary where it was poverty line before. People could afford a rental, a cheap car, basic stuff to be independant.

          People who are earning $15.00 an hour now would still be earning that. Whatever their perceived gripes about it, it still has not reduced or devalued what they earn to any real extent.

          There may be a slight increase in the cost of living overall but not enough to really hurt anybody.

          True, Mom and Pop Shops who are just about scraping a living with a few current rate, minimum paid employees would possibly give up on it. It would affect them. But, reality check, if paying a few employees that extra amount would make you go under, I question the viability of their business other than self employment, American Dream Idealism..
          Signature

          Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469892].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author yukon
            Banned
            Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

            There may be a slight increase in the cost of living overall but not enough to really hurt anybody.






            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470087].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DURABLEOILCOM
              Originally Posted by yukon View Post

              LoL

              I mean it makes sense the Cost Of Living is constantly raised while the Minimum wage has remained stagnate. Most people working full time minimum wage positions can not make ends meet so how are they supposed to have a surplus in order to stimulate economic growth?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470103].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author yukon
                Banned
                Originally Posted by DURABLEOILCOM View Post

                LoL

                I mean it makes sense the Cost Of Living is constantly raised while the Minimum wage has remained stagnate. Most people working full time minimum wage positions can not make ends meet so how are they supposed to have a surplus in order to stimulate economic growth?

                It took 30 years (1980 - 2010) to go from approx. $3 to $7.25. I wouldn't be surprised If Obama gets min. wage pushed to $10+ before he leaves office.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470140].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
              Originally Posted by yukon View Post




              So what, the min wage has been raised at least 20 times since its inception and each time business owners paid more in taxes and their employees paid more in taxes and it did not destroy the economy.

              According to the DOL ...

              Over time, real GDP per capita has steadily increased, even when the minimum wage has been raised





              About Minimum Wage - U.S. Department of Labor
              Signature

              "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471111].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author yukon
                Banned
                Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                So what, the min wage has been raised at least 20 times since its inception and each time business owners paid more in taxes and their employees paid more in taxes and it did not destroy the economy.

                According to the DOL ...

                Over time, real GDP per capita has steadily increased, even when the minimum wage has been raised





                About Minimum Wage - U.S. Department of Labor







                Your chart shows the worth of min. wage falling since 1970. Maybe hold off on buying that condo in Boca Raton.

                BTW, GDP is the entire working population, including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, etc...

                Looking at that chart it looks like you're switching teams. Welcome aboard.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471302].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          According to Forbes and Fortune, 42% of the hourly work force earned less than $15 per hour.

          That's what people don't think about. The $15 demand wouldn't only raise those who earn "minimum" wage - but all those in entry level, retail, tech jobs, service work - who would be re-labeled as "minimum wage". Now those people earn $12-13-14....

          That's why people should stop trying to WIN this argument - it's a complex subject with many layers and problems to solve.
          Kay; Truthfully, I think several people here are just trying to figure it out. It is a complex subject, and new factors are constantly coming up. How would you treat the people that are already making $15 an hour? If they don't get a raise, what would happen? How would you adjust higher wages to be fair?

          I absolutely know I can't win this argument, because I find out more problems as we talk about it.

          I'm just here, hoping to impress the ladies.
          Signature
          One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

          What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469977].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          According to Forbes and Fortune, 42% of the hourly work force earned less than $15 per hour.

          That's what people don't think about. The $15 demand wouldn't only raise those who earn "minimum" wage - but all those in entry level, retail, tech jobs, service work - who would be re-labeled as "minimum wage". Now those people earn $12-13-14....
          Kay; I've given this post a lot of thought today at work. I hadn't considered the "between $7.25 and $15" segment, and the effect this would have.

          Who makes less than $15 per hour, in 3 charts - Fortune

          Yup, 42% of all workers, not just hourly. But only about 3% earn minimum wage right now.

          The math I did earlier? It all goes out the window. Now, we may be looking at an across the board 10% increase in consumer pricing, just to pay for the new minimum wage earners. This doesn't include the people that will get raises (without cause) to make their higher wages more in line.

          Would I be willing to spend 10% more, on services in the US...on products manufactured here? (I wouldn't be on products imported). Probably. But would I insist that everyone pay that? No.

          I suspect there is still quite a lot to learn and consider. At this point it's just an intellectual exercise for me. But I can see how it would effect large numbers of people. Some positively, some negatively.

          Thanks for pointing out a huge gap in my understanding.
          Signature
          One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

          What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471323].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
            Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

            Kay; I've given this post a lot of thought today at work. I hadn't considered the "between $7.25 and $15" segment, and the effect this would have.

            Who makes less than $15 per hour, in 3 charts - Fortune

            Yup, 42% of all workers, not just hourly. But only about 3% earn minimum wage right now.

