Things get lost when posting on boards and responding to multiple people, my fault. You weren't being condescending, on that part I was referring to Wookie's approach from the beginning. Sorry I wasn't clear there.

You are right, wages *in general* have not kept pace with inflation, including minimum wage. The problem I have is the assumption that giving more to minimum wage worker is going to take away from the wealthy. They are not going to simply eat the increased overhead like many people seem to think. That overhead is going to be pushed right back on to the consumer, which includes the middle class.

There will be a decrease in the wage gap, but only between low and middle income earners. The gap between the rich and everyone else will continue doing what it has been ...widening. The answer isn't increasing minimum wage, because that increase will come from decreasing the middle class buying power.

but if minimum wage becomes $15 an hour that doesn't help the people already making $15 an hour, it just means they make minimum wage now, and prices are higher. for people making more than minimum wage it basically just means prices are higher and they make the same amount.

Sure there will be some wage increase for people already making above $15 an hour eventually, but it isn't going to come easy nor will it be equatable to their loss in buying power. The mom and pop small business isn't going to just automatically start paying you more to compensate, and the corporations definitely won't. Hell, even the government workers probably wont see an increase in wages to compensate for what they are losing in buying power.

Poor people will make more at the cost of making more people poor, when the real target should be greedy corporations and the wealthy.

I have previously warned everyone that this guy is an idiot who doesn't merit responses.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

Fallacious argument. The money I make all goes back into the economy too. That's true with everyone, save for those who put cash, gold, etc., into safes (a miniscule amount). Mine does more good, however. A lazy prog making minimum wage is going to be spending more on crap made in China and is, therefore, boosting China's economy. I, on the other hand, am investing a good chunk of my income. That gets American businesses started, businesses that hire more Americans.

If this argument were valid, we could raise minimum wage to $1000/hr and we'd all be rich in no time.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

As a complete idiot yourself, your warning has no merit.

-------------------------

Wiki wiki

Miker, etc., consider what drives the economy. Some would have you think it's the rich, that they just magically "create jobs" as long as give them anything they want from the economy.

I'll tell you what drives the economy, consumer demand. Put a few more dollars in everyone's pocket at the bottom and watch it trickle up. Demand means local merchants sell more goods, people purchase more services, business respond by expanding and hiring, and we all do better.

The minimum wage is just a part of it, but we've got to look for creative ways to redistribute the sequestered wealth in America and put it to work again in the economy. When all the gains go to the few, the engine will grind to a stop, and if folks like Bernie are not successful in the peaceful revolution it will guaranty the violent one later.

Some will try to convince you that the guy working at McDonald doesn't deserve $15, he's just unskilled labor. But in the middle of the last century it was workers with often no more skills than him doing factory industrial jobs that paid a living wage because the workers were organized. That guy was able to feed his family and send his children to school, and retire with a pension. Now all that is gone because we allowed big business to purchase our government and our mass media. And if the concentrated wealth in America is not dispersed in form of wages to workers who can rebuild our infrastructure and repopulate the middle class, then I'm afraid it's a prolonged death rattle for the USA.

-------------------------
“It is the heart of US policy to use fascism to preserve capitalism while claiming to be saving democracy from communism “ - Michael Parenti

I admit I'm a dick and this is a good exposition, but I think it will fall into the vaste wasteland of ungrasped concepts like so many other things.  Insert total frustration here.

-------------------------

Wiki wiki

Bingo!

If taxes are cut for the rich, they will not create jobs unless demand for product exceeds supply.

ECO101

Trickle down is only a tool to make the 1% wealthier.

How the heck do working stiffs support trickle down economics?

Mindblowing.

I was going to post this earlier on a different thread, , , , , maybe I did, , , , (4 head injuries later, , , ,). LOL

A life long buddy, in another state, has an old friend who "made it big" in food in California. 100+ locations, , , ,. So, the business owner friend is still in the early stages of his "re-think" of what to do about the impending wage increases. Initial thoughts are that he will cut his work force by 10+%, perhaps more. Near term goal is to put more money into training and overall employee development. If he is going to have to pay $15 per hour, then the labor is going to have to be worth it. He does know that there is "no way in hell" that he is going to maintain the same current head counts due to the fact that about 30% of his current workers are "worthless". Ya, ya, sure, "get better workers", , , ,! Actually, kind of hard to do. Too many dolts out there walking the streets looking for jobs.

He also does know that $15/hr wage would seemingly help keep good workers, but only in the present "now", not in the future when every swinging idiot will be paid $15. So, if he will soon have to live with $15 labor, he is going to do everything possible to insure that they are worth it and, as such, may end up actually paying more to the "best" of them and/or enhance the benefits of working for him. (his current "average" wage is $9 to $10.)

