64
180

[–] Gerplunckamo 64 points 180 points (+244|-64) ago 

Anyone else ready for the unemployment rate to skyrocket?

23
168

[–] Flaaffy 23 points 168 points (+191|-23) ago  (edited ago)

Actually, it wont. Obama made sure everyone who is unemployed and on the state will no longer count as being unemployed.

This way, statistics will show that the unemployment rate has dropped or not changed.

...Tricky Bastard.

0
88

[–] Echo_of_Savages 0 points 88 points (+88|-0) ago 

Always ask for the poverty rate instead of the unemployment rate. It's more eye - opening to the state of the economy

0
28

[–] battle 0 points 28 points (+28|-0) ago 

That's been going on for years.

0
11

[–] ThePieAssassin 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

Lets see how affordable that "Affordable" Health care act will be for those families that are no longer below the threshold for the government assistance.

0
4

[–] Azriel777 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Bush JR did something similar with including a lot of low wage jobs like working at McDonald as port of the job market report, which was originally for mid tier and higher jobs only, so it padded the unemployment numbers to make it look like there was plenty of jobs happening when it wasn't..

5
43

[–] Paranatural 5 points 43 points (+48|-5) ago 

Do you have any actual studies that demonstrate that it leads to unemployment?

4
25

[–] ReadShift 4 points 25 points (+29|-4) ago 

Here is another comment by brainbaobao with those studies you ordered:

https://voat.co/v/news/comments/324851/1246096

20
20

[–] Ripper 20 points 20 points (+40|-20) ago 

Well I am a manager that is trying to keep his department afloat and has to take in price of labor in the numbers that I present to justify my job and keep my bank from closing the doors. Real world struggle. We pay 15 bucks per hour but we do like to have a year or two experience on the job and able to justify their employment. Plus we like to think that a job producing a product is much more valuable than flipping burgers, or stocking shelves. What's the point of working hard if the same dip shit who plays GTA all day, gets paid the same as the guy who busts his ass. Why make yourself better? Study harder to get a leg up on others?

0
1

[–] pequenopete 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

http://www.cnbc.com/2014/02/18/1010-minimum-wage-could-hit-total-employment-cbo.html

"Raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10, as President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress are proposing, could result in about 500,000 jobs being lost by late 2016, the Congressional Budget Office estimated"

0
0

[–] Adonis_Von_Megadong 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I don't think it'll have a huge effect on employment rates, however we should expect to see a rise in price for many products. Depending on how much the price increase is, that could potentially negate the pay increase.

2
24

[–] ViolentlyMasticates 2 points 24 points (+26|-2) ago  (edited ago)

We recently raised the minimum wage in Australia, and despite a housing bubble and other issues, the unemployment rate has remained stable. We do this every year or so to keep in line with inflation, because, you know, that makes economic sense. If its not being at least minimally matched to inflation, it means that the minimum wage goes DOWN every year inflation goes up.

4
13

[–] dart200 4 points 13 points (+17|-4) ago 

get your proof outta here! Got no room for that in a libertarian wet dream!

14
13

[–] Rummel 14 points 13 points (+27|-14) ago 

I'm not a lazy Marxist, so ...yes?

6
83

[–] Hobnobs 6 points 83 points (+89|-6) ago 

My question is this, if everyone is making more money won't costs just go up to compensate? Won't employers just work people less ours, or fire employees to keep costs down. If they don't, costs will go up for consumers. It just seems like everything will eventually work out to be the same as it is now.

I think that raising the minimum wage is an easy sell. It's sexy, but it's just a band-aid. I DO think everyone has the right to earn a livable wage, especially if they're busting their ass 40 hours a week. What I feel we need more than a minimum wage increase is tax reform and better protections for low level jobs like retail and food service workers.

9
38

[–] Beowolve 9 points 38 points (+47|-9) ago 

Yes you are right. That is what happens. It isn't a permanent solution, just a bandaid on a bigger set of problems.

0
12

[–] tothetop 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

Do you have any evidence to support this? I feel like this gets thrown around but I haven't seen any evidence to support it.

