Disaster greater than San Andreas to hit LA by 2020

[bleubird]

$50 straw man,really?

 

[DBT]

Doesn't change the point that restaurants in Australia, and other parts of the world, are able to pay a reasonable wage to their employees, yet are still able to profit from their business. It can be done. It is being done.

And you continue to ignore the effect of training wages. Both have similar effects except a when it's keyed to those just starting out it means later failures have no path back into the labor force.

That's not what happens in practice. Not here, at least. Training rate is for a set period, three months (offhand) allowing workers to hone their skill and are able to perform their allocated tasks efficiently. At which point they get the full rate rate of pay. Which is a reasonably fair system.

 

[zorq]

Small gradual increases in minimum wage have been applied in the past. These small gradual increases have shown to be, at a minimum, non-toxic to the overall economy. Humongous, fast increases to minimum wage have never been applied anywhere before (to my knowledge) so their effects on the economy are unknown. The unknown can be scary.

We do know that lots of big changes hurt the economy in the short term which is why new laws and regulations that are likely to cause a big change are usually phased in slowly.

Does this sufficiently answer the question of why we don't need a $50 minimum wage right now?
Will the right wingers continue to insist they are unaware of the simplest economic principals that investors and capital are afraid of changes? Why are they playing silly games like this?

 

[bilby]

Small gradual increases in minimum wage have been applied in the past. These small gradual increases have shown to be, at a minimum, non-toxic to the overall economy. Humongous, fast increases to minimum wage have never been applied anywhere before (to my knowledge) so their effects on the economy are unknown. The unknown can be scary.

We do know that lots of big changes hurt the economy in the short term which is why new laws and regulations that are likely to cause a big change are usually phased in slowly.

Does this sufficiently answer the question of why we don't need a $50 minimum wage right now?
Will the right wingers continue to insist they are unaware of the simplest economic principals that investors and capital are afraid of changes? Why are they playing silly games like this?

Because they are right whingers.

 

[Metaphor]

Damn, I was hoping this thread would discuss geology and plate tectonics. I was looking forward to beach-front property.

#1. Cheer yourself with Natalie Merchant's San Andreas Fault.

#2. Lex Luthor already tried sinking California into the sea, and it would'a worked if Superman hadn't interfered. But if Lex Luthor can't do it, movements in the minimum wage won't.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=13974

The 1931 Davis-Bacon Act, requiring "prevailing" wages on federally assisted construction projects, was supported by the idea that it would keep contractors from using "cheap colored labor" to underbid contractors using white labor.

In other words, it's a Jim Crow law. You support Jim Crow??

Whoa deja vu.

Was this about not allowing local blacks to work or about not allowing companies to get working crews from a great distance, and a much cheaper wage, to do the work?

Note "colored".

This is by no means the only place you'll find this, it was just the first I came up with with Google.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[dismal]

$50 straw man,really?

It's not a "strawman", it's a magically powerful argument that is impossible to seriously rebut. It causes all high MW defenders to criticize the messenger rather than engage in the content of why it would or wouldn't be desirable.

 

[dismal]

Small gradual increases in minimum wage have been applied in the past. These small gradual increases have shown to be, at a minimum, non-toxic to the overall economy. Humongous, fast increases to minimum wage have never been applied anywhere before (to my knowledge) so their effects on the economy are unknown. The unknown can be scary.

We do know that lots of big changes hurt the economy in the short term which is why new laws and regulations that are likely to cause a big change are usually phased in slowly.

Does this sufficiently answer the question of why we don't need a $50 minimum wage right now?
Will the right wingers continue to insist they are unaware of the simplest economic principals that investors and capital are afraid of changes? Why are they playing silly games like this?

So we don't know what effects higher wages might cause?

Have we not yet developed models that allow us to predict such things?

If we are operating in complete ignorance on questions of how people react to changes in the cost of things, why are we confident that $15 wages would cause only good things to happen like "people will have more money to spend in restaurants"?

 

[bleubird]

$50 straw man,really?

It's not a "strawman", it's a magically powerful argument that is impossible to seriously rebut. It causes all high MW defenders to criticize the messenger rather than engage in the content of why it would or wouldn't be desirable.

Has $50 minimum ever been proposed?No.However,a reasonable increase that matches inflation of the cost of living has been proposed.
I know the food service industry.If your BIG MAC cost $.50 more you and most consumers will not even notice.

 

[ksen]

Small gradual increases in minimum wage have been applied in the past. These small gradual increases have shown to be, at a minimum, non-toxic to the overall economy. Humongous, fast increases to minimum wage have never been applied anywhere before (to my knowledge) so their effects on the economy are unknown. The unknown can be scary.

We do know that lots of big changes hurt the economy in the short term which is why new laws and regulations that are likely to cause a big change are usually phased in slowly.

Does this sufficiently answer the question of why we don't need a $50 minimum wage right now?
Will the right wingers continue to insist they are unaware of the simplest economic principals that investors and capital are afraid of changes? Why are they playing silly games like this?

So we don't know what effects higher wages might cause?

That's not what he said . . . but you knew that already.

 

[dismal]

So we don't know what effects higher wages might cause?

That's not what he said . . . but you knew that already.

Ok, if we know what effects higher wages might cause what are they?