            The math I did earlier? It all goes out the window. Now, we may be looking at an across the board 10% increase in consumer pricing, just to pay for the new minimum wage earners. This doesn't include the people that will get raises (without cause) to make their higher wages more in line.

            Would I be willing to spend 10% more, on services in the US...or products manufactured here? (I wouldn't be on products imported). Probably. But would I insist that everyone pay that? No.

            I suspect there is still quite a lot to learn and consider. At this point it's just an intellectual exercise for me. But I can see how it would effect large numbers of people. Some positively, some negatively.

            Thanks for pointing out a huge gap in my understanding.
            Your link did not work. I would like to know out of that 42 percent what amount of people are earning say 8 bucks or even 9/10 an hour. Still a low salary.

            I would also say that consumer prices in the US have been kept way (artificially) down low for a long time as compared to the rest of the world. Part of this is due to the massive collective buying power of the US overall, sell it to them cheap but sell a lot for the quantity profits. This is something you have enjoyed being a very consumer driven society.

            I said to my friends in the UK early on since I came here, if you ever come and visit, bring an empty suitcase. You will not believe the prices. Fill it up with clothes and laptops etc.. What the pound buys in the UK, the dollar buys here.

            Added: While consumer goods are cheap by comparison, what is not is stuff like health care and paying for education and stuff of that nature.
            Signature

            Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471350].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
              Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

              Your link did not work. I would like to know out of that 42 percent what amount of people are earning say 8 bucks or even 9/10 an hour. Still a low salary.
              I have no idea. But about this point, I have to say...even if I knew the graduated stats, that's math beyond me. The effort to figure this out, is beyond my ability or interest. I gave a shot at figuring the effects, based on two figures, But this is a bit too complex.

              If a Harvard study showed their math, it may be interesting to see what they may have just not considered. But again, nationwide, I don't think this will get passed. It's too much of a jump, without solid evidence of the effects. And you can't go back, once you raise it.

              Personally, I would be willing to just increase the minimum, and then adjust to whatever happens. But I wouldn't make it law. The link does work. No idea why it doesn't for you. Maybe it hates your accent.
              Signature
              One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

              What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471712].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author agc
        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        I highly doubt military spending will be affected much by the minimum wage, which is our single biggest spending.
        Not exactly.

        Pie chart of 'federal spending' circulating on the Internet is misleading | PolitiFact

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469867].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    Wow. Just wow. I am truly speechless. I really don't even see any to comment further.

    I think I'll just let that steaming pile of over simplified illogical wishful thinking sit there steaming in the sun and call this one a wrap.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10469960].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    According to the DOL ...


    Over time, real GDP per capita has steadily increased, even when the minimum wage has been raised





    About Minimum Wage - U.S. Department of Labor
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470649].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Originally Posted by DURABLEOILCOM View Post
    LoL

    I mean it makes sense the Cost Of Living is constantly raised while the Minimum wage has remained stagnate.


    Most people working full time minimum wage positions can not make ends meet so how are they supposed to have a surplus in order to stimulate economic growth?

    TL Says...


    I don't think anyone is saying they will have an immediate surplus but they surely will have more money to spend into the local economies - and that is what will help stimulate economic growth.
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470683].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      TL Says...

      I don't think anyone is saying they will have an immediate surplus but they surely will have more money to spend into the local economies - and that is what will help stimulate economic growth.
      Economic growth comes from growth - i.e., expansion - not incestuous redistribution of capital. Raising the minimum wage doesn't inject new money into the system, it removes it from one spender (the business or its owner) and gives it to another to spend.

      For your '600 economists' who tout raising the minimum wage, there are at least that many who disagree.

      Your comparison to 'climate change deniers' is hilarious. Keep it up
      Signature

      The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

      Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470968].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
        Banned
        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

        Raising the minimum wage doesn't inject new money into the system, it removes it from one spender (the business or its owner) and gives it to another to spend.
        True - and someone spent money to give it to the business owner and when he pays the employees with it, they go out and spend it and so on and so on.

        That's what makes the world go round. It seems you think that once the money hits the pocket of the business owner, it should travel no further, regardless of how much is accumulated.

        That should get the economy and society moving in the right direction.

        I saw that bumper stcker, once. It read, "I've got mine. SCREW YOU!!!" :-)

        Cheers. - Frank
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470987].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
          Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

          True - and someone spent money to give it to the business owner and when he pays the employees with it, they go out and spend it and so on and so on.

          That's what makes the world go round. It seems you think that once the money hits the pocket of the business owner, it should travel no further, regardless of how much is accumulated.

          That should get the economy and society moving in the right direction.

