- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When did minimum wage become living wage?
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:13 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:13 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
in 1968 when the minimum wage was $1.60 an hour in terms of real dollars that equals $11.47 today. But the minimum wage is $7.25. Why hasn't the minimum wage even came close to keeping up with inflation? That's a legitimate beef, and makes it quite laughable when someone from that generation tells kids today "I survived on minimum wage, so can you" well yeah cuz your minimum wage was worth 140% of what today's is worth. Duh.
Why don't we leave it up to local governments to determine minimum wage? No way minimum wage should be the same in Monroe as it is in Manhattan. If you jack the MW to $15/hr in Manhattan, it won't do a thing, because very few people make less than that there, anyway. Raising it to $15 in Monroe would disrupt the economy.
Here are the minimum wages in my local area. Notice, that the urban wages are higher than the non-urban wages.
The wages reflect the cost of living in those areas. If you feel like the minimum wage is too low in your area, then work to raise it, but don't come up with some arbitrary number across the board.
1
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:16 pm to GurleyGirl
quote:
The concept began during the Obama administration.
“No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country.”
-FDR, 1933
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:18 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
Why don't we leave it up to local governments to determine minimum wage
Bingo. A national min wage is ridiculous
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:21 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:
So all merchants raise their product prices accordingly and the true cost is actually more than the 30-35% when payroll taxes are taken into consideration. So the consumer is really who pays for the increase in the minimum wage.
Except that ONCE again, we know from historical facts that that just isn't true. Prices barely move up when the minimum wage is increased.
Sure over time inflation causes huge increases , but its very easy to look at historical data and see that isn't true.
Let's go back to 1965 as we were discussing earlier. Minimum wage was $1.40 an hour. A McDonalds burger today cost $1.25 .
Let's put that in constant dollars so it's easier to figure out.
As explained earlier, in constant dollars the 1965 min wage was $10.97 an hour . And the constant cost of a hamburger was $1.18. Compared to $7.25 an hour and $1.25 today.
So we see that McDonalds prices have risen by roughly 5 percent since 1965 in terms of real dollars while the minimum wage has actually decreased in value by 34%. Which obviously results in a 39% real increase in prices for McDonalds food for min wage workers.
I would expect that if a person did the math across several industries one would find similar results.
And further, this math takes into account MULTIPLE min wage increases and it is easy to see that with McDonalds prices rising but 5% in 40 plus years that min wage increases do not cause a wild increase in product costs.
And really this is just common sense anyway because being a smart business McDonalds is already charging 100% of what consumers are willing to pay for their awful food. Customers are not going to say "oh well you raised the min wage? Yes then THAT that right there made your hamburger worth $2"
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:23 pm to piggilicious
quote:+1
always looking for handouts
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:24 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Why don't we leave it up to local governments to determine minimum wage
Bingo. A national min wage is ridiculous
Why? Oh maybe because you have three states that have ZERO minimum wage and 3 or 4 more that have min wages under $6/hr and we can't have that?
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:25 pm to jimbeam
quote:
When did minimum wage become living wage?
When the REALITY of what happens when Clinton shipped all the jobs out of the USA
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
that's when the boomers were 40-50 and older (aka, when they ran shite)
I think it also coincides with the time when the Democrat party started playing identity politics and started using tax revenue to buy votes.
You can blame that on the baby boomers, but rate of increase has accelerated with each subsequent generation, as they have become increasingly entitled...
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:37 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
You're seriously arguing that raising MW wage above natural wage floors doesn't cause inflation when you, yourself, just laid out that real MW has decreased over time and prices have largely stayed steady?
I think you just contradicted yourself.
And again, most economists worth their salt of any political stripe find MW to be an antiquated idea.
I think you just contradicted yourself.
And again, most economists worth their salt of any political stripe find MW to be an antiquated idea.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:49 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
sing MW wage above natural wage floor
I have a feeling that you really don't understand the topic at all. There is NOTHING natural about minimum wage floors. They are a completely artificual construct.
No doubt MW laws are antiquated, and if you wanted to get rid of them altogether I might be convinced . But in the meantime it makes NO sense to have a MW that is actually worth less than what it was 20-40 years ago.
And indeed the MW is worth less than what it was in 1965. However the truth is ver few make the min wage, so let's say $9 an hour is the true MW at McDonalds, that is still fully $2 an hour less than what it was in 1965, where has that $2 an hour gone Abu? It hasn't gone to taxes, because in actuality it taxes are lower than they were in the 60s. It most certainly hasn't one to food quality, oh that's right it went to the 990% increase in CEO pay right.
Specifically in regards to McD, its not even the local franchise, it's the corporation, they keep demanding a bigger and bigger share of profits, so much so that franchise owners actually protested a few years ago until McD corporate relented some.
Again, we are not a 100% free market, we are a compassionate , people driven market, and at some point you have to agree that those who have are taking advantage of those who don't . That's not a question. It's a fricking reality. The question part come in what do we as a country do about it? Do we continue allowing corporations to pad their fricking pocket while we pay out $153B in welfare to their employees each year? I think not.
