Minimum Wage questions

[Dr. Ffreeze]

All,

Let's say there is an employer that is paying its people very VERY little (min wage) for very VERY hard work. (I am using "very VERY" so we don't get hung up on specific amounts)

1] Is anyone doing anything wrong enough that the government should intercede?

I have other questions, but it depends on how this question is answered. =)

Thankx,
Dr. Ffreeze

EDIT - I added (min wage) to try and reduce confusion. (not all employers are requried to pay min wage, that is why I didn't put it in there to begin with) =)

 

[Tagrineth]

Are you getting at least minimum wage per hour? If not, then you have a right to complain.

 

[Legion]

Are you getting at least minimum wage per hour? If not, then you have a right to complain.

I agree. Especially if you receive tips or other secondary incomes.

 

[Dr. Ffreeze]

pax,

This topic started from the other thread about prop 187. Would you mind responding? =)

Thankx,
Dr. Ffreeze

 

[epicstruggle]

i see no problem. If you dont find the amount they pay is worth the amount of work you put in, then get a different job.

later,

 

[RussSchultz]

i see no problem. If you dont find the amount they pay is worth the amount of work you put in, then get a different job.

later,

Sometimes, the "man" has the upper hand.

For example, in specific industries (with few employers), I think you'll find those employers "conspiring" to keep the costs down by not competing with each other.

 

[Silent_One]

1] Is anyone doing anything wrong enough that the government should intercede?

No.

Get another job if you don't like it. Leave.

 

[pax]

First of all the gov is already interceding with social programs to keep social peace for people at that wage. Of course some jobs have other incomes like tips. I think total income is the question when living wage is taken into account. I also like to talk living wage as a wage for adults (iow people who arent living at home with mom or in college or receiving other income supports ect...)

The idea of gov intervention in the form of a law vs one of social programs is better. Its great for the persons self esteem to see that society values his her work and it reduces the tax base needed for income supports while dealing with the few employers who are too cheap to pay good wages.

I think the pluses outweigh the negatives here. I also know my damn big mac wont be as likely caked with special sauce the next time I order one 'grill' which the workers hate to do (over half who work mcdees arent students at the local rotten ronnies are adults and not kids as most would think are capable of this).

Going to another job is done by many but not always an option for everyone for various reasons... I certainly encourage buds who have lousy employers and hate their jobs to leave and not give any notice ect. But a modest living wage law makes so much sense its not funny...

When objectively examined its in fact a replacement for more regulation than it imposes.

 

[RussSchultz]

My problem with the "living wage" is that it will drive up prices, making it less of a living wage, which would call for another increase in the living wage, which would drive up prices, etc.

The market pays what the market will bear. The government needs to handle these problems in a different manner than trying to legislate equality in pay.

 

[pax]

My problem with the "living wage" is that it will drive up prices, making it less of a living wage, which would call for another increase in the living wage, which would drive up prices, etc.

The market pays what the market will bear. The government needs to handle these problems in a different manner than trying to legislate equality in pay.

I just dont believe that. Prices will rise if demand outstrips supply which largely isnt the case. We are far more able to produce just about anything other than bleeding edge than to consume. Any increase in demand will likely be met by increase in the number of producers\distros\retailers... I think the law merely deals with essential consumption as well and not limited production of some products and services.

You could make this argument in monopolies though like pharmaceuticals.

This law in any case would only address a very small proportion of the population. Its not about equality by a long shot either. Its about essential incomes for essential consumption that are well established by ongoing studies and analysis. It very well covuld be a wage that could decrease in the future if essentials were to drop in price even if the economy as a whole sees inflation. Such as core inflation rates vs overall inflation.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

My problem with the "living wage" is that it will drive up prices, making it less of a living wage, which would call for another increase in the living wage, which would drive up prices, etc.

Don't be silly, Russ. We all know that anyone who actually hires minimum wage workers is by definition an overly oppressive zillionaire who is just keeping more money for himself...prices won't go anywhere!

 

[pax]

My problem with the "living wage" is that it will drive up prices, making it less of a living wage, which would call for another increase in the living wage, which would drive up prices, etc.

Don't be silly, Russ. We all know that anyone who actually hires minimum wage workers is by definition an overly oppressive zillionaire who is just keeping more money for himself...prices won't go anywhere!

