Minimum Wage

[LordKiran]

Wait, if I buy a lemonade from a kid do I have to put them through college?

Because that would affect my decision.

Children selling lemonade on their front yard is what you consider a business? That's not a business, that's a thing children do a few days out of the summer when the weather is good and then they pack that shit in. Even for you this argument is weak as shit.

 

[dismal]

Wait, if I buy a lemonade from a kid do I have to put them through college?

Because that would affect my decision.

Children selling lemonade on their front yard is what you consider a business? That's not a business, that's a thing children do a few days out of the summer when the weather is good and then they pack that shit in. Even for you this argument is weak as shit.

Ok when is the exact moment I take on the obligation for someone else's life?

If I pay a kid to make me a lemonade? If I pay an adult to make me a lemonade?

If I pay an adult to make me 3 lemonades?

If I pay an adult to make me and my friends as many lemonades as they want for a party? A 2 hour party? A 3 hour party?

Where exactly is the line drawn between it being a mutually voluntary transaction for a few lemonades to his entire well-being involuntarily becoming my responsibility?

 

[laughing dog]

Wait, if I buy a lemonade from a kid do I have to put them through college?

Because that would affect my decision.

Yep and that kid who swings the sign at Chick-Filet needs to afford a mansion because it's a job too.

Sometimes attempts at reductio ad absurdum result in simply in absurdum

 

[coloradoatheist]

Yep and that kid who swings the sign at Chick-Filet needs to afford a mansion because it's a job too.

Sometimes attempts at reductio ad absurdum result in simply in absurdum

Except that job of flipping the sign at Chick Filet was never meant to be a career and be able to support a family for it. It's to get experience working and get some spending money.

 

[laughing dog]

Sometimes attempts at reductio ad absurdum result in simply in absurdum

Except that job of flipping the sign at Chick Filet was never meant to be a career and be able to support a family for it. It's to get experience working and get some spending money.

What does that have to do with affording a mansion?

 

[coloradoatheist]

Except that job of flipping the sign at Chick Filet was never meant to be a career and be able to support a family for it. It's to get experience working and get some spending money.

What does that have to do with affording a mansion?

I think people overestimate what the min wage could buy at an earlier time. Instead of just using the general inflation number, I am very curious what min wage earners in 1980 bought compared to min wage earners today.

 

[laughing dog]

What does that have to do with affording a mansion?

I think people overestimate what the min wage could buy at an earlier time. Instead of just using the general inflation number, I am very curious what min wage earners in 1980 bought compared to min wage earners today.

What does that have to do with affording a mansion or college?

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think people overestimate what the min wage could buy at an earlier time. Instead of just using the general inflation number, I am very curious what min wage earners in 1980 bought compared to min wage earners today.

What does that have to do with affording a mansion or college?

This is where Jason and I do disagree and think that inflation has actually been overestimated. And the two areas, housing and college, along with health are the areas that have risen faster than the other inflation which has skewed inflation up would not have as big of impact on most min wage earners and that in min wage earners do purchase more than there predecessors.

 

[laughing dog]

What does that have to do with affording a mansion or college?

This is where Jason and I do disagree and think that inflation has actually been overestimated. And the two areas, housing and college, along with health are the areas that have risen faster than the other inflation which has skewed inflation up would not have as big of impact on most min wage earners and that in min wage earners do purchase more than there predecessors.

Inflation is the rate of change in the general level of prices. The different price indices all measure inflation. And there is no dispute that resulting measurements are inaccurate: they all measure the rate of change in the general level of prices in their indices.

There are reasons indicating that the resulting measures may be inaccurate in estimating the actual effects on well-being. The generally accepted estimates are that fixed weight indices over-estimate the effect on well-being by 1 to 2 percentage points (i.e. that a reported 3% increase in the CPI is really a 1 to 2 percent reduction in well-being). To my knowledge, there is no generally accepted estimates for the inaccuracy of chain-weighted indices.

