currently, the minimum wage is $7.25/hr and there is talk of raising it
There is no maximum wage
If congress sets a maximum wage
Should it be raised?
There is no maximum wage
If congress sets a maximum wage
Should it be raised?
Should The Maximum Wage Be Raised?
- Thread starter kid.fx.cross
- Start date
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...994b34-87cd-11e3-916e-e01534b1e132_story.html
if this is not buying votes for dems, then i don't know what is. it's so ***** blatantly obvious ..i have no idea how all US can be fine with it.
i have no idea,how you ended up in the world,where servants(gvt employees) are having a greater minimum wage than f*** masters(private sector) and how everyone is fine with it..
i'm missing something here?
“The talk” is about raising gov employees making min wage up to 10.10 (and why 10.10 not 10.50.. or even 11.00 – another discussion)
The number of workers impacted is musicale – as the vast majority already make well over min wage
This is more for affect rather than effect
RN
The number of workers impacted is musicale – as the vast majority already make well over min wage
This is more for affect rather than effect
RN
You can't raise something if it doesn't exist
They need to raise the minimum wage to say $8.50 and then index it to inflation. Dems never want to index it to inflation because it would take one of their best political issues off the table, but if we determined what the right minimum wage was and then indexed it ala COLA it would seem to makeover sense than bringing up the issue every 4-8 years.
The people that earn minimum wage are those that are affected the most by inflation.
Also, I'm not convinced it matters much as companies will just pass on their higher patyroll costs to the consumers anyway. And those in that minimum wage class are hurt the most with higher costs for goods and services.
The people that earn minimum wage are those that are affected the most by inflation.
Also, I'm not convinced it matters much as companies will just pass on their higher patyroll costs to the consumers anyway. And those in that minimum wage class are hurt the most with higher costs for goods and services.
Right now the government subsides the corporations with a low minimum wage. Reason is they dont want people below poverty level, so they give money to those making minimum wage. By making it higher they will save money. The profit of corporations is artificial because they are exploiting the dumbness of the government.
I would have said it differently, but I fully agree.
"The true cost of minimum wage labor" is a nebulous concept because it can only be computed to fall within a range and it differs from one section of the country to another. When applied to minimum wage workers it is essentially the cost of housing, feeding, clothing, transporting and providing medical and dental care for a minimum wage worker. It is higher than the government's poverty income for an adult worker living alone, because that income calculation omits subsidies such as food stamps, public housing and medicaid; consequently the value of those subsidies must be included when computing the true cost of labor. The concept of true cost of labor applies to all wage workers, not just adult workers.
When wages drop below the true cost, someone, or some entity, must making up the difference. For the teenage worker living at home it might be the workers family, for an adult worker it might be the local, State, and Federal government, various welfare organizations,etc.
Currently @ 7.25$/hr the minimum wage is well below the true cost of labor in all sections of the country and places these workers at the government's official poverty level for a one person household. These minimum wage workers are being subsidized. In effect, the tax payer is indirectly subsidizing employers that hire minimum wage workers. To end this subsidy, and create a more honest labor market, the minimum wage must be raised to somewhere between 10 and 11 dollars an hour. Even then, in some sections of the country, employers will find it difficult to hire at the minimum, and the market will require still higher wages. Nowhere in the U.S.A., however, should the wage be below $10/hour to avoid taxpayer subsidy of employers. That's a very safe minimum in the sense that we can be certain that if wages drop below that level extensive subsidies will be involved. However the wage would have to be raised considerably above that level to assure that there are no subsidies.
In the today's dollars, the minimum wage in the mid 1960's was approximately $10.50/hr. That would likely be a reasonable level in many sections of the country today.
When wages drop below the true cost, someone, or some entity, must making up the difference. For the teenage worker living at home it might be the workers family, for an adult worker it might be the local, State, and Federal government, various welfare organizations,etc.
Currently @ 7.25$/hr the minimum wage is well below the true cost of labor in all sections of the country and places these workers at the government's official poverty level for a one person household. These minimum wage workers are being subsidized. In effect, the tax payer is indirectly subsidizing employers that hire minimum wage workers. To end this subsidy, and create a more honest labor market, the minimum wage must be raised to somewhere between 10 and 11 dollars an hour. Even then, in some sections of the country, employers will find it difficult to hire at the minimum, and the market will require still higher wages. Nowhere in the U.S.A., however, should the wage be below $10/hour to avoid taxpayer subsidy of employers. That's a very safe minimum in the sense that we can be certain that if wages drop below that level extensive subsidies will be involved. However the wage would have to be raised considerably above that level to assure that there are no subsidies.
In the today's dollars, the minimum wage in the mid 1960's was approximately $10.50/hr. That would likely be a reasonable level in many sections of the country today.