          I saw that bumper stcker, once. It read, "I've got mine. SCREW YOU!!!" :-)

          Cheers. - Frank
          No, I obviously haven't made myself clear.

          The business owner spends the money he receives. It doesn't go into a black hole somewhere, never to be seen again.

          The argument seems to be that that same money, if spent by an employee instead of the business owner, will somehow drive an economic expansion. Nonsensical thinking, imo.

          Growth is what makes the world go around - creation of new wealth. Anything else is just a real-life game of Monopoly, where there is no new money or wealth, and the supply gets redistributed over time to the craftiest.

          Which is not to say that this isn't what we're experiencing now, to a degree. It's just my answer to the problem is to make it easier to create new wealth rather than confiscating wealth from those who've created it.
          Signature

          The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

          Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470998].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
            Banned
            Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

            rather than confiscating wealth from those who've created it.
            Right. That about says it all and makes your perspective on the subject clear.

            At what point does it cross the line from paying a person a living wage, to confiscating the business owner's wealth? $1 an hour. $2. Or, are you the generous sort that will happily pay a person $5 an hour?

            Just wondering, is all. :-)

            Cheers. - Frank
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471010].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Ron Lafuddy
              Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

              Right. That about says it all and makes your perspective on the subject clear.

              At what point does it cross the line from paying a person a living wage, to confiscating the business owner's wealth? $1 an hour. $2. Or, are you the generous sort that will happily pay a person $5 an hour?

              Just wondering, is all. :-)

              Cheers. - Frank
              At what point does it cross the line from someone having EARNED the wage that they have agreed to, to suddenly being ENTITLED to more, while providing no additional value?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471049].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Ron Lafuddy View Post

                At what point does it cross the line from someone having EARNED the wage that they have agreed to, to suddenly being ENTITLED to more, while providing no additional value?
                I guess everyone has to determine that number for themselves based on their view of the world and their place in it and whether or not they believe that the 'growth' they are always yammering about only happens when people have more money to spend.

                Corporations/businesses don't create jobs. Consumers and their purchasing power is what creates jobs. The more money people have to spend, the more demand for products which results in a need to hire more people to create them.

                Additionally, people 'agree' to a wage because it's all that's offered and they're desperate. Let's not make believe they are thrilled about it and don't expect more.

                Anyone trying to build a business with an army of minimum wage workers will never amount to much. When I employed people, I hired everyone at minimum wage. If I couldn't train you well enough to be worth a 25% increase after 30 days, I had to let you go. Some people are not even worth paying minimum wage. Most are worth more than that, or they shouldn't be working for you.

                Cheers. - Frank
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471101].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

        not incestuous redistribution of capital.
        So, giving someone a raise is incestuous redistribution? Interesting perspective. I take it you never gave your employees raises?

        Economic growth comes from growth.
        I'll have to remember that one to impress people at dinner parties.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471048].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

        Economic growth comes from growth - i.e., expansion - not incestuous redistribution of capital. Raising the minimum wage doesn't inject new money into the system, it removes it from one spender (the business or its owner) and gives it to another to spend.

        For your '600 economists' who tout raising the minimum wage, there are at least that many who disagree.

        Your comparison to 'climate change deniers' is hilarious. Keep it up

        Find an organization of economists that agree with you. It shouldn't be hard to do.

        I would have thought that folks against the min wage would have formed some type of organization simply to counter the organization that's in favor of it. They do it all the time. Your friends even tried to form an organization to counter AARP - but it met with little success.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471074].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          Find an organization of economists that agree with you. It shouldn't be hard to do.

          I would have thought that folks against the min wage would have formed an organization simply to counter the organization that's in favor of it.
          How about 500 economists including three Nobel laureates?

          http://nebula.wsimg.com/0ac0b639d50f...&alloworigin=1
          Signature

          Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471088].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

            How about 500 economists including three Nobel laureates?

            http://nebula.wsimg.com/0ac0b639d50f...&alloworigin=1

            There you go. I knew someone had to create a counter group for the 600 economists.

            And once again GDP still goes up despite the min wage going up. There is no proof that the economy is destroyed by increasing the min wage - especially if it is raised slowly.


            According to the DOL ...

            Over time, real GDP per capita has steadily increased, even when the minimum wage has been raised





            About Minimum Wage - U.S. Department of Labor
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471103].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    The kid must see this movie as part of a school project so I'm on my way to see The Big Short!


    The Big Short | Trailer & Movie Site | December 2015
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10470694].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    Anyone who thinks $15/hr as a minimum wage in 2015 is anything short of moonbeam economics ... consider this. The median household income is $54k.

    You are saying that the minimum wage, for two people who add no value above just showing up and not drooling on themselves too much, should be more than the income of half of all current households. (Hint for the math impaired: 2000 hours x $15/hr = $30k/yr ea, x 2 = $60k/yr for the household).

