What is the point of minimum wage? (srs)

[BangBrahs]

What is the point of even having a minimum wage in the United States?

[recedingjaw]

There isn't a point if you follow total free market philosophy. You'd have much higher employment because people could bargain wages, and the wages wouldn't be "pennies" like liberals think due to competition

[Stizzel]

The original purpose of minimum wage laws was to keep minorities from getting jobs

[Qong]

I can't think of anything positive coming from minimum wage laws. They hurt the average person.

Facts:

1. Having a minimum wage at all will increase the price of things. More people with more money equals more demand. More demand means higher prices. Sure, production would catch up and supply would meet the demand and lower prices back down a bit but that doesn't change the fact that costs and prices both increase.

2. Poor people aren't making minimum wage. The majority of minimum wage workers are young people, kids if you will. Children from middle class and upper middle class families. They aren't poor. Their parents have provided for them for their entire lives and will continue to do so for years into the future.

3. Actual poor people need opportunity. Not a higher minimum wage. Give them the opportunity, the chance to better themselves and their lives. Minimum wage laws do nothing to increase their opportunity, in fact such laws diminish their opportunity by destroying the marketplace.

[dyee4613]

Min. wage is the government saying people stupid.

[Ikeman83]

What is the point of even having a minimum wage in the United States?

The point is to get votes from people who don't understand economics for Democratic Candidates.

[Austanian]

Well under current laws it is necessary because other laws reference the minimum wage law. (Garnishments and Child support for example)

However, in reality it is because liberals are able to convince enough of the voter base that wages would be pennies without minimum wage laws.

[nutsy54]

What is the point of even having a minimum wage in the United States?

So politicians can pander for votes while making someone else foot the bill...

[KyleAaron]

Australia minimum wage / US: AUD18.29 (USD13.90 at the moment) / 7.25
Australia participation rate / US: 64.9% / 62.7%

By the way, we have an unemployment benefit from the federal government which continues indefinitely, it's AUD250.50 or USD190.37 a week.

Australia has not had a recession since 1992, that's 25 years of uninterrupted growth, including growth in the minimum wage. The USA meanwhile had one in 2001 (dot com bubble) and 2007-9 (GFC courtesy bad debts). Success leaves tracks. Follow them.

The minimum wage should meet "the normal needs of an average employee, regarded as a human being in a civilised community".

"If A lets B have the use of his horses on the terms that he gives them fair and reasonable treatment, I have no doubt that it is B's duty to give them proper food and water, and such shelter and rest as they need; and, as wages are the means of obtaining commodities, surely the State in stipulating for fair and reasonable remuneration for the employees means that the wages shall be sufficient to provide these things, and clothing and a condition of frugal comfort estimated by current human standards."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvester_case

It's not merely a matter of negotiation, since most companies will have much more power than some individual person. Now, they won't have more power than people forming a work union, but that's another conversation.

[nutsy54]

Australia minimum wage / US: AUD18.29 (USD13.90 at the moment) / 7.25
Australia participation rate / US: 64.9% / 62.7%

By the way, we have an unemployment benefit from the federal government which continues indefinitely, it's AUD250.50 or USD190.37 a week.

Australia has not had a recession since 1992, that's 25 years of uninterrupted growth, including growth in the minimum wage. The USA meanwhile had one in 2001 (dot com bubble) and 2007-9 (GFC courtesy bad debts). Success leaves tracks. Follow them.

US GDP-per-capita is 23% higher than Australia...
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-...States/Economy

And it seems the US (blue line) is doing well with GDP growth compared to Australia (dotted line)...

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

[wesleysh21]

Australia minimum wage / US: AUD18.29 (USD13.90 at the moment) / 7.25
Australia participation rate / US: 64.9% / 62.7%

By the way, we have an unemployment benefit from the federal government which continues indefinitely, it's AUD250.50 or USD190.37 a week.

Australia has not had a recession since 1992, that's 25 years of uninterrupted growth, including growth in the minimum wage. The USA meanwhile had one in 2001 (dot com bubble) and 2007-9 (GFC courtesy bad debts). Success leaves tracks. Follow them.

