Minimum Wage

[Trephining]

But what happens if the minimum wage is raised so high that the business owner is now making half of minimum wage? Isn't he entitled to earn minimum wage too? Who is going to give him his money? What about business's that loose money and end up closing? Are those owners entitled to minimum wage for all the hours they've worked? Who's going to pay them?

Stoopit question of the year award.


Honibaz

Go ahead and explain why it is a stupid question.

The business owner is the one risking his savings, possibly his house, along with his livelihood, on the success of the business.

[thegreekdog]

But what happens if the minimum wage is raised so high that the business owner is now making half of minimum wage? Isn't he entitled to earn minimum wage too? Who is going to give him his money? What about business's that loose money and end up closing? Are those owners entitled to minimum wage for all the hours they've worked? Who's going to pay them?

Stoopit question of the year award.


Honibaz

Go ahead and explain why it is a stupid question.

The business owner is the one risking his savings, possibly his house, along with his livelihood, on the success of the business.

One might consider it a stupid question because the business owner could simply fire the person making minimum wage.

Or... raise prices!

[Trephining]

You sound like somebody who has never owned, managed, or operated a business or business unit that needed to make money. The market is competitive. One can't just raise prices whenever you feel like it.

Do you think some struggling burger joint owner can just raise all his prices by $0.75 whenever he wants? He'll lose business. What about the guy who does tuck-pointing? He can't just start charging $5/sq foot. He will lose all his business to the guy who still charges $4/sq foot.

[thegreekdog]

You sound like somebody who has never owned, managed, or operated a business or business unit that needed to make money. The market is competitive. One can't just raise prices whenever you feel like it.

Do you think some struggling burger joint owner can just raise all his prices by $0.75 whenever he wants? He'll lose business. What about the guy who does tuck-pointing? He can't just start charging $5/sq foot. He will lose all his business to the guy who still charges $4/sq foot.

I have never owned, managed or operated a business. I am, however, a manager of a business unit. I'll send you my resume separately. Although, really, this is less about experience and more about realism.

Let's take your struggling burger joint owner... he runs a McDonald's. He pays his employees minimum wage (let's say $8 an hour). His major competitors are Burger King, Taco Bell, and KFC. Those competitors pay their employees minimum wage ($8 an hour). The minimum wage is suddenly increased to $9 an hour! What do you think would happen in that instance? Here's what I think might happen: (1) Hours for employees are decreased, (2) Employees are laid off, and/or (3) Prices are raised. In fact, I happen to think all three would happen, and they would happen in all three businesses (i.e. all the competitors). But I'd love to read your thoughts on this, but only if you have owned, managed or operated a business.

[PLAYER57832]

Again, I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself, if people weren't paid a fair wage, they would quit.

You're seriously fucking retarded, aren't you.

"I'm not making enough money. Maybe I should quit my job."

This would have been a great opportunity for you to make a point of your own Timminz. Next time, summon your thinking cap, and explain a point. Until then, you might keep your "seriously f***ing retarded" comments for the man in the mirror.

What 72o is saying is exactly the way it works. My woman graduated school and got a job making $X/year. She wasn't satisfied with that, so she quit the job, went to graduate school and worked a part time job making 0.6 * X per year. Then she finished her degree and found a job paying 1.71*X per year. She later found a job making 2.21*X per year.

Every time, she wasn't satisfied with what she was earning, so she found a better one and quit the current job. It is that simple.

It is that simple if you can afford to pay $20,000 in tuition (rough average for graduate tuition here). Oh, and if you are married to someone who is working, you can forget any kind of financial aid.

[Woodruff]

I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.

For that matter, paying your employees at all is effectively wealth distribution. Bring back slavery!

(See how that's done?)

You're making no sense. A minimum wage law is something forces economic activity to behave in ways that are contrary to what voluntary participants would do. Paying people is not.

Is that right? Not only history but also the outflux of jobs from America prove otherwise.

[thegreekdog]

I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.

For that matter, paying your employees at all is effectively wealth distribution. Bring back slavery!

(See how that's done?)