3
10

[–] josemon 3 points 10 points (+13|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Yes and no. It depends on the business. A corporation like McDonald can afford it easy without rising their prices. They just pay less to make more profit. The rest, yeah somewhat. But more people will be able to afford more as well.People with a lot of money will be able to afford higher prices. In the end it is them that will suffer the most, having their money mean less compared to the average and they are the ones that will resist this the most. I think it's not a bad idea because of the amount of money the Feds have printed has already diluted the economy a lot, and the value of the dollar should reflect this, but doesn't. If they don't inflate eventually it will blow up, just like in Argentina (they were keeping the value of their peso at 1 USD but this did not reflect what was truly going on with their economy, only an illusion)

0
0

[–] Repetitivemotion 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

it's not a solution to all of our problems, clearly. But people are already working 60 hours a week and still barely paying their bills. Most companies will only have to raise prices by a quarter or two to afford the labor costs. Most people will actually be able to go out and buy products and services, increasing businesses cash flow. And if it was such an easy win as /u/Hobnobs said, then why is it such a hotly debated topic. Seems kind of the opposite.

3
28

[–] FreshieD 3 points 28 points (+31|-3) ago 

That assumes that the cost of goods is directly tied to the cost of labor, which isn't the case. The relative increase in prices is less than the relative increase in purchasing power that occurs with a higher minimum wage.

6
7

[–] 123_456 6 points 7 points (+13|-6) ago 

That assumes that the cost of goods is directly tied to the cost of labor, which isn't the case.

Nope. It has a direct connection. You're 100% wrong. Labor is the main cost to a business.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] PraiseIPU 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Costs go up about $0.30 to every dollar the minimum wage is raised. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/06/08/what-will-a-higher-minimum-wage-cost-you-at-mcdona.aspx

0
2

[–] Rigoleto 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I'm on my mobile so I can't link sources, but I'm pretty sure that prices don't double or anything to accomodate a wage increase like this. Prices will go up a buck or two but won't skyrocket. Some guy in a thread similar to this had a bunch of sources for it. I'll see if I can find it when I get home.

19
68

[–] 5forsilver 19 points 68 points (+87|-19) ago 

I see a lot of people against this in the thread. So then what is your alternative? people with jobs that mean they can't afford to live? doesn't everyone deserve to make a livable wage working 40 hours a week?

64
76

[–] Clayton 64 points 76 points (+140|-64) ago  (edited ago)

doesn't everyone deserve to make a livable wage working 40 hours a week?

No. Plain and simple. The cook at your local McDonalds should not be making $15/hour. They should be in high school, or attempting to further their education to get a higher paying job. Most people that make minimum wage are either working through high school, or they are not willing to further their education.

If someone wants more than minimum wage they should put in the effort to not make minimum wage. Want to make $20/hour? Study something other than a popular degree. Get a degree in something that actually makes sense and that is in high demand. Not something easy that everyone does just to slap a degree on their wall.

EDIT: Damn autocorrect

12
152

[–] brokenfingers 12 points 152 points (+164|-12) ago  (edited ago)

I'm not fan of the high minimum wage, but I have to disagree with your 'tough love' ideas here. You have to come to terms with the idea that there are a lot of people in this country that are not going to be scientists, or accountants, or any other college level career. Yet most of them are more than willing to put in a 40 hour work week and contribute to society. Should they be penalized because they don't fit into your particular view of being valuable citizens? I wouldn't argue they should have upper middle class incomes, but in my opinion anyone willing to put in a full week's worth of work should be paid a living wage.

1
66

[–] let_them_eat_slogans 1 points 66 points (+67|-1) ago  (edited ago)

If people aren't making enough money to live from their jobs, then they're going on benefits. Do you prefer paying for these people (and thus subsidizing the businesses they work for) through your tax dollars?