In 1967, the federal minimum wage was 2.00 and the CPI as currently measured was 33.40. In 2016, the federal minimum wage was $7.25 and the CPI was 240.008. So, the annual rate of increase of the CPI (as measured) over those 39 years is (240/33.4)\(1/39\)-1 =5.18%. Using the 1 to 2 percentage point over-estimate interval, that means that if the 2016 federal minimum wage were to give the same level of estimated well being as $2.00 per hour in 1967, it would be between $2.00(1+0.0318)\(39\) = $6.78 and $2.00(1+0.0418)\(39\)=$9.87.
That suggests to me there is little reason to believe that the federal minimum wage today provides more well-being than it did in 1967.

Furthermore, your implicit argument that health care and housing "inflation" should be excluded from the estimates because those items are not large in the consumed market basket of most minimum wage earners is not terribly convincing, since we do not know what the market basket of minimum wage earners is. And, if one is being consistent, one would have to construct a market basket for minimum wage earners.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Wait, if I buy a lemonade from a kid do I have to put them through college?

Because that would affect my decision.

Children selling lemonade on their front yard is what you consider a business? That's not a business, that's a thing children do a few days out of the summer when the weather is good and then they pack that shit in. Even for you this argument is weak as shit.

Where do you draw the line between an employee that deserves a living wage and one that doesn't, then?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yep and that kid who swings the sign at Chick-Filet needs to afford a mansion because it's a job too.

Sometimes attempts at reductio ad absurdum result in simply in absurdum

Sometimes. He's got a point, though--where do you draw the line as to who deserves a living wage?

 

[laughing dog]

This is where Jason and I do disagree and think that inflation has actually been overestimated. And the two areas, housing and college, along with health are the areas that have risen faster than the other inflation which has skewed inflation up would not have as big of impact on most min wage earners and that in min wage earners do purchase more than there predecessors.

Inflation is the rate of change in the general level of prices. The different price indices all measure inflation. And there is no dispute that resulting measurements are inaccurate: they all measure the rate of change in the general level of prices in their indices.

There are reasons indicating that the resulting measures may be inaccurate in estimating the actual effects on well-being. The generally accepted estimates are that fixed weight indices over-estimate the effect on well-being by 1 to 2 percentage points (i.e. that a reported 3% increase in the CPI is really a 1 to 2 percent reduction in well-being). To my knowledge, there is no generally accepted estimates for the inaccuracy of chain-weighted indices.

In 1967, the federal minimum wage was 2.00 and the CPI as currently measured was 33.40. In 2016, the federal minimum wage was $7.25 and the CPI was 240.008. So, the annual rate of increase of the CPI (as measured) over those 39 years is (240/33.4)\(1/39\)-1 =5.18%. Using the 1 to 2 percentage point over-estimate interval, that means that if the 2016 federal minimum wage were to give the same level of estimated well being as $2.00 per hour in 1967, it would be between $2.00(1+0.0318)\(39\) = $6.78 and $2.00(1+0.0418)\(39\)=$9.87.
That suggests to me there is little reason to believe that the federal minimum wage today provides more well-being than it did in 1967.

Furthermore, your implicit argument that health care and housing "inflation" should be excluded from the estimates because those items are not large in the consumed market basket of most minimum wage earners is not terribly convincing, since we do not know what the market basket of minimum wage earners is. And, if one is being consistent, one would have to construct a market basket for minimum wage earners.

I noticed I made a mistake my analysis. The range is 49, not 39 years. That reduces the annual rate of inflation as measured by the CPI to 4.1% which makes the range for $5.57 to $8.92. That suggests to me that today's federal minimum wage does not provide more well-being than the one in 1967.

 

[laughing dog]

Sometimes attempts at reductio ad absurdum result in simply in absurdum

Sometimes. He's got a point, though--where do you draw the line as to who deserves a living wage?

The argument that workers ought to earn a living wage does not assume they work one or 3 hours a week but at full time employment.

 

[DBT]

Wait, if I buy a lemonade from a kid do I have to put them through college?

Because that would affect my decision.

Yep and that kid who swings the sign at Chick-Filet needs to afford a mansion because it's a job too.

Examples that miss the point of a huge power imbalance between employers and applicants that have very little bargaining power, enabling employers to no only offer the bare minimum rates, but allow no negotiation; take it or leave it even if the position is underpaid and the employer pockets a healthy profit. Perhaps with another investment property of his own in mind.....

