Obama to raise minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011.

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

You guys said that after the last minimum wage hike, yet our small businesses are still here. You right wingers are really amazing economists, I have to tell you. Ah well, I guess I just have to get used to 4 years of disaster predictions from you guys.

This just reminds me of the 90's. I've never seen a 'doomed' economy run so well.

the last time minimum wage was hiked a lot of the people you'd think of doing minimum wage jobs were earning significantly more than minimum wage. moving minimum wage from 5.25 to 6.55 doesn't do much of anything when cashiers and baggers at grocery stores are making $8.25, but you'll note the installation of self checkouts all over the place.

 

[biostud]

if the minimum wage is raised the buying power of the poorest increase, and so they will gain in wealth. Since they will use the money to buy groceries etc., the money will be redistributed on the market and thus increase trade.

Raising the minimum will have little effect for people already earning more than the minimum wage, but will have a huge effect for the poorest in the country. And a minimum wage of $9.5 is nothing.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

When are the libs ever going to learn that "MINIMUM" wage != "living" wage. Sheesh. Bunch of F'n morons.

They SHOULD be the same thing. If you are going to set a minimum, why would it not be the minimum needed to live decently?



By the way, there is a clear double standard here. Has anyone here turned down a raise "because it would cause inflation"? Has any of you criticized a family member for getting a raise because "I don't want my dollar devalued"? Has anyone ever criticized a CEO $25 mil bonus for causing inflation? This is RIDICULOUS.

No one gives a damn about wages, until it's the poorest people, and then suddenly the whole economic system hinges on them making half the liviing wage, or else "we all suffer the evils of inflation!!"

No they shouldn't be the same thing. Minimum wage was to prevent "abusively" low wages for people. It was not intended to be "livable"(however you define it).

And no, there is no double standard. A "raise" is earned and negotiated(or not) between you and your employer. Artificially raising minimum wage is a FEDERAL GOV'T inserting itself into that process. You people are amazing... /me shakes head...

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: eskimospy

You guys said that after the last minimum wage hike, yet our small businesses are still here. You right wingers are really amazing economists, I have to tell you. Ah well, I guess I just have to get used to 4 years of disaster predictions from you guys.

This just reminds me of the 90's. I've never seen a 'doomed' economy run so well.

the last time minimum wage was hiked a lot of the people you'd think of doing minimum wage jobs were earning significantly more than minimum wage. moving minimum wage from 5.25 to 6.55 doesn't do much of anything when cashiers and baggers at grocery stores are making $8.25, but you'll note the installation of self checkouts all over the place.

Changes to minimum wages will not impact technology and how it sometimes replaces man power. We will always continue to advance like that.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: biostud
if the minimum wage is raised the buying power of the poorest increase, and so they will gain in wealth. Since they will use the money to buy groceries etc., the money will be redistributed on the market and thus increase trade.

Raising the minimum will have little effect for people already earning more than the minimum wage, but will have a huge effect for the poorest in the country. And a minimum wage of $9.5 is nothing.

the majority of people making minimum wage live under mommy and daddy's roof.

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Changes to minimum wages will not impact technology and how it sometimes replaces man power. We will always continue to advance like that.

why wouldn't changes to the minimum wage not impact that? those machines aren't cheap. with cashiers it wasn't necessarily the mimimum wage doing it, like i and others have said, cashiers make $8+ an hour. so obviously there was a tipping point.


there are two ways of digging ditches, one using a team of guys with shovels, and other using 1 guy with a backhoe. the guy wanting the ditch dug will pick the cheaper option. if the government suddenly comes in and says you have to pay the guys with shovels a lot more than what they would otherwise ask for, the guy with the backhoe becomes more attractive. at some point, the guy with the backhoe becomes cheaper. that is why the skilled unions want the minimum wage way up in the teens.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: biostud
if the minimum wage is raised the buying power of the poorest increase, and so they will gain in wealth. Since they will use the money to buy groceries etc., the money will be redistributed on the market and thus increase trade.

Raising the minimum will have little effect for people already earning more than the minimum wage, but will have a huge effect for the poorest in the country. And a minimum wage of $9.5 is nothing.

the majority of people making minimum wage live under mommy and daddy's roof.

But some don't and we need to adjust for inflation.


As stated in my previous posts though, my position on it depends on the state of the econ by 2011. I have confidence that Obama feels the same way. The man clearly has priorities.

 

[JS80]

lol reading threads like these remind me why history repeats itself over and over

 

[MikeyLSU]

the people this really hurts is those that make around $9.50 now and a little up.

They will see no increase in income and will now be making minimum wage. While price of good very well can/will go up.

I agree we don't need to have sweatshops with people making $5 a day. But I have no reason to believe that would happen if we got rid of minimum wage alltogether. I really think the market would work it out to a fair wage and it would probably be around the current $6-$8 range(since that is what many of the fast food places pay).

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: ICRS
Please lets not make this political.

http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy

Increase the Minimum Wage: As president, Obama will raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011 and index it to inflation so full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and housing ? things so many people take for granted.

Personally I think it is good, hopefully he also abolishes the arcane practice of allowing tip pay to go towards the minimum wage requirement. This $9.50 should apply to all jobs and tip should never count towards it.

P&N'd

ATOT Moderator ElFenix

That still isn't enough to raise a family on at all, and as mentioned it'll just make a lot of the basic shit cost more.

That said, smackdonalds pays like 8.50+ now around here anyway so it really doesn't matter.

 

[Excelsior]

Hey everyone, isn't this only supposed to apply to those working full time? The 'living wage' thing was never meant to be for those working part time....so what is the big deal.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

the majority of people making minimum wage live under mommy and daddy's roof.

But some don't and we need to adjust for inflation.