The minimum wage should meet "the normal needs of an average employee, regarded as a human being in a civilised community".

"If A lets B have the use of his horses on the terms that he gives them fair and reasonable treatment, I have no doubt that it is B's duty to give them proper food and water, and such shelter and rest as they need; and, as wages are the means of obtaining commodities, surely the State in stipulating for fair and reasonable remuneration for the employees means that the wages shall be sufficient to provide these things, and clothing and a condition of frugal comfort estimated by current human standards."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvester_case

It's not merely a matter of negotiation, since most companies will have much more power than some individual person. Now, they won't have more power than people forming a work union, but that's another conversation.

No thanks Jeff. Merica.

[ProbateTed]

There is no reason for a minimum wage. The idea that without a minimum wage all companies would suddenly collude and pay workers 10 cents an hour is just laughably idiotic for many reasons. The real minimum wage is zero - it's what happens when someone is not hired because their marginal benefit to the potential employer is less than the mandated wage.

[Slayermanlet]

The cons are that it increases unemployment, inflation and doesn't deal with underlying problems

Although the UK has had a national minimum wage since 1998 and has found the worries about hurting employment and business to be largely unfounded

The arguments for are generally:

Reduced union membership in the modern era gives workers less bargaining power against large companies

It ensures a floor for low paid/ low skill jobs

Companies cannot be trusted alone to pay fair wages (obviously 'fair' is contentious)

If workers are not paid fair wages they are frozen out of the consumer market, decreasing demand for certain goods and economic activity overall

A higher minimum wage helps to lower dependancy on state welfare, and generally a society with less extremely low income people is a more stable and safe one

Not necessarily my point of view, but this is generally what we were taught in school when we dabated the topic

[KyleAaron]

US GDP-per-capita is 23% higher than Australia...

Yes. But also our median household incomes are about the same. Which is to say, in the US the growth goes proportionally more to the people who are already well-off. That's nice for them, but goes to show what happens when you have a high vs a low minimum wage; a high minimum wage makes low income people better off, and does nothing for wealthy people; a low minimum wage makes low income people worse off, but helps wealthy people.

Now, we may argue whether or not we should help low income people, but few would argue we should help wealthy people, who will after all be alright with or without our help. I would argue we should help low income people, though: preferably with a job, but since we keep shipping those jobs overseas, other help should be given. We cannot sign free trade agreements with countries employing people for $150 a month and then berate people for not getting a job.

But let's consider some other numbers.

Australia has 0.98 homicides per 100,000 people, the US has 4.88. For the USA, firearms are used in 3.43 of those 4.88, so even if you magically wave all the bangsticks away, the 1.55 per 100k homicides left are still higher than Australia's. You're just a more violent and aggressive people.

Australia incarcerates 152 people per 100,000 population, the US 693. Vengeful, and judging from the above, not very effective.

Australia has 0.20 police killings of suspects (6 in 2010, for example) per million people, the USA 2 (at least 963 in 2015), ie USA has 4-5 times the violent crime rate, but 10 times the police shooting rate. Your boys and girls in blue are a bit jumpy.

Australia has 5.4 traffic fatalities per 100,000, the USA 10.6. Don't drink and drive, kids.

Australia has 3.8 of 100 children die by the age of 5, the USA 6.5. Someone's forgetting to stop them putting knitting needles into power points.

Australia has a life expectancy of 82.8, the USA 79.3. That's a lot of healthcare expense for a worse result.

Australia has 14% of children living in single-parent families, the USA 29%. Over 95% of these single parents are women. Your men need to learn to take responsibility. If the Misc is any indication, this isn't improving soon.

Australia has a larger percentage of university graduates in the 25-34yo age group than the USA. Edumucation is more importanter here.

Australia has 10.4 suicides per 100,000 people, the USA 12.6. Well with all that going on, I'd probably feel gloomy, too.