You're making no sense. A minimum wage law is something forces economic activity to behave in ways that are contrary to what voluntary participants would do. Paying people is not.

Is that right? Not only history but also the outflux of jobs from America prove otherwise.

Dude... I have it on good authority (i.e. two friends that do that sort of thing for a living, unfortunately for them) that call center people in the US make more than minimum wage. Manufacturing jobs pay salaries higher than minimum wage. Maybe unions (and others) base their salary demands on minimum wage, but I don't think minimum wage jobs are leaving the U.S.

[Woodruff]

Again, I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself, if people weren't paid a fair wage, they would quit.

You're seriously fucking retarded, aren't you.

"I'm not making enough money. Maybe I should quit my job."

This would have been a great opportunity for you to make a point of your own Timminz. Next time, summon your thinking cap, and explain a point. Until then, you might keep your "seriously f***ing retarded" comments for the man in the mirror.

What 72o is saying is exactly the way it works. My woman graduated school and got a job making $X/year. She wasn't satisfied with that, so she quit the job, went to graduate school and worked a part time job making 0.6 * X per year. Then she finished her degree and found a job paying 1.71*X per year. She later found a job making 2.21*X per year.

Every time, she wasn't satisfied with what she was earning, so she found a better one and quit the current job. It is that simple.

What is amazing is that she could afford to quit her job AND attend graduate school. That's amazing...and far out of reach of most people.

[Woodruff]

You sound like somebody who has never owned, managed, or operated a business or business unit that needed to make money. The market is competitive. One can't just raise prices whenever you feel like it.
Do you think some struggling burger joint owner can just raise all his prices by $0.75 whenever he wants? He'll lose business. What about the guy who does tuck-pointing? He can't just start charging $5/sq foot. He will lose all his business to the guy who still charges $4/sq foot.

Perhaps. Depends on the product. I will certainly pay more for a better product.

[Woodruff]

I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.

For that matter, paying your employees at all is effectively wealth distribution. Bring back slavery!

(See how that's done?)

You're making no sense. A minimum wage law is something forces economic activity to behave in ways that are contrary to what voluntary participants would do. Paying people is not.

Is that right? Not only history but also the outflux of jobs from America prove otherwise.

Dude... I have it on good authority (i.e. two friends that do that sort of thing for a living, unfortunately for them) that call center people in the US make more than minimum wage. Manufacturing jobs pay salaries higher than minimum wage. Maybe unions (and others) base their salary demands on minimum wage, but I don't think minimum wage jobs are leaving the U.S.

No, you misunderstand. I'm not at all talking about minimum wage...I'm talking about the idea that many (certainly not all...maybe not most...but many) businesses would try to squeeze every last nickle out of the pocket of their employees if they had the opportunity, PARTICULARLY in a time when jobs are scarce (as they are).

[PLAYER57832]

Player, you keep talking about the plight of minimum wage, yet you have never provided statistics about how many people are actually at minimum wage. Worse yet, you haven't mentioned how many of these are high school or college students or are actually the 2nd income in the family just to make a few extra bucks. The amount of people trying to live off minimum wage is grossly overestimated simply to raise the minimum wage.

Numbers are irrelevant to my argument. One person not making enough to live upon is too many. Second, the current minimum wage is so far below what most people need to make, so far below the current poverty level, the level at which people begin recieving assistance, that a lot of people getting assistance are fully working and working for much more than minimum wage.

IN PA, for example, a family of 4 can earn just under $40,000 and still qualify for reduced lunches, Medicaid, etc.

[PLAYER57832]

I stopped getting raises at work because the rise in minimum wage eclipsed what I was getting paid, so although I had done exceptional work for nearly 2 years, I was forced to get paid the same amount as a starting employee. It's a continuous circle that the public use to harm the economy: people raise minimum wage, prices have to go up to pay those wages, people claim wages have to go up more to pay for those prices. It's a stupid cycle that kills our economy.