-------------------------
Dora Hates You

The consumer drives the economy, I agree. However it will not be the wealthy and the corporations subsidizing the wage increase, it will be the middle class. Any trickle up that occurs is going to be a long and painful process and will not in any way ever come close to equating to what was lost.

Again, what is going to happen to the husband and wife both making $15/hr when they suddenly find that they are now minimum wage workers and their purchasing power has decreased? Do you think they will be spending money they way they used to once prices have gone up. Do you think that the businesses that they work for are going to automagically increase their wages to compensate?

What about the 500,000+ people that are expected by many economists to be put out of work and not replaced?

Hell, what about my purchasing power? I am firmly entrenched in the middle class and I can guarantee you my salary won't go up to match the increased costs coming my way, not where I work. I will have less money to spend until salaries creep up to compensate and even then I would most likely have to leave a job I love to obtain a better salary.

I will say it again, using what is left of the middle class to subsidize the working poor in this country will only create more poor people and widen the gap between the wealthy and everyone else. Unless there is a plan to stop the corporations and 1% from fleecing everyone else, raising the minimum wage across the board will not do anything in the end but leave more people in a bad place.

Edited: 04/27/2016 at 07:40 PM by miker

Your issue is assuming someone is stupid because they don't hold the same opinion as you. This is a lot of disagreement by actual subject matter experts on the subject, so it isn't any real surprise that there will be disagreement among layman.

I realize it is easier for you to quote someone else and agree with them  while being a condescending tool bag to people with other opinions, but maybe you should impress people with how smart you think you are by actually making your own argument?

15 an hour is a win-win for politicians. They look good fighting for the people and at the same time most of these folks will lose their government benefits resuliting in even less disposable income for them. WIN WIN!!!

No doubt. "Supply-side economy" has proven so, so very successful for our country time and time again, hasn't it? No? Oh.

You had me at sequestered, cool work btw. Everything below that however ehhhh idk.

People who work at McDonalds don't deserve $15 per hour.....ever.....and are not comparable to factory and industrial workers(Skill wise, and job is far less dangerous).

One must look at the value of the product and service a worker is producing, and pay accordingly.......Making $.99 cheeseburgers hardly generates $15 per hour.

Allow the market to dictate wages, pay the cheeseburger flipper $5 an hour, allow the price of said cheeseburger to be $.75.....Motivate people to learn new skills, to EARN more money, do not force it on them.

Lastly what is with everyone wanting to "redistribute wealth"?







-------------------------
I troll 2L.com to be a better person in real life

You're focusing only on negatives, but there are other moving parts. The cost would be distributed because the owners seeing a labor cost increase can't necessarily pass through the full cost for most gods and services, they have to compete, so some of it would be absorbed by them. Even so, would you even notice if that $2 burger was 2.25?

I don't have stats but I believe there is evidence that a minimum wage increase does tend to lead to higher pay up the line. But by far the biggest benefit is the increased consumer demand.

Yes, there may be some job losses initially. But when business is good, companies hire. I think on basic principle we should value work, and no one willing and able to work full time should have to be on government assistance.

-------------------------
“It is the heart of US policy to use fascism to preserve capitalism while claiming to be saving democracy from communism “ - Michael Parenti

From the above topics I question first; increasing the businesses costs promotes competition, is this to say they are currently not competing!?

Secondly by setting a minimum pay, it does not value work, it reduces its value.

Lastly INCREASING consumer spend, and helping the middle class create wealth to become independent of Guberment assistance are COMPLETELY conflicting agendas.........

I know I aint the brightest Panda in the bamboo forest but how the ef does that make sense, pay them more but hope they spend more!? How will that change anything!!??


-------------------------
I troll 2L.com to be a better person in real life

The main point I have is that this is a complex topic.  Armchair musings are worthless.

This wiki article is pretty comprehensive.  Don't cherry pick; look at all of it.  Macroenconomies are highly interconnected and sensitive to some inputs while insensitive to others; assuming direct causality as a worthwhile model is pointless.  They are also chaotic and very hard to predict; this is why we still have Nobel Prizes for Economics.  Looking at them the same way as you would a microeconomy is not valid.

-------------------------

Wiki wiki

The problem is that a business will not "absorb" anything, it is all about the bottom line. higher labor costs will cut into their margin and they will compensate by raising prices and hiring less workers.

And like miker is saying, we will notice when that $2 burger becomes $2.25, imagine if you make $15 right now, under the current minimum wage laws. If the minimum wage becomes $15 tomorrow, the price of burgers becomes $2.25 tomorrow, but you still only make $15, you are spending more of your income on a burger than you were yesterday.

Wookie- that article says that 22 of 28 member states of the european union have national minimum wages, do you think that could be part of the reason why their unemployment rate is 10%?