IsntLifeFunny Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 @Starkiller If companies won't pay a penny more than they have to, then why would anyone making over 10 dollars an hour get a raise if the minimum wage was increased? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 @StarkillerIf companies won't pay a penny more than they have to, then why would anyone making over 10 dollars an hour get a raise if the minimum wage was increased? If your job paying you 35% over minimum wage became a minimum wage job overnight, you don't think a raise would be forthcoming/demanded? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 If your job paying you 35% over minimum wage became a minimum wage job overnight, you don't think a raise would be forthcoming/demanded? Weren't you saying above that companies are not going to spend a penny more than they have to? So, would they have to raise people's rates just because the floor was raised? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 They will have to because some workers will demand a raise. Not all workers, but some. We aren't talking about people making $50/hr. But people making just over $10/hr will demand a raise. A higher minimum wage will reset the market value for workers who currently make somewhat over minimum wage. Simple as that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 They will have to because some workers will demand a raise. Not all workers, but some. We aren't talking about people making $50/hr. But people making just over $10/hr will demand a raise. A higher minimum wage will reset the market value for workers who currently make somewhat over minimum wage. Simple as that. But that goes directly against what you said earlier. You said they won't spend a penny more than they have to, and they won't have to give a raise to anyone already making ten dollars an hour. You think worker's hold the leverage in this economy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 But that goes directly against what you said earlier. You said they won't spend a penny more than they have to, and they won't have to give a raise to anyone already making ten dollars an hour. You think worker's hold the leverage in this economy? No, it doesn't. They will have to pay more because the market for labor will change. But again, even if that mythical wage scale vacuum existed, you would still see a quarter of American workers get a raise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 Do ya think some business and companies that employ a bunch of low wage workers are not going to be effected by a 30+% increase in their labor costs? Â Sure some people will get a raise. Â You will also see a number of entry level people get their wages cut to zero. Â I have no doubt that some people would lose hours or their job entirely. But this is the minority of workers. Businesses are already basically running at minimum employment levels. They can't afford to lay people off for the sake of efficiency any more. And the reality is that as people have more money to spend, the economy improves naturally, and businesses hire more people to keep up with demand. That's what conservatives are too stupid to understand. When Clinton was in office, he raised the minimum wage AND increased taxes. Conservatives told horror stories about how each would hurt the economy. Instead, the economy boomed. Why people even bother listening to right wing economic bullshit anymore boggles the mind. Conservatives are the ones who have run up our deficits and deregulated our banks to dangerous levels, but hey, I'm sure they are worth listening to... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall along with the rest of congress. Oh, and I agree with you about the labor market adjusting, but I was noting how your blanket statement about business doesn't then fit in with the thought process. Businesses have a surplus of unemployed and under-paid labor; they wouldn't be forced to give raises, but would do so to keep up with the market adjustment. There is a difference between necessity and smart business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 The more businesses pay out the less people work full time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall along with the rest of congress. I don't disagree with that statement, but it was conservatives in control of congress that pushed it. The Dems actually blocked the first version, but they allowed a 2nd version to pass (obviously a mistake). And you can also criticize Clinton for his administrations handling of the derivatives market. That one can't even be blamed on conservatives, it was all the Clinton administration who shut down Brooksley Born. Oh, and I agree with you about the labor market adjusting, but I was noting how your blanket statement about business doesn't then fit in with the thought process. Businesses have a surplus of unemployed and under-paid labor; they wouldn't be forced to give raises, but would do so to keep up with the market adjustment. There is a difference between necessity and smart business. It would have to give raises because of the nature of the labor market itself, not because they chose to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 The more businesses pay out the less people work full time. No. Businesses cut back on full time employees if it gets them out of paying benefits. But they get no advantage of cutting back on full time employees just because minimum wage increases. If they went from 1 full time employee at the minimum wage to 2 part time employees splitting those same hours, they gain nothing. In fact, they would pay more if you figure in unemployment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMJ Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 Bundy was in the owner's box of the LA Clippers game. lmao Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 The congressional budget office estimated that if the minimum wage was raised to $10.10 an hour that 16M would get a direct raise and another 9M would get a raise because of the people below them on their scale got a raise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFCman Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 So, raise your hand if you are aware of the Democrat Party's racist background. Why do think so many old white folk were/are Democrats? If you really want to learn some truth you need to branch out from the mainstream teachings. Do you REALLY think either party gives a shit about minorities? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 There's no doubt the Dems have a racist background as a party. But they are almost 200 years old. That's well before slavery was outlawed. That's all history and has no relevance today. The parties each had huge resets thanks to the civil rights movement and the New Deal. As for the modern parties, one has the clear support of basically all minorities in America and the other one does not. Figure it out... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.