Your employer taking advantage of you and your willingness to keep working there and not go out and as YOU said, improve yourself to get a higher wage, is not to be blamed on a rise in the minimum wage. Too many employers think that workers are superfolous. Too many employers fail to understand that a poor manager is the number one factor in poor performance and productivity, not "lazy workers". Lazy workers absolutely exist, but a good manager can motivate the overwhelming majority. A poor manager can only criticize everyone around and sees no problem in cutting wages. Sure, they may send out nice notices geared to get a their employees to go out and vote in ways that will benefit the employer, not themselves.

And you COMPLETELY missed the point of my statement. I didn't get a raise because of a poor manager; I didn't get a raise because the rising minimum wage was considered my raise! I was unable to get a performance raise because minimum wage rose for everybody. My hours also declined as minimum wage went up.

I did not miss the point. I just think you are looking at it from only one point of view, and that you won't even consider any other.

[PLAYER57832]

The owner of a small farm was being investigated for allegedly not paying his workers proper wages.

"I need a list of your employees and how much you pay them," demanded the interviewing agent.

"Well," replied the farmer, "there's my farmhand, who has been with me for three years. I pay him $200 a week plus free room and board. The cook has been here for 18 months, and I pay her $150 a week plus free room and board. Then there's the half-wit who works about 18 hours every day and does 90 percent of all the work around here. He makes about $10 a week and pays his own room and board, and I buy him a bottle of bourbon every Saturday night. He also sleeps with my wife occasionally."

"That's the guy I want to talk to, the half-wit," said the agent.

The farmer replied, "That would be me."

This is hardly a new joke or invented by playboy. In fact, there is a lot of truth to that, for farmers and some other small businesses.

However, there is a big difference between owning a company or a farm and working for someone else who does. When you work for yourself, you may go through some lean times, but you always hope to balance things out. It is your "baby". Many businesses do fail, and rightfully so.

The plight of farmers is much more complicated, because often times their failures have more to do with things they cannot control, and too often when a farm is sold it does not stay as a farm, which hurts all of us (in the long run). Also, even poor farmers have homes and usually can round up some food.

However, NEITHER of these really compares to a worker who may be asked to make the same kinds of sacrifices, but who has no hope of the same return.

[Night Strike]

Player, you keep talking about the plight of minimum wage, yet you have never provided statistics about how many people are actually at minimum wage. Worse yet, you haven't mentioned how many of these are high school or college students or are actually the 2nd income in the family just to make a few extra bucks. The amount of people trying to live off minimum wage is grossly overestimated simply to raise the minimum wage.

Numbers are irrelevant to my argument. One person not making enough to live upon is too many. Second, the current minimum wage is so far below what most people need to make, so far below the current poverty level, the level at which people begin recieving assistance, that a lot of people getting assistance are fully working and working for much more than minimum wage.

IN PA, for example, a family of 4 can earn just under $40,000 and still qualify for reduced lunches, Medicaid, etc.

Then maybe the better argument is that there should be no FEDERAL minimum wage. Let each state decide what their minimum wage will be, and we'll see how people and businesses move to adjust. In MO, $40,000 in plenty to raise a family of 4 (my family of 5 is about that level or a bit more).

[PLAYER57832]

Player, you keep talking about the plight of minimum wage, yet you have never provided statistics about how many people are actually at minimum wage. Worse yet, you haven't mentioned how many of these are high school or college students or are actually the 2nd income in the family just to make a few extra bucks. The amount of people trying to live off minimum wage is grossly overestimated simply to raise the minimum wage.

Numbers are irrelevant to my argument. One person not making enough to live upon is too many. Second, the current minimum wage is so far below what most people need to make, so far below the current poverty level, the level at which people begin recieving assistance, that a lot of people getting assistance are fully working and working for much more than minimum wage.

IN PA, for example, a family of 4 can earn just under $40,000 and still qualify for reduced lunches, Medicaid, etc.

Then maybe the better argument is that there should be no FEDERAL minimum wage. Let each state decide what their minimum wage will be, and we'll see how people and businesses move to adjust. In MO, $40,000 in plenty to raise a family of 4 (my family of 5 is about that level or a bit more).

The federal minimum is to help balance out the states. But, many states and even localities do have their own minimums.