    And this doesn't strike you as the least bit, oh, I dunno, almost guaranteed to cause an extreme economic dislocation? Really?

    $15 an hour will com to pass eventually. Like when it's worth about $8 in 2015 money.

    But in 2015/2016? No way in hell does it make any sense whatsoever to anyone who knows the first thing about real business or real money.

    Like I said already. This one is a wrap.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471515].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    There is a resort area about a half hour from where I live.

    Starting pay at Wendy's is $15.00 per hour, $12 per hour at Wal-Mart
    and Target. $800 to $1000 per month is about how much it costs to
    get a room in a house. That county does have a lot of affordable housing
    for locals to try and get-waiting lists and so on though.

    Sad that minimum wage and entitlements have become permanent instead of
    entry level or temporary at a time of need.
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10471888].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      There is a resort area about a half hour from where I live.

      Starting pay at Wendy's is $15.00 per hour, $12 per hour at Wal-Mart
      and Target. $800 to $1000 per month is about how much it costs to
      get a room in a house. That county does have a lot of affordable housing
      for locals to try and get-waiting lists and so on though.

      Sad that minimum wage and entitlements have become permanent instead of
      entry level or temporary at a time of need.
      You talking about Summit County? Frisco, Dillon, Brekenridge?

      When I moved up there in 1990 - I lived 25 minutes from Frisco via the main highway (70). I worked in Frisco. It was my first tourism job so I started on as a Front Desk agent. I made 10 bucks an hour way back then just breaking into tourism. That's two three dollars more than a lot of places pay now. Wages have always been high in that area -- but housing has always been scary high, too. You know where I lived - and I only paid $250 a month there when I would have been paying around $700 to live right in the resort towns.

      Seattle not long ago established the $15 ph min wage locally -- I've not followed up to see how it's working there, but at the price of energy and housing there, I can't imagine $15 actually being a self supportive wage without having each bedroom in a place filled with another renter. You're not going to do it on your own at that price.

      Seems to me that $15, which is a doubling of the wage is a little to stiff for a single jump. It might benefit workers, but would be quite some leap for management to juggle around without just saying the heck with it and getting rid of as many workers as possible at least for a short run while they figure out the new budget they'd need to run on. Maybe $11 would suffice for an immediate increase - that's still a large % but would be easier for businesses to budget around than an almost 100% immediate slam.

      I've worked for wages that vary so wildly that it's crazy......I'll even do min wage for a day or two if the job is to my liking (I only accept temp work or do contracts anyway). If I had to live on a min of $8 an hour, I can actually do it - but then, I don't have kids......would probably never be able to own a home on that, don't have a lot of needs actually - food, clothes, a few tools for my crafts, reliable rig, and that's about it. Not everyone can live comfortably as bare bones as I do. Even considering as little as I actually need -- I think it would be pretty miserable to try to live anywhere I've ever been on less than $10 an hour - and I've lived in (and do now, too) areas where decent housing at a low price is fairly easy to find as long as you don't think you need crazy amounts of luxury to be happy.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10472903].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Recent manufacturing history in the U.S.


    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10477944].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      Recent manufacturing history in the U.S.


      Some of that isn't just manufacturing going away - some of it's because in a lot of places, wages have also plummeted.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10478141].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nechiforlucian
    very funny ...I don't know if is really work....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10478024].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author agc
    Are you arguing for or against the forced raising of labor costs???

    The cost of labor is just about the only reason those jobs ever get sent overseas. Because "Hey! I think we should pay more for labor, and also get communication nightmares, shipping turnaround delays, and remote management headaches as a bonus." said exactly nobody ever.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10478214].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
      Originally Posted by agc View Post

      Are you arguing for or against the forced raising of labor costs???

      The cost of labor is just about the only reason those jobs ever get sent overseas. Because "Hey! I think we should pay more for labor, and also get communication nightmares, shipping turnaround delays, and remote management headaches as a bonus." said exactly nobody ever.
      Our regulations also have a lot to do with why manufacturing is sent overseas. For example:
      It's darn near impossible to open a new, mass clothing manufacturer in the US. I looked
      into it a little. Duluth Trading and Glenn Beck sell USA made jeans (I bet they both
      have them made at the old Levi's factory) for about twice the cost of other jeans.

      I should have bought it just for show (I take a large and it was XXXL), but I saw a
      made in China baseball shirt for sale at Wal-Mart. It had LL Bean embroidered on the
      front and a Wal-Mart label on the inside collar. Oooops, did not quite get the production
      line switch done right. LOL
      Signature

      "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10478272].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Wrong thread!!
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10478978].message }}

Trending Topics