McDonalds corporate has $2.4B in cash reserves. Why the frick are we paying welfare out to employees of corporations who have that kind of cash reverse laying around?
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:06 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
I have a feeling that you really don't understand the topic at all. There is NOTHING natural about minimum wage floors. They are a completely artificual construct.
On the contrary, I've studied it quite a bit. I have an advanced degree that covered quite a bit of this. It's artificial only so far as the purchasing power of the dollar is concerned. Otherwise, supply and demand for labor follows pretty well understood economics.
quote:
And indeed the MW is worth less than what it was in 1965. However the truth is ver few make the min wage, so let's say $9 an hour is the true MW at McDonalds, that is still fully $2 an hour less than what it was in 1965, where has that $2 an hour gone Abu? It hasn't gone to taxes, because in actuality it taxes are lower than they were in the 60s. It most certainly hasn't one to food quality, oh that's right it went to the 990% increase in CEO pay right.
The fact that you keep harping on this makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. That value went went a lot of other places - overseas labor, shareholders, CAPEX, some of it disappeared, etc. There isn't a 1:1 extraction from the worker to management, and it's idiotic to think that.
quote:
Specifically in regards to McD, its not even the local franchise, it's the corporation, they keep demanding a bigger and bigger share of profits, so much so that franchise owners actually protested a few years ago until McD corporate relented some.
Franchisees were upset at the licensing model? Stop the presses.
quote:
No doubt MW laws are antiquated, and if you wanted to get rid of them altogether I might be convinced . But in the meantime it makes NO sense to have a MW that is actually worth less than what it was 20-40 years ago.
Why? The global labor pool is far in excess of what it was fifty years ago. Technology is substituting for labor every single day at a rate that is exponential of what it was fifty years ago. So yes, let's up the MW and shite on the purchasing power of the dollar. Great idea.
quote:
Again, we are not a 100% free market, we are a compassionate , people driven market, and at some point you have to agree that those who have are taking advantage of those who don't . That's not a question. It's a fricking reality. The question part come in what do we as a country do about it? Do we continue allowing corporations to pad their fricking pocket while we pay out $153B in welfare to their employees each year? I think not.
I don't agree with "taking advantage". That's some 1930's labor style rah-rah bullshite.
You really think these firms are just going to eat the cost? Seriously? Have you ever worked in management in private industry? Do you think the purchasing power of the dollar is going to stay the same?
quote:
McDonalds corporate has $2.4B in cash reserves. Why the frick are we paying welfare out to employees of corporations who have that kind of cash reverse laying around?
Because they wouldn't have jobs otherwise? This isn't that hard. While McDonald's in particular has pretty good margins, the restaurant industry as a whole - even the fast food business - is small (~2.5%). Again, you're thinking in a 1:1 paradigm. Force a higher wage -> Automation and lay-offs -> Higher UE and slower growth -> lower payroll taxes. That is offsetting to whatever theoretical gains might be made from lifting some off welfare, and that's without accounting for purchasing power, especially when MW-pegged union salaries are taken into account. A few years later, the labor and currency markets settle back in.
In the end, MW doesn't really do anything. The dollar shakes out, the labor markets adjust, and nothing happens.
That "compassionate, people-driven" stuff? You know who thinks like that? Most of Europe. Where unemployment is out of control. Median income when taking into account PPP is absolute dogshit (even Germany and most of the Scandinavians don't compare here). Innovation is fractional compared to ours. Growth has been basically non-existent for a long time. Public debts are drowning their governments. On and on and on.
This post was edited on 6/7/17 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:18 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
Except that ONCE again, we know from historical facts that that just isn't true. Prices barely move up when the minimum wage is increased.
That's probably true historically but the increases have not been in the 40% range that you proposed earlier in the thread ($7.25 up to $10.5)
As I stated earlier most low skill positions in the KC area are paying more than MW.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:25 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
On the contrary, I've studied it quite a bit. I have an advanced degree that covered quite a bit of this. It's artificial only so far as the purchasing power of the dollar is concerned. Otherwise, supply and demand for labor follows pretty well understood economics.
Then why would you post about the minimum wage and natural wage floors. There is nothing natural about the minimum wage
quote:
The fact that you keep harping on this makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. That value went went a lot of other places - overseas labor, shareholders, CAPEX, some of it disappeared, etc. There isn't a 1:1 extraction from the worker to management, and it's idiotic to think that.
Of course the value went a lot of other places, does that somehow make it okay? You talk about shareholders, for example, and that is true, shareholders demand more of a share, and these corporations wanting more capital to expand even further, are happy to oblige.
But that is the entire point of laws like the minimum wage. Corporations are designed to do one thing, make the maximum amount of profit for their owners that they can legally make. Just the same as we tell corporatoins "no you can't just dump shite in the river , we know that would be the most profitable for YOU , but........." we also tell them, "no you can't just offer shite wages" that's already decided, the only real discussion is what level is shite wages.
quote:
Why? The global labor pool is far in excess of what it was fifty years ago. Technology is substituting for labor every single day at a rate that is exponential of what it was fifty years ago. So yes, let's up the MW and shite on the purchasing power of the dollar. Great idea.