Australia has many things to learn from the USA, for example your excellent protections for freedom of speech, so that as I saw a few years ago visiting, even a local city newspaper has intelligent discussions of international affairs, ours are trash. But I think there may be a few things you could learn from us, too.

[KyleAaron]

No thanks Jeff. Merica.

I am impressed by the depth and cogency of your argument. As I said, our countries have different standards of education.

[UTSoccerbro]

Yes. But also our median household incomes are about the same. Which is to say, in the US the growth goes proportionally more to the people who are already well-off. That's nice for them, but goes to show what happens when you have a high vs a low minimum wage; a high minimum wage makes low income people better off, and does nothing for wealthy people; a low minimum wage makes low income people worse off, but helps wealthy people.

Now, we may argue whether or not we should help low income people, but few would argue we should help wealthy people, who will after all be alright with or without our help. I would argue we should help low income people, though: preferably with a job, but since we keep shipping those jobs overseas, other help should be given. We cannot sign free trade agreements with countries employing people for $150 a month and then berate people for not getting a job.

But let's consider some other numbers.

Australia has 0.98 homicides per 100,000 people, the US has 4.88. For the USA, firearms are used in 3.43 of those 4.88, so even if you magically wave all the bangsticks away, the 1.55 per 100k homicides left are still higher than Australia's. You're just a more violent and aggressive people.

Australia incarcerates 152 people per 100,000 population, the US 693. Vengeful, and judging from the above, not very effective.

Australia has 0.20 police killings of suspects (6 in 2010, for example) per million people, the USA 2 (at least 963 in 2015), ie USA has 4-5 times the violent crime rate, but 10 times the police shooting rate. Your boys and girls in blue are a bit jumpy.

Australia has 5.4 traffic fatalities per 100,000, the USA 10.6. Don't drink and drive, kids.

Australia has 3.8 of 100 children die by the age of 5, the USA 6.5. Someone's forgetting to stop them putting knitting needles into power points.

Australia has a life expectancy of 82.8, the USA 79.3. That's a lot of healthcare expense for a worse result.

Australia has 14% of children living in single-parent families, the USA 29%. Over 95% of these single parents are women. Your men need to learn to take responsibility. If the Misc is any indication, this isn't improving soon.

Australia has a larger percentage of university graduates in the 25-34yo age group than the USA. Edumucation is more importanter here.

Australia has 10.4 suicides per 100,000 people, the USA 12.6. Well with all that going on, I'd probably feel gloomy, too.

Australia has many things to learn from the USA, for example your excellent protections for freedom of speech, so that as I saw a few years ago visiting, even a local city newspaper has intelligent discussions of international affairs, ours are trash. But I think there may be a few things you could learn from us, too.

You just pointed out a half dozen things your country does better than us (family, traffic, deaths, suicide, education, crime, incarceration, police killings, etc) and then roll back around and say "Minimum wage is the reason we have less poverty!"


u wot m8? It's culture, not an arbitrary minimum wage law.

[Mr Beer]

The high minimum wage in Australia prevents an impoverished underclass. There are rough places here and there but absolutely no terrifyingly dangerous ghettos like you get in the US.

Effectively it's a form of welfare which creates a maximally broad middle class. I'm all for it but ideologically it's anathema to right wing Americans.

EDIT

I think back in the day the minimum wage was much higher in the US and blue collar guys could raise a family on it?

[katya422]

I can't think of anything positive coming from minimum wage laws. They hurt the average person.

Facts:

1. Having a minimum wage at all will increase the price of things. More people with more money equals more demand. More demand means higher prices. Sure, production would catch up and supply would meet the demand and lower prices back down a bit but that doesn't change the fact that costs and prices both increase.

2. Poor people aren't making minimum wage. The majority of minimum wage workers are young people, kids if you will. Children from middle class and upper middle class families. They aren't poor. Their parents have provided for them for their entire lives and will continue to do so for years into the future.

3. Actual poor people need opportunity. Not a higher minimum wage. Give them the opportunity, the chance to better themselves and their lives. Minimum wage laws do nothing to increase their opportunity, in fact such laws diminish their opportunity by destroying the marketplace.