And, yes, I agree that $40,000 ought to be plenty to raise a family in all but the most expensive locations, which, though include most cities. (though you have to balance higher rents with sometimes lower transportation costs). It also means a wage of over $19 an hour.

A person making $8 makes just $16,640 a year. That is still above most minimum wages in the US.

[keiths31]

In Canada the provinces have different minimum wages. A Canada wide one wouldn't work because of the different tax rates in each province.

Province Minimum Waqge

• Alberta $8.80
  BC $8.00
  Manitoba $9.00
  New Brunswick $8.50
  Newfoundland $9.50
  NWT $9.00
  Nova Scotia $9.20
  Nunavut $10.00
  Ontario $10.25
  PEI $8.40
  Quebec $9.50
  Saskatchewan $9.25
  Yukon $8.93

Just a point of reference...
BC is one of the most expensive places in North America to live (2 of the top 3 cities)...and they have the lowest minimum wage in the country. Crazy that...people can afford to live in this expensive part of the country without business owners being forced to pay arbitrary high wages. Also Alberta is the richest province in Canada (at the moment anyway) they have no provincial sales tax and with the oil boom many workers make as much as a doctor does. But yet...their minimum wage is low compared to other provinces.

[thegreekdog]

No, you misunderstand. I'm not at all talking about minimum wage...I'm talking about the idea that many (certainly not all...maybe not most...but many) businesses would try to squeeze every last nickle out of the pocket of their employees if they had the opportunity, PARTICULARLY in a time when jobs are scarce (as they are).

I agree.

[BigBallinStalin]

So you not getting a raise has everything to do with expected increases in minimum wage and nothing to do with your particular line of work, the boss, "internal politics," or your performance, or for that matter any other factor?

Considering I had high reviews every 3 months and did not get a raise every other review (as was the policy) while the minimum wage was increasing in that time, then yes, those at the very least correlate if it's not causation.

What kind of establishment is this? For it to be rather vulnerable to a small increase of the minimum wage would mean that most of its workers are minimum wage earners, right?

Reminds me of a fast food joint, which isn't apt to promotions in the first place.

[BigBallinStalin]

yeah, player pretty much covered what I was hinting at.

Thanks, PLAYER! =)

[b.k. barunt]

But what happens if the minimum wage is raised so high that the business owner is now making half of minimum wage? Isn't he entitled to earn minimum wage too? Who is going to give him his money? What about business's that loose money and end up closing? Are those owners entitled to minimum wage for all the hours they've worked? Who's going to pay them?

Stoopit question of the year award.


Honibaz

Go ahead and explain why it is a stupid question.

The business owner is the one risking his savings, possibly his house, along with his livelihood, on the success of the business.

You realize of course that having the stoopit question of the year explained to you will not exactly get you into MENSA? Mmmkay, i'll spoon feed it to you as gently as i can:

Minimum wage is pitifully low - here in Louisiana it's about 7.00 an hour. I can go mow a lawn for 50.00 and that would take my old crippled ass as long as 2 hours with the edging and all. That's 25.00 an hour. I could hire a young man at 10.00 an hour (3.00 over minimum wage) to help me and still make 15.00 an hour on his labor alone without lifting a finger. I can get a brand new gas powered lawn mower for less than 200.00 and a gas powered weed eater for 160.00. 2 lawn mowers and 2 weed eaters = 720.00.

Two of us can do 8 lawns (at my crippled old ass speed) in one 8 hour day. That's 400.00 per day. 5 days of such will make 2000.00. His salary for said week will be 400.00. That plus the cost of the equipment comes to 1120.00. Let's subtract another another 80.00 for gas and other minor costs and that comes to 800.00 profit for me on the first week with my equipment all paid for. After that i have only his salary to subtract and say 100.00 for any other equipment and/or maintenance costs. That's 1500.00 per week for me, and that's assuming i only want to work a 5 day 40 hour week. Also assuming i only want to employ 1 helper.

If i were to somehow get stuck making 3.50 an hour, as Bedub suggested (half of minimum wage) that would come to 240.00 per week instead of 1500.00. If i were that stoopit then i shouldn't be attempting to work for myself and i would probably have to have the Stoopit Question of the Year explained to me in this same fashion.