 

[DBT]

Children selling lemonade on their front yard is what you consider a business? That's not a business, that's a thing children do a few days out of the summer when the weather is good and then they pack that shit in. Even for you this argument is weak as shit.

Where do you draw the line between an employee that deserves a living wage and one that doesn't, then?

Anyone who works full time, their time, skill and effort doing productive work should enable them to earn a decent wage...at considerably better rates than MW. Just as the pay and perks at the top end of town should be capped to given percentage above the average wage, a rate that rewards taking on added responsibility and skill but not at the astronomical rates we currently see being paid to both middle and upper management.

 

[dismal]

Yep and that kid who swings the sign at Chick-Filet needs to afford a mansion because it's a job too.

Examples that miss the point of a huge power imbalance between employers and applicants that have very little bargaining power, enabling employers to no only offer the bare minimum rates, but allow no negotiation; take it or leave it even if the position is underpaid and the employer pockets a healthy profit. Perhaps with another investment property of his own in mind.....

Meanwhile, back in reality, 98% of people make above minimum wage. For some unknown reason.

- - - Updated - - -

Where do you draw the line between an employee that deserves a living wage and one that doesn't, then?

Anyone who works full time, their time, skill and effort doing productive work should enable them to earn a decent wage...at considerably better rates than MW. Just as the pay and perks at the top end of town should be capped to given percentage above the average wage, a rate that rewards taking on added responsibility and skill but not at the astronomical rates we currently see being paid to both middle and upper management.

Ok, so if I don't hire someone "full time" I can pay what they are willing to accept?

 

[Horatio Parker]

I would add to that seniority.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I would add to that seniority.

Seniority is just a way of propping up unions by making it hard for workers to change jobs to get a better deal.

 

[DBT]

Examples that miss the point of a huge power imbalance between employers and applicants that have very little bargaining power, enabling employers to no only offer the bare minimum rates, but allow no negotiation; take it or leave it even if the position is underpaid and the employer pockets a healthy profit. Perhaps with another investment property of his own in mind.....

Meanwhile, back in reality, 98% of people make above minimum wage. For some unknown reason.

Middle class incomes have been stagnating for years, decades even. Which still doesn't address the huge gulf between high income earners and the pay rates for ordinary workers...which is the point I'm making and not just the issue of MW.

Ok, so if I don't hire someone "full time" I can pay what they are willing to accept?

You are dancing around the point of the sheer size of the disparity, which is still growing, between those at the top of the heap and practically everyone else below.

 

[KeepTalking]

Children selling lemonade on their front yard is what you consider a business? That's not a business, that's a thing children do a few days out of the summer when the weather is good and then they pack that shit in. Even for you this argument is weak as shit.

Ok when is the exact moment I take on the obligation for someone else's life?

If I pay a kid to make me a lemonade? If I pay an adult to make me a lemonade?

If I pay an adult to make me 3 lemonades?

If I pay an adult to make me and my friends as many lemonades as they want for a party? A 2 hour party? A 3 hour party?

Where exactly is the line drawn between it being a mutually voluntary transaction for a few lemonades to his entire well-being involuntarily becoming my responsibility?

The line is drawn when you own a business and you hire a direct employee in an ongoing basis to sell lemonade. Like when you open up an Orange Julius store in the mall, anyone you hire to work at that store must be paid the prevailing MW. You should also note that if you hired a kid who was previously running their own lemonade stand in their front yard, you have likely broken child labor laws.

Sometimes attempts at reductio ad absurdum result in simply in absurdum

Except that job of flipping the sign at Chick Filet was never meant to be a career and be able to support a family for it. It's to get experience working and get some spending money.

That employee is only put in a chicken suit and sent out to wave the sign when business is slow. At other times they will likely have other responsibilities like cooking, cleaning, or running the cash register. You know, things that are integral to operating a fast food restaurant. That person deserves to be properly compensated for the work they are doing throughout the day.

-------------

In other news, dismal and ca have arrived, so now this thread is properly fucked.