As stated in my previous posts though, my position on it depends on the state of the econ by 2011. I have confidence that Obama feels the same way. The man clearly has priorities.

historically the government inflation number has overstated inflation because it does not account for quality improvements or shifts in consumer spending.

inflation should not be taken into account for the minimum wage. rather, minimum wage should be set where the workers affected are able to gain the maximum aggregate benefit. that is actually where the FLSA says the minimum wage should be. but you won't find the politicians asking where that might be.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
the people this really hurts is those that make around $9.50 now and a little up.

They will see no increase in income and will now be making minimum wage. While price of good very well can/will go up.

I agree we don't need to have sweatshops with people making $5 a day. But I have no reason to believe that would happen if we got rid of minimum wage alltogether. I really think the market would work it out to a fair wage and it would probably be around the current $6-$8 range(since that is what many of the fast food places pay).

That's why I think we should get the econ rolling first and get the working middle class spending again. That will cause growth and market competition which will keep the prices in check. It won't completely prevent them going up at all, but it will be very reasonable.

 

[txrandom]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: txrandom

Originally posted by: ICRS
Please lets not make this political.

http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy

Increase the Minimum Wage: As president, Obama will raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011 and index it to inflation so full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and housing ? things so many people take for granted.

Personally I think it is good, hopefully he also abolishes the arcane practice of allowing tip pay to go towards the minimum wage requirement. This $9.50 should apply to all jobs and tip should never count towards it.

Minimum wage isn't just for waiters. Waiters don't even make minimum wage. If the minimum wage is raised to $9.50, they'll get paid $5.27 rather than $2.13.

Waiters make minmum wage if their tips do not equal minimum wage. The $2.13 gets bumped up by the resturaunt.

Department of Labor link regarding tips.

Yep, it's common knowledge that waiters will be reimbursed if they don't meet the minimum wage level. Most waiters make more than minimum wage because of tips.

 

[ICRS]

Originally posted by: Excelsior
Hey everyone, isn't this only supposed to apply to those working full time? The 'living wage' thing was never meant to be for those working part time....so what is the big deal.

No this proposal applies to all. He references the minimum wage. Also I agree it should apply to all.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Amused
Welcome to Carter part 2.

The similarities in events leading up to his election are stunningly similar, and so are his beliefs and policies. If you ask me, I would predict an admin as huge of a failure as Carter's. And no, I'm not Republican.

BTW, this actually hurts the lowest wage earners, just as corporate taxes do... because all it means is an increase in the prices of goods and services they use everyday and can already barely afford.

In case you're not old enough to remember, Carter brought us double digit inflation. I predict the same will happen in this admin... and the feds will not be able to stop it as business is forced to raise prices to cover higher taxes and wages.

Wasn't that the birth of stagflation?

And to control inflation, Carter tried strongarming the Fed to bend to his will. Reagan got it under control, but he did it by simply getting the hell out of the way and letting the Fed do its job.

And you Fail at history, too

Instead of posting nothing but "you fail" comments, how about you back it up?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

When are the libs ever going to learn that "MINIMUM" wage != "living" wage. Sheesh. Bunch of F'n morons.

Be better to put everyone other than the rich into slavery eh?

How does a minimum wage help anybody, Dave? Do explain.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Why not look at minimum wage adjusted for inflation? A lot of fiscal conservatives automatically oppose any and all minimum wage increases. Do you guys not realize that if we never increased the minimum wage, there would be people out there making $1 or 2/hr? Is that in any way helpful to those people?

http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/anth484/minwage.html

 

[MikeyLSU]

one of the graphs that plot the poverty line.

If I have that correct, a family of 2 that makes $45,000 a year is the poverty line?

Really, I know that is not well off, but come on.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Where are you getting that from? The graph you're referring to says that ~$22,500 a year (adjusted for inflation) is considered the poverty line for a family of four (not one person).

 

[OCGuy]

More jobs going over-seas. More increases in the cost of goods and services. People will need more money to counteract the increases. Dems will again raise minimum wage.

What a fucked up pattern.

 

[MikeyLSU]

ok, sorry I misread, but I don't understand, they have a family of 4 poverty line at $22,000 and say you can't get that if only 1 person works.

Why the hell would only 1 person work. I know well off families that have 2 workers.

Basically you are above the poverty line if you work. Because 2 people making minimum wage will make over that.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
More jobs going over-seas. More increases in the cost of goods and services. People will need more money to counteract the increases. Dems will again raise minimum wage.

What a fucked up pattern.

^ This guy gets it... why can't our government?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
ok, sorry I misread, but I don't understand, they have a family of 4 poverty line at $22,000 and say you can't get that if only 1 person works.

Why the hell would only 1 person work. I know well off families that have 2 workers.

Basically you are above the poverty line if you work. Because 2 people making minimum wage will make over that.

Example: 1 adult. 3 kids.

 

[MikeyLSU]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
ok, sorry I misread, but I don't understand, they have a family of 4 poverty line at $22,000 and say you can't get that if only 1 person works.

Why the hell would only 1 person work. I know well off families that have 2 workers.

Basically you are above the poverty line if you work. Because 2 people making minimum wage will make over that.

Example: 1 adult. 3 kids.

heh, in that example I have other choice words.

But they should specify if they mean single parents of 3 as a "family of 4"

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
ok, sorry I misread, but I don't understand, they have a family of 4 poverty line at $22,000 and say you can't get that if only 1 person works.

Why the hell would only 1 person work. I know well off families that have 2 workers.

Basically you are above the poverty line if you work. Because 2 people making minimum wage will make over that.

Example: 1 adult. 3 kids.

heh, in that example I have other choice words.

But they should specify if they mean single parents of 3 as a "family of 4"

I'm sure you do but remember that a great many of these 1 adult/3 kids families used to be 2 adults/3 kids families.