$15/hour min wage - opposition op-ed on Slate.com

[senseamp]

...right, which generally is heralded by liberals as another means by which the poor are disenfranchised. Now, senseamp sounds like a cold-hearted conservative, expecting people to adapt. It's confusing. I thought liberals didn't concede that minimum wage had any affect on unemployment, outsourcing, automation, etc.

What's confusing? Progressives are fine with progress. And for welfare to help people as they adjust to it.

 

[blankslate]

What might happen and what would be best I feel is that the Federal minimum wage goes up a few dollars and some cities like Seattle as an example go above and beyond that in stages. Seattle last I heard is raising theirs to $15 dollars in stages so local businesses have time to adapt.

If a companies business model requires a low wage then they may very well be forcing tax payers like you and me to subsidize their labor costs when that employee may have to apply for benefits if that low wage paycheck doesn't go far enough...

Not every place has a high cost of living but local city, county and state governments raising theirs above the Federal minimum wage where appropriate is something that I do not object to.


....

 

[Atreus21]

I think your worldview of ideology is a little bit over-generalized. I don't find very many liberals here in CA, particularly in bastions like Silicon Valley or SF, that would honestly argue that because automation might disenfranchise some low-income people that suddenly we should actively work against the idea of technological progress. It's become inevitable, at least in the minds of millennial liberals.

I suppose that's possible.

 

[fskimospy]

mmmI've seen contradictory studies.

It's just an impression I got: Liberals tend to view increased automation as threatening to wages and workers, the same way they view outsourcing. Woolfe was on here awhile back talking about how automation will inevitably lead to widespread unemployment which would require an equally widespread social safety net.

Well that's definitely true. In fact that's the whole goal of technology: 100% unemployment.

If we have machines that can take care of every need we have we can spend our whole lives doing whatever we want instead of worrying about survival or prosperity. It's true that automation concentrates wealth and so it needs a public policy response, but that's just life.

I can't say I know any liberals that oppose increased automation. I think it's more of a case that both liberals and conservatives oppose outsourcing and automation when they think their job is the one that might be automated or outsourced.

In terms of economics, you must admit you tend to lean more to the right than your other liberal colleagues on this board.

Maybe, but I doubt you would classify me as a conservative.

 

[senseamp]

Oops, wrong thread

 

[Atreus21]

Here's what the Republicans on SCOTUS believe, verbatim from Citizens United:

Yep, Republicans actually believe this crap.

This is related to the OP?

 

[ivwshane]

Very nice! So several of the jobs you originally listed do in fact make more than $15 but we will ignore that fact and focus on the ones that make less. I would say that of the jobs posted that make less than $15, all of them should be making more. So your arguement appears to be that we shouldn't be raising the minimum wage because people who you think shouldn't be making more money will now be making more money along with other people who you feel should be making more money. I don't think I need to tell you why that's a stupid arguement to make

Or is your arguement that you feel no one should be making more money? Or are you one of those "let the market decide" types who seem to forget what has happened in the past when the market "decided" what people were worth?

Do you ever contribute anything worthy to a debate/conversation?



/Facepalm, I already said it. I understand you guys are lazy, but come the fuck on? Read the article. It has sources at every single part.

And no, I didn't say, "on average", nor did I say every single one of them. Why would you compare AVERAGE salaries to MINIMUM wages? The point was simply that making the minimum wage $15/hr will put you over what many of those professions are being paid.

I said $15/hr was "over or within the ballpark of" what the professions made. W

It's like you're children that we have to spoon feed everything to.

 

[ivwshane]

What might happen and what would be best I feel is that the Federal minimum wage goes up a few dollars and some cities like Seattle as an example go above and beyond that in stages. Seattle last I heard is raising theirs to $15 dollars in stages so local businesses have time to adapt.

If a companies business model requires a low wage then they may very well be forcing tax payers like you and me to subsidize their labor costs when that employee may have to apply for benefits if that low wage paycheck doesn't go far enough...

Not every place has a high cost of living but local city, county and state governments raising theirs above the Federal minimum wage where appropriate is something that I do not object to.


....

We already subsidize their costs!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoc...t-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/

The problem with your thinking (the bolded) is that the minimum wage at the local levels are not being raised. In fact the states with the lowest wages are typically the states that have the highest use of government assistance.

Now you could argue that if the federal government gets out of the way and removes all federal assistance then the local government will have to act/adjust but then you'd have to be prepared for the consequences of such actions if those local governments do anything at all. I don't see that happening, no politician would stand behind the consequences (short term or not) nor would the public be ok with it (especially if crime started rising).

 

[werepossum]

What might happen and what would be best I feel is that the Federal minimum wage goes up a few dollars and some cities like Seattle as an example go above and beyond that in stages. Seattle last I heard is raising theirs to $15 dollars in stages so local businesses have time to adapt.

If a companies business model requires a low wage then they may very well be forcing tax payers like you and me to subsidize their labor costs when that employee may have to apply for benefits if that low wage paycheck doesn't go far enough...

Not every place has a high cost of living but local city, county and state governments raising theirs above the Federal minimum wage where appropriate is something that I do not object to. ....

I don't completely agree, but well said. I especially agree that high cost cities, counties and perhaps even states need their own, higher minimum wages. Otherwise minimum wage work isn't worth doing. A wage that will get one a decent life in Frog Level Tennessee is below starvation in New York City.