What you are saying here doesn't make sense as a response to my statement that it doesn't make sense to have a MW law if the MW is set below where it should be. It might be a defense of not having any MW law, but that isn't the point you responded to.
quote:
I don't agree with "taking advantage". That's some 1930's labor style rah-rah bull shite.
Of course it is taking advantage when you hire a college educated hard working person at the same wage as you would hire a barely graduated high school slacker simply because the college educated person needs a job any job because jobs are scarce
quote:
In the end, MW doesn't really do anything. The dollar shakes out, the labor markets adjust, and nothing happens.
If that were true, you wouldn't be on her arguing vehemonously against raising it to 1960 levels.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:43 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:Just so I'm clear, are you saying that eliminating welfare would in effect be a corporate subsidy or "corporate welfare", somehow allowing them to pay lower wages (absent MW laws)?
To correctly call something a subsidy/"corporate welfare", it'd need to increase labor supply. I would see welfare as doing the exact opposite
If so, I think either you or I have a fundamental misunderstanding of the law of supply. You seem to think that dropping welfare would suddenly increase the supply of people willing to work for piddly wages, which would have the effect of lowering the market price. Seems to me the opposite would happen. There are plenty of people currently willing to work for MW simply because of welfare. If welfare goes away, MW isn't good enough to live anymore, so the supply of people willing to work for that wage will drop.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:44 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:Why would you assume it should be constant?
in terms of real dollars while the minimum wage has actually decreased in value by 34%
Manual labor is less valuable today than 1965 for MANY reasons.
First, much it can (and has been) be automated. If one was a good working a machien lathe in 1965--they were very valuable. Today, it takes one button push on the CNC to do the same output as 20 people. The value in manual labor is gone. The NPV in the machines is far higher.
Second, the skill conduct basic business operations had drastically declined. The degree of skill required to operate a cash register, make correct change, process and assemble an order, etc in 1965 is FAR FAR less than the computer managed processes of today. When was teh last time you saw anyone at a counter make change in their head?
Third, post 1965... you've had the rise of social benefits. Any honest comparison of 1965 to today should also account for the additional income and benefits a minimum wage earner gets from SNAP, CHIP, Medicaid, Section 8 housing, FHA, and other benefits that didn't exist at that time.
Asking taxpayers to pay for all of those things, then turning around and saying "AND pay for a liveable wage for everyone" is double-dipping.
quote:You appear to have confused prices wiht cost. You can often get a McD hamburger for $0.99. THe cost isn't $1.25. And the direct cost of the burger materials are NOT the full cost of operations. You're leaving out the cost of real-estate, taxes, insurance benefits, retirement plans and the like which have all seen marked increases far above inflation.
Which obviously results in a 39% real increase in prices for McDonalds food for min wage workers.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:45 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:WOW! That is some serious ignorance right there...
McDonalds corporate has $2.4B in cash reserves. Why the frick are we paying welfare out to employees of corporations who have that kind of cash reverse laying around?
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:46 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Just so I'm clear, are you saying that eliminating welfare would in effect be a corporate subsidy or "corporate welfare", somehow allowing them to pay lower wages (absent MW laws)?
If so, I think either you or I have a fundamental misunderstanding of the law of supply. You seem to think that dropping welfare would suddenly increase the supply of people willing to work for piddly wages, which would have the effect of lowering the market price. Seems to me the opposite would happen. There are plenty of people currently willing to work for MW simply because of welfare. If welfare goes away, MW isn't good enough to live anymore, so the supply of people willing to work for that wage will drop.
Correct. the net result would probably be that we would see more people resort to criminal activity and such.
Welfare encourages people to accept lower wage jobs there is no argument about that.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:52 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
One can make the argument that the social benefits should be eliminated in conjunction with a "living" wage. But... what about those that aren't responsible enough to manage their financial affairs given that "living" wage.
If they spend it on hookers and blow, then waste the rest of it... will we say "tough isht?" I doubt it. And in reality, we're talking about (mostly) people with a history of doing just that with their money.
The motivated and responsible people don't hold minimum wage jobs for long...
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:55 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:I don't see any confusion, he clearly said prices, not costs. The price of a burger at McD's has risen 39% in relation to MW. As in, what once cost a MW worker an hour of labor now costs 1.39 hours of labor.quote:
Which obviously results in a 39% real increase in prices for McDonalds food for min wage workers.
You appear to have confused prices wiht cost.
Posted on 6/7/17 at 1:55 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
If they spend it on hookers and blow, then waste the rest of it... will we say "tough isht?" I doubt it. And in reality, we're talking about (mostly) people with a history of doing just that with their money.
Agreed, and that is of course a concern. Doesn't do any good to say "okay were raising the min wage to a level where a single person doesn't qualify for welfare" if you then just turn around and change the level of welfare so the new MW qualifies
ALL I am concerned about here is making sure that the MW allows a single person to stay off welfare. That's it. I'm not even talking about a single mom with a kid. I'm talking about a single person making $8 an hour working full time qualifies for welfare. That's ridiculous.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News