2
7

[–] Cody-WanKenobi 2 points 7 points (+9|-2) ago  (edited ago)

I work as a country club cook, providing quasi-fine dining. I only make $14/hr, but goddamnit I worked hard to get that rate. There is no way they are going to hike my pay up to 20/hr to maintain the same gap between McChef and me. I'll get a $1 raise that was already coming and make the same as a McChef who doesn't deserve $40k/yr. Fuck that. Fuck that yesterday and twice on Sunday.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

2
14

[–] let_them_eat_slogans 2 points 14 points (+16|-2) ago 

There's no real alternative.

You can raise the minimum wage, and force businesses to offer liveable wages.

You can keep wages low, and continue to subsidize low wage workers through your tax dollars via the social safety net.

Or you can keep wages low, cut the social safety net, and suffer the societal consequences of higher poverty rates (crime et al).

4
7

[–] dart200 4 points 7 points (+11|-4) ago 

I honestly don't see what's wrong with "forcing" them to be decent human beings and pay people liveable wages ...

5
3

[–] anonsfuckbuddy 5 points 3 points (+8|-5) ago 

Depends on if they have a family or not. If you're only paying for yourself, I'd say 10 dollars per hour is certainly bearable.

14
15

[–] Clayton 14 points 15 points (+29|-14) ago  (edited ago)

If you're making minimum wage and you have kids you should be reexamining your life's decisions while you're getting a degree to better your children's future instead of looking for the government to step in and save you. I have seen way too many kids have a poor childhood because their parents made minimum wage and refused to get a better education to support their family.

0
7

[–] yergi 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

...so I need to sire like 12 kids, right? Would that put rims on my car?

1
2

[–] Poco 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

doesn't everyone deserve to make a livable wage working 40 hours a week?

The problem with that is who decides which jobs qualify or why? If I want to watch TV for 40 hours a week who is going to pay me to do it?

Do I deserve a livable wage for doing anything?

If not then why should I be guaranteed one for other types of work that do not deserve minimum wage? Why is it legal for me to watch 40 hours of TV for free but illegal for you to give me any money to do it below 40*minimum wage? What happens between the free and $600? Does it mean that I need to be paid under the table? No income tax?

If I don't deserve a livable wage for doing literally anything then I don't deserve it for doing the job that is worth $5 a week or one worth $10 a week.

Do you pay the kid down the block $600 a week to mow your lawn? Why not? What if you were the only lawn that he mows? Should you be fined and jailed for not paying him enough?

80
51

[–] brother_tempus 80 points 51 points (+131|-80) ago 

The goal of the minimum wage is to outlaw low paying jobs for the unskilled and inexperienced. The law, simply, says: it is illegal, and therefore criminal, for anyone to hire anyone else below the level of X dollars an hour. This means, plainly and simply, that a large number of free and voluntary wage contracts are now outlawed and hence that there will be a large amount of unemployment. Remember that the minimum wage law provides no jobs; it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs ( unemployment ) are the inevitable result.

Even the CBO agrees : http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-rt-us-usa-wage-cbo-20140218,0,274811.story

Remember this is the first version. As history will show with the CBO,500k lost jobs will be a conservative estimate with the revisions going higher and higher

And as we have seen with every raise in the minimum wage .. jobs have disappeared

Even in Seatlle we see this now :

http://shiftwa.org/more-seattle-restaurants-close-doors-as-15-minimum-wage-approaches/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2015/04/30/and-here-is-as-we-said-the-effect-of-seattles-15-an-hour-minimum-wage-on-employment/

14
222

[–] brainbaobao 14 points 222 points (+236|-14) ago  (edited ago)

I have academic studies that support the claim that raising the minimum wage does not hike unemployment. I'd trust studies from notable universities over news articles.

http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage-2013-02.pdf

http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/166-08.pdf

http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/157-07.pdf

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.5661&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Also, your articles on Seattle's unemployment aren't based on data. Here is unemployment data from wa.gov. As you can see, the number of people looking for jobs in washington went down. Shouldn't it have went up if massive numbers of people were laid off?

https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/employmentdata/docs/economic-reports/mer-2015-06.pdf

edit: added seattle

3
55

[–] flyawayhigh [S] 3 points 55 points (+58|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Edit: @brainbaobao did a much better job than I did on the studies here, so I cut that part out of this reply. (Less reading for all):D

THE BIG PICTURE

Minimum wage is very low compared to historical standards when the economy was better. If nothing else, we know that we can have a good economy with a much higher minimum wage, since we have before. Our economic problems lie elsewhere.