That's about as basic an example as i can think of, but considering the fact that you had to ask in the first place it may not be enough. Sorry about that.


Honibaz

[Trephining]

Again, I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself, if people weren't paid a fair wage, they would quit.

You're seriously fucking retarded, aren't you.

"I'm not making enough money. Maybe I should quit my job."

This would have been a great opportunity for you to make a point of your own Timminz. Next time, summon your thinking cap, and explain a point. Until then, you might keep your "seriously f***ing retarded" comments for the man in the mirror.

What 72o is saying is exactly the way it works. My woman graduated school and got a job making $X/year. She wasn't satisfied with that, so she quit the job, went to graduate school and worked a part time job making 0.6 * X per year. Then she finished her degree and found a job paying 1.71*X per year. She later found a job making 2.21*X per year.

Every time, she wasn't satisfied with what she was earning, so she found a better one and quit the current job. It is that simple.

What is amazing is that she could afford to quit her job AND attend graduate school. That's amazing...and far out of reach of most people.

Explain why you think that is out of reach for most people.

[BigBallinStalin]

Explain why you think that is out of reach for most people.

got a few questions, Treph:

Do you work for a living? Have you held a regular job?

Have you attended college? How did you pay for it?

[72o]

Minimum wage is pitifully low - here in Louisiana it's about 7.00 an hour. I can go mow a lawn for 50.00 and that would take my old crippled ass as long as 2 hours with the edging and all. That's 25.00 an hour. I could hire a young man at 10.00 an hour (3.00 over minimum wage) to help me and still make 15.00 an hour on his labor alone without lifting a finger. I can get a brand new gas powered lawn mower for less than 200.00 and a gas powered weed eater for 160.00. 2 lawn mowers and 2 weed eaters = 720.00.

Two of us can do 8 lawns (at my crippled old ass speed) in one 8 hour day. That's 400.00 per day. 5 days of such will make 2000.00. His salary for said week will be 400.00. That plus the cost of the equipment comes to 1120.00. Let's subtract another another 80.00 for gas and other minor costs and that comes to 800.00 profit for me on the first week with my equipment all paid for. After that i have only his salary to subtract and say 100.00 for any other equipment and/or maintenance costs. That's 1500.00 per week for me, and that's assuming i only want to work a 5 day 40 hour week. Also assuming i only want to employ 1 helper.

If i were to somehow get stuck making 3.50 an hour, as Bedub suggested (half of minimum wage) that would come to 240.00 per week instead of 1500.00. If i were that stoopit then i shouldn't be attempting to work for myself and i would probably have to have the Stoopit Question of the Year explained to me in this same fashion.

That's about as basic an example as i can think of, but considering the fact that you had to ask in the first place it may not be enough. Sorry about that.


Honibaz

I'll assume for a minute that your scenario is factual, and you have an unlimited number of people willing to pay you 50 bucks to mow a lawn that only takes two hours.

While we're assuming, assume that the great state of Louisiana, in order to "help" the poor minimum wage earners, and put the screws to the mean old business owners, raises the minimum wage to 30 bucks an hour.

Suddenly, you would actually lose money hiring someone else to help you mow lawns. Even on the lawns you mow yourself, you'd effectively be making less than the minimum wage.

Now do you understand bedub's question? Is it still stoopit? This is what you are supporting, amirite?

[BigBallinStalin]

Minimum wage is pitifully low - here in Louisiana it's about 7.00 an hour. I can go mow a lawn for 50.00 and that would take my old crippled ass as long as 2 hours with the edging and all. That's 25.00 an hour. I could hire a young man at 10.00 an hour (3.00 over minimum wage) to help me and still make 15.00 an hour on his labor alone without lifting a finger. I can get a brand new gas powered lawn mower for less than 200.00 and a gas powered weed eater for 160.00. 2 lawn mowers and 2 weed eaters = 720.00.

