What should the minimum wage be in the United States?

[Rakehellion]

The question is how well though? If I had to I could feed my entire family for less than $40 a week.

Many people do. But $40 isn't enough to pay for rent.

 

[Rakehellion]

Minimum wage should be the minimum amount a company needs to pay to get what is required to complete the task(s) needed competently. The fallacy that a set minimum wage somehow helps anyone is based in ignorance.

Paying a worker more doesn't suddenly make them more skilled. Paying a worker less doesn't remove their basic requirements for shelter.

 

[Atreus21]

Unskilled people need to eat too.

That's right. And now that it's illegal to pay them market value for their labor, they are faced with starvation or the government dole.

 

[Atreus21]

What if it's a 30-year-old with a degree in engineering and the decision is whether to work 80 hours a week or steal for a living?

Well, it's his labor that's for sale isn't it? Don't you think that's up to him?

 

[Rakehellion]

Well, it's his labor that's for sale isn't it? Don't you think that's up to him?

That's the point. It's a false choice made under duress.

 

[PieIsAwesome]

$0.

The real solution is a Basic Income Guarantee. Then people can have $1/hour wages or whatever their labor is worth. Otherwise enjoy your social unrest as everyone fights for ever decreasing jobs and real wages.

 

[realibrad]

A lot of those things didn't exist in the 1700's.



You're forced to work somewhere. Survival isn't optional.



So the other option is to boycott Walmart, so they have to lay off employees?

I noticed that you did not respond to my point that you as well value someones labor at the lowest price possible. You are a hypocrite. Its terrible when people collectively do the same that you do, and thus push down the cost of labor because its slavery, but you as an individual it is just rational.

Walmart makes money, because it has found ways to make the cost of running much lower than any other company in that market. They not only save money on labor, but have worked out ways to make the supply chain as efficient as possible, thus further pushing down prices. Its pretty apparent you have little to no idea what point you are arguing. Your point that Walmart is modern slavery is disgusting and completely wrong.

 

[Rakehellion]

I noticed that you did not respond to my point that you as well value someones labor at the lowest price possible. You are a hypocrite. Its terrible when people collectively do the same that you do, and thus push down the cost of labor because its slavery, but you as an individual it is just rational.

I don't know what the fuck you're talking about. And I never said anything about slavery.

 

[Rakehellion]

Walmart makes money

Fuck Walmart. Their employees need to make money.

 

[MongGrel]

I don't know what the fuck you're talking about. And I never said anything about slavery.

You're on a real roll today

 

[MrColin]

I picked $0. Let the market decide. It's called economics. Let supply/demand of products dictate price as well as let supply/demand of skills and people dictate the wage they make.

If two factories sit side by side, one pays $2/hr, and the one next door pays $15/hr, where do you think the talent is going to go? The other factory will have to raise its wages if it wants any decent employees, and it will. Unless a monkey can do the job, and why pay $15 if it only takes a monkey?

Your theoretical econ 100 view of the issue ignores a whole galaxy of other real world concepts.

 

[Jaskalas]

$0.

The real solution is a Basic Income Guarantee. Then people can have $1/hour wages or whatever their labor is worth. Otherwise enjoy your social unrest as everyone fights for ever decreasing jobs and real wages.

That sounds kind of... palatable. :$

 

[xj0hnx]

For the people saying $0/hr, do you really think it should be acceptable for someone to get paid only 50 cents an hour for their labor?

No one is going to work anywhere that only pays $0.50 an hour, so it's a moot point at best.

 

[dmcowen674]

For the people saying $0/hr, do you really think it should be acceptable for someone to get paid only 50 cents an hour for their labor?

Where do you get 50 cents?

The overwhelming majority picked $0/hr

 

[dmcowen674]

No one is going to work anywhere that only pays $0.50 an hour, so it's a moot point at best.

When there is no choice people will do it.

 

[Rakehellion]

No one is going to work anywhere that only pays $0.50 an hour, so it's a moot point at best.

People work places that only pay $7.25 an hour.

 

[Rakehellion]

You're on a real roll today

Excellent retort. You should write it in your Livejournal.