What this clearly shows is ... the minimum wage is not responsible for bad economics, even if some would lose their jobs in the immediate aftermath. But that too, is tenuous, as the above studies show.

2
15

[–] MaryJanesBestBud 2 points 15 points (+17|-2) ago 

I really like that you took the time to write this all out. Any way we could get a tldr?

0
9

[–] Gake_The_Cake 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

I would upvoat you, but I'm 1 point away from that. So instead I'll simply give my kudos.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 5 points 69 points (+74|-5) ago 

[Deleted]

5
32

[–] redshelled 5 points 32 points (+37|-5) ago 

Agreed. That guy just spews this illusion of libertarianism and in another thread he tried to rewrite the left right spectrum to agree with his opinion. It's crazy. It's a very limited study and imo isn't even applicable.

[–] [deleted] 6 points 16 points (+22|-6) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] jpw42 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Small business are getting destroyed by laws like this if you want to only have Applebees and TGIFridays to choose form and when you feel like a good pizza from a ma and pop shop and all you can find is a Pizza hut you will be happy that you had a chart.Small businesses can not afford to train in someone at 15 dollars a hour. A large business can because they have more employees to offset the expense of a non productive trainee. So yes I would say that one pizza shop closing is relevant.

0
0

[–] A_Scanner_Darkly 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

You pay an employee because they allow you to make more money. You are willing to pay them up to the ammount of additional profit that hiring them can make you. If a "minimum wage" is set at a value above the ammount of additional profit that an employee can generate than you won't hire them. That is simple logic.

1
6

[–] let_them_eat_slogans 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

The goal of the minimum wage is to outlaw low paying jobs for the unskilled and inexperienced. The law, simply, says: it is illegal, and therefore criminal, for anyone to hire anyone else below the level of X dollars an hour. This means, plainly and simply, that a large number of free and voluntary wage contracts are now outlawed and hence that there will be a large amount of unemployment.

Are you arguing that if minimum wage rises to x$, that all jobs below x$ will disappear? Because that's not how it works.

Remember this is the first version. As history will show with the CBO,500k lost jobs will be a conservative estimate with the revisions going higher and higher

I like how you cite the CBO that 500k jobs will be lost, and ignore the part where they say that the wage hike will lift almost a million Americans out of poverty.

I mean do you have any evidence, any numbers to support your narrative? All you did was cite a couple of blog posts with anecdotes about a couple restaurants closing. Sure, some businesses might go under, but these are businesses that aren't paying their employees enough to live. That means you are paying the difference through your tax dollars to subsidize these businesses already.

2
-1

[–] brother_tempus 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

Are you arguing that if minimum wage rises to x$, that all jobs below x$ will disappear?

Pretty much ... they will either be outsourced, shuttered or be filled by the black market

I like how you cite the CBO that 500k jobs will be lost, and ignore the part where they say that the wage hike will lift almost a million Americans out of poverty.

At the cost of 1/2 a million losings their jobs to do so ... that is too high a price as well ass an immoral one to impose.

By your logic if killing 500,000 people saves a milliion, than an acceptable exchange .... absolutely evil

I mean do you have any evidence,

Already sourced and you are ignoring

Because that's not how it works.

Source?

0
4

[–] TheBrokenWorld 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I bet you're the kind of person who would whine about people receiving foodstamps too.

Not everyone can get a job that pays them enough to support their family (there isn't an unlimited supply of jobs, especially decent paying jobs), so even with a full time job they have to depend on foodstamps to supplement their income. How would you suggest that situation be remedied?

1
0

[–] brother_tempus 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

I bet you're the kind of person who would whine about people receiving foodstamps too.