Two of us can do 8 lawns (at my crippled old ass speed) in one 8 hour day. That's 400.00 per day. 5 days of such will make 2000.00. His salary for said week will be 400.00. That plus the cost of the equipment comes to 1120.00. Let's subtract another another 80.00 for gas and other minor costs and that comes to 800.00 profit for me on the first week with my equipment all paid for. After that i have only his salary to subtract and say 100.00 for any other equipment and/or maintenance costs. That's 1500.00 per week for me, and that's assuming i only want to work a 5 day 40 hour week. Also assuming i only want to employ 1 helper.

If i were to somehow get stuck making 3.50 an hour, as Bedub suggested (half of minimum wage) that would come to 240.00 per week instead of 1500.00. If i were that stoopit then i shouldn't be attempting to work for myself and i would probably have to have the Stoopit Question of the Year explained to me in this same fashion.

That's about as basic an example as i can think of, but considering the fact that you had to ask in the first place it may not be enough. Sorry about that.


Honibaz

I'll assume for a minute that your scenario is factual, and you have an unlimited number of people willing to pay you 50 bucks to mow a lawn that only takes two hours.

While we're assuming, assume that the great state of Louisiana, in order to "help" the poor minimum wage earners, and put the screws to the mean old business owners, raises the minimum wage to 30 bucks an hour.

Suddenly, you would actually lose money hiring someone else to help you mow lawns. Even on the lawns you mow yourself, you'd effectively be making less than the minimum wage.

Now do you understand bedub's question? Is it still stoopit? This is what you are supporting, amirite?

Look, that's a dumb example because in order for bedub and your consequences to occur, minimal wage would have to jump up an extra $23 dollars overnight. That's just a ridiculous and unreasonable scenario, which screams to be not taken seriously and just ridiculed.

[72o]

Minimum wage is pitifully low - here in Louisiana it's about 7.00 an hour. I can go mow a lawn for 50.00 and that would take my old crippled ass as long as 2 hours with the edging and all. That's 25.00 an hour. I could hire a young man at 10.00 an hour (3.00 over minimum wage) to help me and still make 15.00 an hour on his labor alone without lifting a finger. I can get a brand new gas powered lawn mower for less than 200.00 and a gas powered weed eater for 160.00. 2 lawn mowers and 2 weed eaters = 720.00.

Two of us can do 8 lawns (at my crippled old ass speed) in one 8 hour day. That's 400.00 per day. 5 days of such will make 2000.00. His salary for said week will be 400.00. That plus the cost of the equipment comes to 1120.00. Let's subtract another another 80.00 for gas and other minor costs and that comes to 800.00 profit for me on the first week with my equipment all paid for. After that i have only his salary to subtract and say 100.00 for any other equipment and/or maintenance costs. That's 1500.00 per week for me, and that's assuming i only want to work a 5 day 40 hour week. Also assuming i only want to employ 1 helper.

If i were to somehow get stuck making 3.50 an hour, as Bedub suggested (half of minimum wage) that would come to 240.00 per week instead of 1500.00. If i were that stoopit then i shouldn't be attempting to work for myself and i would probably have to have the Stoopit Question of the Year explained to me in this same fashion.

That's about as basic an example as i can think of, but considering the fact that you had to ask in the first place it may not be enough. Sorry about that.


Honibaz

I'll assume for a minute that your scenario is factual, and you have an unlimited number of people willing to pay you 50 bucks to mow a lawn that only takes two hours.

While we're assuming, assume that the great state of Louisiana, in order to "help" the poor minimum wage earners, and put the screws to the mean old business owners, raises the minimum wage to 30 bucks an hour.

Suddenly, you would actually lose money hiring someone else to help you mow lawns. Even on the lawns you mow yourself, you'd effectively be making less than the minimum wage.

Now do you understand bedub's question? Is it still stoopit? This is what you are supporting, amirite?

Look, that's a dumb example because in order for bedub and your consequences to occur, minimal wage would have to jump up an extra $23 dollars overnight. That's just a ridiculous and unreasonable scenario, which screams to be not taken seriously and just ridiculed.

Can you explain why the size of the increase matters? It doesn't. It's not about what the minimum wage is, it's about the existence of it at all.