I certainly never said that. Oh cmon Joe anyone concerned by the environment is an eco terrorist so ergo what are you waiting for in using that catchword for anyone on the left of your position in this debate?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

OMG...and I was just trying to be funny with my last post.

I just dont believe that. Prices will rise if demand outstrips supply which largely isnt the case.

Correct: price is driven by supply/demand...but cost isn't.

So in this scenario, raising the minimum wage doesn't actually influence prices "directly"...it just allows fewer people to be employed to maintain profits...

....which in turn generally means less supply...

...which in turn has a price increase effect given constant demand...

 

[Joe DeFuria]

I certainly never said that. Oh cmon Joe anyone concerned by the environment is an eco terrorist so ergo what are you waiting for in using that catchword for anyone on the left of your position in this debate?

Actually, Pax, I made my "zillionaire" post before I even knew you posted a response to Russ....chill, dude. I was respoding to RUSS, not you.

 

[pax]

Technology has largely made the old economic arguements about what drives inflation untrue. I see far more moderating of production today due to oversupply of just about anything essential in order to maintain prices than overconsumption.

Its just not true than any increase in incomes\consumption = an exact increase in prices. There are plenty of small isolated towns in Canada over the last couple gens years where when unionization came through and wages made leaps and prices saw little increase.

Im also of course not saying no inflation will happen. There will be attempts to manipulate some markets as well as some cyclical lack of supplier sin some areas where min wage is more prevalent than other areas. Transitory inflation at most.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Technology has largely made the old economic arguements about what drives inflation untrue. I see far more moderating of production today due to oversupply of just about anything essential in order to maintain prices than overconsumption.

So let's start laying off workers then. Increase the pay of those who are left.

What is more acceptable to you?

1) More people employed at a lower min wage
2) Fewer people employed at a higher min wage

Its just not true than any increase in incomes\consumption = an exact increase in prices.

Nor was that claimed.

There are plenty of small isolated towns in Canada over the last couple gens years where when unionization came through and wages made leaps and prices saw little increase.

But did the companies have the same growth that they would have had with a lower wage?

 

[pax]

Oh sorry 8) ... but I am getting used to your kind of short posts that kinda radicalize the arguments... Well the climate ones seemd to be too much in that vein anyway hhe...

I mean really climate studies are fascinating... and it might just be that after a a few more decades of serious and large scale study that more co2 is what is needed to stabilize the climate.

Unstable and very violent climate is a fact of recent geologic past... We really need to get serious about that.

Here I go rambling off topic again

 

[pax]

Well I certainly think demand is far more important than wage to dictate growth... If profit is 15% with a good wage vs 20% without with growing demand whatever investment is needed will happen in either case. Plenty of capital out there. Of course Im not talking about 6 figure california dock workers or the ruinous baseball union...

2 fewer. If basic wage drives technology so much the better. But honestly I dont see how wages can compete with tech even in the short run. Incentive for tech is already massive... such a modest thing as a living wage wont add that much incentive to that. Its very much a marginal issue for a very small proportion of the population.

 

[Crusher]

Economics aside, anyone who pays their employees $5.15/hour and asks them to do more than put dishes into a dishwasher has poor ethics and little respect for the well being of their employees, and is not someone I would recommend working for. Even retail stores in the mall pay their employees $6.50, and I consider those to be about as low wage as you can expect to find.

I feel you have a responsibility to develop some integrity in order to avoid being put in that sort of position. Example: I applied at Blockbuster a while back. On the application they requested that you provide a desired wage. I put $9.00/hr. That is about the minimum I consider my time to be worth, and it's also the least I could expect to live on while only working part-time. The next question asked if that wage was negotiable, and I said yes. Needless to say, they didn't call me in for an interview, and I'm sure they hired some high school student for $6.50/hr. to fill the position. However, just because a 16 year old living with their parents can afford to work for that wage, doesn't mean I can, or that I would be willing to if I could.

 

[Simon F]

My problem with the "living wage" is that it will drive up prices, making it less of a living wage, which would call for another increase in the living wage, which would drive up prices, etc.

The market pays what the market will bear. The government needs to handle these problems in a different manner than trying to legislate equality in pay.

IIRC Australia has had a decent minimum wage for ages and I don't think it's been a problem. The UK only recently (i.e. with the election of the current Labour Government) introduced a (reasonable) min wage - of course many industry and the right-wing people screamed that it would lead to economic disaster but I don't think anyone could claim that the the UK economy has suffered as a result.