Yeh becuase the government stole from me to do so and its agianst the law for government to do that

everyone can get a job

Not my problem ...

How would you suggest that situation be remedied?

By government getting out of the way and stop these unconstituional subsidies that create a dependent class that sponges off those in the country who actually produce

21
43

[–] battle 21 points 43 points (+64|-21) ago 

Bernie Sanders has ideas that are SO GOOD THEY MUST BE MANDATORY AND ENFORCED BY LAW.

4
51

[–] defiantKITTY 4 points 51 points (+55|-4) ago 

That's the whole point... he's a legislator.

5
3

[–] revanyo 5 points 3 points (+8|-5) ago 

You dont see legislators making laws that make higher education mandatory, exercise mandatory, or drinking water mandatory.

1
3

[–] 1253861? 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Well, if you want to see what it looks like when we don't use the law to force businesses to act in the interests of their workers, look at what the economy was like back in the 1900s. A few tycoons became extremely rich by exploiting their workers for every penny and ounce of effort they could.

Asking businesses to police themselves doesn't work by itself because people are greedy and almost always want to work for their own best interests. Even today, Google only even got into the Internet Service Provider industry because the poor state of the service provided by the current ISPs was harming their potential profits.

Sure, total government control doesn't work either (see: 1984), but this is one of the things that needs to be enforced by law or it won't be done at all.

And raising the minimum wage overall seems likely to raise prices by a small amount (some studies say about 0.7 percent for every 10 percent increase), decrease employment by a small amount, and raise about double the number of people out of poverty (even though that still would be a small number of the people currently in poverty).

0
1

[–] Thehealbus 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Isn't that every law?

0
0

[–] minusthebearplus44 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I think I see what you did there!

8
39

[–] dabork 8 points 39 points (+47|-8) ago 

Whenever the wage debate comes up I always hear the same thing. "People flipping burgers shouldn't be making X amount of dollars an hour!" It's usually followed by some weak justification like "Doctors and firefighters only make Y per hour!" or "They should be bettering themselves or looking for a better job". Well that's all a crock of shit if you ask me and it reeks of greed. What you're really saying is "why should a person who I view as inferior to myself or someone else based on their occupation get paid a similar amount?" This ridiculous notion so many people seem to have that occupations should all be some kind of ranking system for your worth as a human and have a matching pay scale is a detriment to society. Yes, people who are critical to the foundations of life itself should get paid a little more than people who simply enhance our lives or provide convenience to us, but that doesn't mean the gap needs to be astronomical. It's also a little infuriating that everyone seems to view look down on the people that actually affect their lives the most. Sure, your doctor keeps you alive, but you see him maybe a few times a year unless you have a condition. You rely on the guy who flips your burger or cleans your toilet or mows your lawn or cleans your car or delivers your pizza several times a month. Also take into account that not everyone in life is profit driven or wants to dedicate their lives to their occupations and is merely looking for something that offers enough for them to live comfortably like the people they serve on a daily basis, albeit on a smaller scale. I've delivered pizza, I've been a line cook in multiple restaurants, I've been a telemarketer, an IT technician, and now I detail rich peoples' cars. All jobs that people seem to take for granted and most of which could benefit greatly from an improved wage. I have been genuinely happy with every job I have ever had except telemarketing, but that was my first job ever and I hate talking on the phone. To see people constantly berating me to always be on the hunt for something better and try to make me feel bad for enjoying the work I did, regardless of how "important" the work was, used to be really discouraging. I've met people who have been doing the same job for 20 years who can do it better than anyone I've ever met have to take a second job just to make ends meet because somebody decided the person building the Pizza Hut was twice as important as the person working in it. Get out of this outdated thinking. Just because your parents and grandparents told you that the only way to be happy in life was to work as hard as possible and never be happy with anything other than the absolute best, doesn't mean it's true. Stop underestimating the value of the people around you because of their uniform. We're all humans and we all deserve to live a rich and happy life based on our own motivations. Money is driving a wedge between us all, and that's exactly what the people running the show want.