- - - Updated - - -

It's not a "strawman", it's a magically powerful argument that is impossible to seriously rebut. It causes all high MW defenders to criticize the messenger rather than engage in the content of why it would or wouldn't be desirable.

Has $50 minimum ever been proposed?No.However,a reasonable increase that matches inflation of the cost of living has been proposed.
I know the food service industry.If your BIG MAC cost $.50 more you and most consumers will not even notice.

I proposed it earlier. In light of all the claims higher minimum wages cause no harm of any kind to anyone.

Are you officially coming out against it because it will make Big Macs too expensive?

 

[NobleSavage]

There is obviously no down side to raising the minimum wage so why don't we make it $350 hr?

 

[Perspicuo]

There is obviously no down side to raising the minimum wage so why don't we make it $350 hr?

If it's alright to cross the road, why not lie on the road and take a nap there?

(That's called a 'slippery slope' argument)

 

[dismal]

There is obviously no down side to raising the minimum wage so why don't we make it $350 hr?

Good question. Good luck getting it answered here.

- - - Updated - - -

There is obviously no down side to raising the minimum wage so why don't we make it $350 hr?

If it's alright to cross the road, why not lie on the road and take a nap there?

(That's called a 'slippery slope' argument)

This rebuttal seems to contain a premise that a minimum wage increase can cause bad things to happen.

If no one can identify what those things are this premise is flawed, and the analogy fails.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Oh, horrors. The minimum wage. What has really happened in the third of a century since Ronald the Conqueror took office is that millionaires (similar to him) contribute far less to the country (or nothing, if they go off-shore) and that the filthy rich are far filthier and own a much larger share of the wealth. They own the G.O.P. They have a Supreme Court that they must love, just now. They have a "news" network that is busy convincing working class folks that the Republicans are their friends. It's not quite at the level to use the word Orwellian, but that's the basic trend. Yes, OP, God (or rational thinking) save us from the hard right.

 

[James Brown]

There is obviously no down side to raising the minimum wage so why don't we make it $350 hr?

If there is no upside to raising the minimum wage, why not lower it to a dollar an hour?

 

[dismal]

There is obviously no down side to raising the minimum wage so why don't we make it $350 hr?

If there is no upside to raising the minimum wage, why not lower it to a dollar an hour?

It's my understanding there are countries that have no minimum wage at all.

Think of all the free lunches they are missing out on.

 

[ksen]

If there is no upside to raising the minimum wage, why not lower it to a dollar an hour?

It's my understanding there are countries that have no minimum wage at all.

Think of all the free lunches they are missing out on.

Which countries are those?

- - - Updated - - -

Are you saying a $50 minimum wage would cause bad things to happen?

What sort of bad things?

Not necessarily. However if done too quickly, like most things having to do with the economy, there would probably be some unemployment effects.

 

[fromderinside]

If there is no upside to raising the minimum wage, why not lower it to a dollar an hour?

It's my understanding there are countries that have no minimum wage at all.

Think of all the free lunches they are missing out on.

So instead of playing this $50 no minimum wage game we begin concentrating on what has been learned about raising the minimum wage.

For your enjoyment;

Minimum Wage Mythbusters http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm

A few nuggets:

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.
Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.
Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.
Myth: Increasing the minimum wage is bad for the economy.
Not true: Since 1938, the federal minimum wage has been increased 22 times. For more than 75 years, real GDP per capita has steadily increased, even when the minimum wage has been raised.
Myth: Raising the federal minimum wage won't benefit workers in states where the hourly minimum rate is already higher than the federal minimum.
Not true: Only 23 states and the District of Columbia currently have a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum, meaning a majority of states have an hourly minimum rate at or below the federal minimum. Increasing the federal minimum wage will boost the earnings for some 28 million low-wage workers nationwide. That includes workers in those states already earning above the current federal minimum. Raising the federal minimum wage is an important part of strengthening the economy. A raise for minimum wage earners will put more money in more families' pockets, which will be spent on goods and services, stimulating economic growth locally and nationally.

Myth: Only part-time workers are paid the minimum wage.
Not true: About 53 percent of all minimum wage earners are full-time workers, and minimum wage workers contributed almost half (46 percent) of their household's wage and salary income in 2011. Moreover, more than 88 percent of those who would benefit from raising the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 are working adults, and 55 percent are working women.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage lacks public support.
Not true: Raising the federal minimum wage is an issue with broad popular support. Polls conducted since February 2013 when President Obama first called on Congress to increase the minimum wage have consistently shown that an overwhelming majority of Americans support an increase.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage is bad for businesses.
Not true: Academic research has shown that higher wages sharply reduce employee turnover which can reduce employment and training costs.

OK. I'm in. Quit whining and dodging. Please try to successfully dispute the above claim.

If not where do we send the shove crew to bury the BS, which I assume will be proven if you don't counter, you pipe.

 

[dismal]

It's my understanding there are countries that have no minimum wage at all.

Think of all the free lunches they are missing out on.

Which countries are those?

According to Wikipedia they include such hellholes as Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates, Austria, Italy, Lichtenstein and Denmark.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you saying a $50 minimum wage would cause bad things to happen?

What sort of bad things?

Not necessarily. However if done too quickly, like most things having to do with the economy, there would probably be some unemployment effects.

So, it's the speed of change that causes the (as yet unspecified) problems not the amount? You could get to that $50 or $350 minimum wage if you did it gradually?