I'll give you the first one.

As to your second assertion that the majority of minimum wage workers are teenagers, well that just isn't true.

From the BLS for 2016:

20.6% were age 16 - 19
24.8% were age 19 to 24
54.6% were 25 and older

For the third, yes, poor people do need opportunity. However if said opportunity doesn't pay enough to live then the taxpayer is expected to make up the difference.

Seems to me we either need a higher minimum wage so that employed people earn enough to support themselves or we stop providing social support, which many here seem to be okay with. I'm not. Mainly because a lot of those living in poverty are children.

More than 16 million children, or roughly one in five, were living in poverty in 2011, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's official poverty measure (pdf). That is higher than any other age group. Among 18- to 64-year-olds, the poverty rate was 13.7 percent, while among seniors the rate was 8.7 percent.

[NYPat]

I'll give you the first one.

As to your second assertion that the majority of minimum wage workers are teenagers, well that just isn't true.

From the BLS for 2016:

20.6% were age 16 - 19
24.8% were age 19 to 24
54.6% were 25 and older

For the third, yes, poor people do need opportunity. However if said opportunity doesn't pay enough to live then the taxpayer is expected to make up the difference.

Seems to me we either need a higher minimum wage so that employed people earn enough to support themselves or we stop providing social support, which many here seem to be okay with. I'm not. Mainly because a lot of those living in poverty are children.

So if you're older than 25, and earning min wage, you failed in life. That's our country's threshold.

Raise the minimum wage so that hard workers working a full time job or multiple jobs can pay the rent, feed their kids, and pay the bills, and don't have to rely on government handouts to do so.

I'm in full support of less government assistance, make big business pay.




Edit: And don't give him the first one. Min wage doesn't affect prices of goods AT ALL. If there was ever fake news, this is it. Ever notice how Qong never supports his claims with sources?

[Stizzel]

I'll give you the first one.

As to your second assertion that the majority of minimum wage workers are teenagers, well that just isn't true.

From the BLS for 2016:

20.6% were age 16 - 19
24.8% were age 19 to 24
54.6% were 25 and older

For the third, yes, poor people do need opportunity. However if said opportunity doesn't pay enough to live then the taxpayer is expected to make up the difference.

Seems to me we either need a higher minimum wage so that employed people earn enough to support themselves or we stop providing social support, which many here seem to be okay with. I'm not. Mainly because a lot of those living in poverty are children.

Was this data pulled after states started going full retard with minimum wage laws? Because historically about a quarter of the people earning minimum wage have been teenagers.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...-minimum-wage/

Federal Minimum Wage 1938-2013
People at or below the federal minimum are:

Disproportionately young: 50.4% are ages 16 to 24; 24% are teenagers (ages 16 to 19).

As idiots keep pushing for these laws you're going to enjoy more youth unemployment, and a higher age trend for minimum wage earnings. Which of course libtards will use to claim we need a higher minimum wage, as is happening now.

[FIREnICE]

usually a way for democrats to get more votes because it makes it seem like they're helping the fellow citizens out. what ends up happening is that you lose jobs and prices go up.

[Stizzel]

And as the young are the primary recipients of minimum wages, it is helpful to look at what minimum wages do to their unemployment statistics:

https://wol.iza.org/uploads/articles...and-income.pdf

Cliffs: It aint good

[NYPat]

Was this data pulled after states started going full retard with minimum wage laws? Because historically about a quarter of the people earning minimum wage have been teenagers.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...-minimum-wage/

Federal Minimum Wage 1938-2013
People at or below the federal minimum are:

Disproportionately young: 50.4% are ages 16 to 24; 24% are teenagers (ages 16 to 19).

As idiots keep pushing for these laws you're going to enjoy more youth unemployment, and a higher age trend for minimum wage earnings. Which of course libtards will use to claim we need a higher minimum wage, as is happening now.

As idiots like you continue to not understand what big business does to the working class, our country will continue to depend on handouts from the government, which you love so much.