0
16

[–] Poco 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

Your are correct that anyone who is starting their argument with "This person doesn't deserve that much money" is a jerk. No one should be looked down just because of the job they have or their skill set.

That said, the straight up economics of it would suggest that people will only get paid by a business if they can produce more value than they are paid.

Let's say you run a business and sell widgets for $10 and it costs you $9 to produce the widgets. Let's say that $4 of that cost is wages and you are currently paying minimum wage. If minimum wage were to double then the cost of producing your widgets might go up by $4 and now it costs you $13 to produce each widget.

If the market for the widgets is highly elastic then there is a very good chance that people don't want to pay $13 for the widget. The $10 price was set based on what people were willing to pay, not based on how much it costs to produce.

If the market is inelastic then they might be able to charge $14 a widget and still sell just as many. However, if that was the case then you would likely already be selling them for $14 per widget and making even more money than you do now. There is probably some competition that is pushing the price down to $10 per widget.

So then the problem come if your competition is going to be affected by the minimum wage the same way you are. What if their cost is also $9 but they have a more automated process so only $2 of their cost is wages. Their cost would go up to $11 and now they are selling it for $12, undercutting you by $2.

Unless you can find a way to optimize your production then you might very well go out of business and have to layoff your staff and find a new line of business yourself. They can get jobs somewhere else, and so can you, but in the mean time you have been negatively impacted by the rise in minimum wage.

This is the real, non-emotional, problem that can happen. Not because they are being looked down upon or because they are worth less or don't deserve the money, but because the wages make it cost too much to produce a product in their current line of business.

1
14

[–] 1252693? 1 points 14 points (+15|-1) ago 

Ok, but over the last 3 generations the value of the individual hasn't been raised to their actual production value.

2
2

[–] tothetop 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

I agree that this will likely happen if the minimum wage is increased. My issue though is why should the owner of the company be protected to make a profit on the widgets while the workers get shafted and have to work a second job or something? In my mind, if your company can't produce the widgets while paying your workers a livable wage, you are doing something wrong. If that company collapses, a different company that can do both will take its place if there is enough demand for the widget.

In my opinion, this draws a lot of attention to things like overseas manufacturing that drive the price down. It's good for individual consumers because they can purchase things for cheaper, but it drastically reduces the number of consumers in the US that can spend money.

It seems like a society where more people can buy widgets sold on a smaller profit margin is better than one where fewer people can buy them on a larger profit margin, and both would theoretically result in profits for the company.

1
1

[–] Hand-Banana 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

But we don't really produce anymore. Most min wage jobs are service jobs. And there employees make many times their wage for the employer. Everything else would have already left for countries where the labor savings far outweigh shipping it in.

0
6

[–] XPS 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

It's not that the less educated or less industrious don't deserve to have the good life or whatever you want to call it, it's that it erases or denigrates the work those who are already there did to get it. No one likes to see people get what they worked hard for without doing likewise. I feel the same about student loan forgiveness, mortgage debt forgiveness, financial oppression through confiscating saved funds in a bank during crisis, why do the irresponsible get off while I paid and get fucked? It's the same sort of feeling going on here. If it were really true that all wages would get a bump up, I don't think anyone would cry out as much. I don't care as much as I make well above 15 but if I was around that amount I would be annoyed. Those guys will get a raise too but I bet it won't be by the same amount as those at the minimum now. People will see that as a clawback.

People also just assume businesses will eat the costs to do this. They won't. It will get passed along to the consumer and long term eliminated through efficiency whether technological or lowering in service or quality. I'm not saying it isn't the right thing to happen but people will see prices rise in a visible way and that gives reason to complain.

0
1

[–] Isaak 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

"I had it bad when I was your age, so you should too otherwise I'll feel that it's unfair" isn't a healthy view to have. The quality of living is supposed to get better for everyone as time goes on.

1
1

[–] pitapityparty 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago  (edited ago)

No one likes to see people get what they worked hard for without doing likewise.