 

[Rakehellion]

$0.

The real solution is a Basic Income Guarantee. Then people can have $1/hour wages or whatever their labor is worth. Otherwise enjoy your social unrest as everyone fights for ever decreasing jobs and real wages.

Welfare?

 

[Engineer]

Welfare?

Nah, the goal of the $0 min wage crowd is to also eliminate all forms of welfare too. Just imagine the number of workers lining up for a $2 hour factory job when there's no welfare.

But again, who is going to buy the stuff? Doesn't matter how cheap your labor is when you can't sell your products.

 

[xj0hnx]

When there is no choice people will do it.

Unfortunately for your argument, there are LOTS of choices.

People work places that only pay $7.25 an hour.

Which is a far, far cry from $0.50

 

[realibrad]

I don't know what the fuck you're talking about. And I never said anything about slavery.

You commented about my comment about Walmart being modern slavery. I liked your reply to mean that you also agreed that Walmart was modern slavery because of the context.

So, ill explain how you and the way you buy things is the reason Walmart pays its employees.

You see a CPU you want to buy. You don't just go to any place and pay what they are asking for it. Instead, you go online and shop around, or look through the adds to see if the CPU is on sale anywhere. You would never pay more for that CPU at tigerdirect when microcenter has it for $50 less. The retailers then look around, and realize they are not selling enough because their prices are too high. They come to the realization that they must somehow reduce their prices. If they have a large profit margin, they might cut it there. Its also true that they might be able to reduce the price of the CPU, by reducing other costs. So maybe they go with a different trucking company that does not cost as much, or maybe they move their warehouse to a place that has cheaper rent. All of this competition causes a downward pressure on the cost of transportation and production. One of the many factors of production and transportation is labor. So, if a worker is willing to get paid less, and the customer is always trying to pay the least amount for something they can, what is the logical step when all other expenses have been cut?

When you shop around, you create the cycle that puts downward pressure on wages. If you truly think that people should get paid more, open a business and try to pay people more. There is a reason companies dont pay more, and its competition to sell the cheapest product.

 

[Rakehellion]

Nah, the goal of the $0 min wage crowd is to also eliminate all forms of welfare too. Just imagine the number of workers lining up for a $2 hour factory job when there's no welfare.

So they're advocates of crime and homelessness?

 

[Vanth]

The choices available are too low. If corporate CEOs have a minimum of $10,000 per minute, why should the rest fumble in the gutter with $7.95 per hour? Let us all be rich and then we'll see just how special your fancy car and house really are.

 

[Engineer]

So they're advocates of crime and homelessness?

Homelessness? Not sure.

Crime? No. That's what all the guns are for.

 

[crashtech]

You commented about my comment about Walmart being modern slavery. I liked your reply to mean that you also agreed that Walmart was modern slavery because of the context.

So, ill explain how you and the way you buy things is the reason Walmart pays its employees.

You see a CPU you want to buy. You don't just go to any place and pay what they are asking for it. Instead, you go online and shop around, or look through the adds to see if the CPU is on sale anywhere. You would never pay more for that CPU at tigerdirect when microcenter has it for $50 less. The retailers then look around, and realize they are not selling enough because their prices are too high. They come to the realization that they must somehow reduce their prices. If they have a large profit margin, they might cut it there. Its also true that they might be able to reduce the price of the CPU, by reducing other costs. So maybe they go with a different trucking company that does not cost as much, or maybe they move their warehouse to a place that has cheaper rent. All of this competition causes a downward pressure on the cost of transportation and production. One of the many factors of production and transportation is labor. So, if a worker is willing to get paid less, and the customer is always trying to pay the least amount for something they can, what is the logical step when all other expenses have been cut?

When you shop around, you create the cycle that puts downward pressure on wages. If you truly think that people should get paid more, open a business and try to pay people more. There is a reason companies dont pay more, and its competition to sell the cheapest product.

Buying local as much as possible is a partial antidote to this race to the bottom. We see this now in the resurgence of farmer's markets, for example. But most people simply don't care, up until someone in a far away cubicle gives them the axe.