Surely, eliminating the min wage will increase the lower middle class' standard of living. Right?

[IronRooster2]

In the old days, it was legal to pay your employees in company scrip. Aka, Disney Fun Bucks.

This was often more brutal than slavery - when you own a slave at least you want it to be somewhat healthy. To protect your investment in capital. When you have them on rent, just use them up and get a new one when it's worn out.

So the communist-proposed idea of a minimum wage was and is necessary. Whether it should be a living wage, a starvation wage, or a nominal wage, that's a different argument altogether. It's been proven that it's better for a society to have its employees be paid in actual money.

"I'm not getting wet, so let's throw away the umbrella while in the middle of a thunderstorm" is maybe not so smart. We can talk about eliminating the minimum wage once we have a basic income or dividend sharing fund when our robot overlords take over.

[UTSoccerbro]

As idiots like you continue to not understand what big business does to the working class, our country will continue to depend on handouts from the government, which you love so much.






Surely, eliminating the min wage will increase the lower middle class' standard of living. Right?

I don't think you understand that raising the minimum wage would, in fact, HELP big corporations and screw every small/private business owner in America.

Walmart, Amazon, etc can all afford to absorb a higher minimum wage via efficiency at scale and automation. In fact, they'd love it, because it would inherently ruin every small to midsize business that was labor-intensive, meaning that the big corps would gobble up larger market shares.


But nah, let's just play the "screw the big guys" card arbitrarily and pat ourselves on the back for saying our pre-approved lefty line today.

[wesleysh21]

I am impressed by the depth and cogency of your argument. As I said, our countries have different standards of education.

Yes. We have many more people and many more case studies. Our system works on our scale, but we are headed in the wrong direction. Give me a bunch of white Australians (many of which are like Texans) and I'll change how we should approach things. But we don't have a bunch of Texans/Australians, we have a large group of people who are more than willing to milk the system. As I've said before, a person on welfare today lives better than a working class family in the 90s, 80s or prior. When you have elevated your welfare game to that level, its time to start recalibrating.

[wesleysh21]

I don't think you understand that raising the minimum wage would, in fact, HELP big corporations and screw every small/private business owner in America.

Walmart, Amazon, etc can all afford to absorb a higher minimum wage via efficiency at scale and automation. In fact, they'd love it, because it would inherently ruin every small to midsize business that was labor-intensive, meaning that the big corps would gobble up larger market shares.


But nah, let's just play the "screw the big guys" card arbitrarily and pat ourselves on the back for saying our pre-approved lefty line today.

Brilliant. Clearly you've led a life path that served you a healthy dose of red pills.

[UTSoccerbro]

Brilliant. Clearly you've led a life path that served you a healthy dose of red pills.

I mean I managed multiple small businesses while putting myself through college, ain't nothin like real life experience to teach you that classroom/textbook liberal economics are pretty useless in application. The market is the market, it doesn't give a **** about needs, emotions, or feelings.

[NYPat]

I don't think you understand that raising the minimum wage would, in fact, HELP big corporations and screw every small/private business owner in America.

Walmart, Amazon, etc can all afford to absorb a higher minimum wage via efficiency at scale and automation. In fact, they'd love it, because it would inherently ruin every small to midsize business that was labor-intensive, meaning that the big corps would gobble up larger market shares.


But nah, let's just play the "screw the big guys" card arbitrarily and pat ourselves on the back for saying our pre-approved lefty line today.

Min wage is not building America. It's a corporate welfare system for big business. Small businesses do not succeed by hiring min wage employees, big business does.

[NYPat]

Yes. We have many more people and many more case studies. Our system works on our scale, but we are headed in the wrong direction. Give me a bunch of white Australians (many of which are like Texans) and I'll change how we should approach things. But we don't have a bunch of Texans/Australians, we have a large group of people who are more than willing to milk the system. As I've said before, a person on welfare today lives better than a working class family in the 90s, 80s or prior. When you have elevated your welfare game to that level, its time to start recalibrating.

"Milk the system"... You mean like Walmart?