So you're faced with two alternatives: one in which you make $X, and those who didn't work as hard make less, and one in which you still make $X, and those who didn't work as hard also make $X. To me, a bystander, I'm drawn towards the former latter, since more people are better off. Did you work hard so you could make a living and maybe follow a passion, or did you work hard to feel superior to others?

1
3

[–] aScott 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Finally, some sense. Thank you.

0
2

[–] lolol42 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

People aren't saying that they, as people are less meaningful or valuable. Their labor is worth less. Labor is a product like anything else, and it is harmful to mandate minimum prices that are higher than it is worth. What if they decided that to help the grain industry, the minimum any store could charge for bread was $5/loaf? Would everyone just pony up? No, they would buy other kinds of bread, or make their own.

6
26

[–] dv1155 6 points 26 points (+32|-6) ago 

I employ about 10 people that work for about $10 per hour. If this law passed tomorrow, I would lay off all of them. It simply wouldn't make economic sense with the margin on the product I'm producing.

1
13

[–] battle 1 points 13 points (+14|-1) ago 

Pay 'em all $10 an hour under the table. It's like giving them a raise.

3
7

[–] KoKansei 3 points 7 points (+10|-3) ago 

This. The only thing this kind of idiotic legislation does is expand the role of the black market. It's no coincidence that the most robust black markets are found in highly socialist countries.

0
6

[–] HaveABidet 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Why ALL of them?

2
15

[–] dv1155 2 points 15 points (+17|-2) ago 

Adding 50% to the cost of labor would make the profit margin negative. I wouldn't be able to compete against competitors that make similar products in China.

5
3

[–] trumpetjock 5 points 3 points (+8|-5) ago  (edited ago)

That doesn't make any sense. If your business can survive you laying off 10 people, want wouldn't you just do that now? Second, your business is really on such a tight margin that you can't offset 2000 a month (see edit) in wages with a small price per unit increase, but you're moving enough product to employ 10 ftes?

Edit -- 2000 a week, not month. My original points still stand.

3
9

[–] yergi 3 points 9 points (+12|-3) ago 

WHOOSH!

He's saying that the business will close.

2
5

[–] dv1155 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago 

A 50% increase is way more than $2k. It doesnt seem like you have even a basic grasp of business or economics. A small price increase means a huge decline in sales when your competitors can pay pennies an hour for labor in China.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] dv1155 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Of course. Liberals hate small business as small business is the only real path to prosperity for ordinary Americans. Prosperous Americans don't need government handouts to live, therefor they're less likely to vote Democrat. The more people who prosper and succeed, the less power the Democrats have. This is why every year the government makes it harder and harder to run a small business.

Not only that, but it wins brownie points with ignorant young adults who have no idea how the real world works and think you can just legislate a pay increase for everyone and magically the laws of economics and math don't apply. It's a win-win for the left.

5
24

[–] RectalLeakage 5 points 24 points (+29|-5) ago 

Minimum wage chases cost of living, cost of living chases inflation, which is caused by minimum wage increases. The cycle continues.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 23 points (+23|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
8

[–] theoldguy 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

0
3

[–] SirKeyboardCommando 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I don't know much about economy stuff, doesn't deflation mean your money is worth more today than it was yesterday? Doesn't that make it hard to get people to spend it? I've always been under the impression that deflation is bad and ideally you want a consistent very very small amount of inflation.

0
1

[–] Hand-Banana 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Right.. and all of this QE had nothing to do with inflation but some min wage increase will.

0
1

[–] Ridonkulousley 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

"chases" makes this seem like a quick process, it is not. This process of minimum wage increase leading to a cost of living increase is a slow process that will take years, there will be incremental increases (some within the short period after minimum wage increases) but nothing 1:1 in the short term.

0
0

[–] caveman1337 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Inflation is caused by more money being printed. What increased minimum wage does is give a larger portion of profits to the people actually working instead of going into shareholders' pockets and becoming stagnant in their massive bank accounts. More circulation of our current money reduces the need to print more bills, thus slowing down inflation.

load more comments ▼ (80 remaining)