We are doing what we do best ... increasing costs and making things worse for everybody to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

The morons are also talking about rasing gas taxes too.

And I still know people that applaud this BS...I forwarded them the story!!!

The gushing MSM coverage of this ‘watershed’ event was sickening this morning. They are either deluded or truly believe that most Americans work for minimum wage.

Elitist? They define the word.

W signed it. He’s drunk with bill signing.

Aren’t the majority of those who earn minimum wage teens or beginning entry workers?

Minimum wage laws are supposed to help the young, inexperienced, often minority, worker. When the minimum wage is increased, the employer often cannot afford to keep workers who's contribution to the business (i.e., their marginal revenue product) is less than the new wage. The end result is that the employer fires the young, inexperienced, often minority, worker. About the only thing the minimum wage worker gets to enjoy in many cases is that if he had a job he'd be making more than he used to.

The folly of screwing around with the market is pretty easy to understand if you take the liberal stance to the extreme. If you can just arbitrarily set a wage for labor, why not pay everyone a minimum of $100/hour? This would tickle the liberals to death because everyone would now be "rich" and Obama's 55% tax rate would apply to everyone. What could be more fair?

Aren’t the majority of those who earn minimum wage teens or beginning entry workers?

Yes, but it sets the floor for wages, an artificial one at that. We aren't competitive on the world market because between the minimum wage and unions, we are forced to pay people far more than they are worth.

Let the free market set wages... the fair wage for a job is what someone will do that job for...

A while back, someone posted a chart from bls.gov that showed that something like 90% of people making minimum wage are under the age of 24... ie, teens working at grocery stores, etc. This is more smoke and mirrors from the Dems.

Trust me...I agree.

Oh duh, it’s right there in the article:

“Census data compiled by the Employment Policies Institute reveal that less than 1% of U.S. workers over 25 is earning the minimum wage. Who are these folks?”

In any event, this claim about it helping the working poor is BS. These are mostly teens/young people who are most likely living at home while going to school, etc.

i make minimum wage at my second job.. kinda.
i work as a bartender. so my hourly is minimum wage. but then add in the fact that i average $15/hour or more in tips.
so, now my boss will have to raise his prices to cover the fact that we all make a new wage, people will pay more and tip less.
minimum wage increase ends up turning into a wage cut for me.

“We aren’t competitive on the world market because between the minimum wage and unions, we are forced to pay people far more than they are worth.”

How much are you worth? Tell us what you do and how much you make, and let’s compare your compensation to someone doing the same thing in Mexico, India, China, etc.

You're right! Years ago I worked for the phone company and was in the Union. Everytime there is an increase in the minimum wage, the Union contract says that all workers will get the same PERCENTAGE increase in wages. It became a company policy.

So the so-called "GAP" between the rich and the poor never changes in that respect, prices go up to cover the increase, and the percentage that all bills go up, completely wipes out any pay increase received by the "poor".

It's merely the masterbation of good intentions by the liberals...feel-good, non-productive fodder to stand for bright, shiny beads for the natives. It's really funny how it always happens around election time, too.

Of course, the media isn't going to report any of this, as they have a socialist axe to grind, and their efforts toward that end are relentless.

You’re right. People will tend to give less $$ for their tip.

I don’t see smoke, I think it is pretty clear.
The Democratic Party is doing what it has always done; getting as many votes as money can buy.
Regardless of whose money, or how many self sufficient working people they ruin in the process.
In fact the latter only creates more people to pander to.
J.C.

“Employers inevitably pass wage increases onto consumers as higher prices for goods and services, which erodes the spending power of all consumers but especially the poor.”

But the salaries and commissions and bonuses and benefits of a company’s more generously compensated employees are not passed on to the consumer?

Republicans and conservatives really need worry about some issue other than this one. Do you realize what misers and elitists you sound like in this discussion? Lords of the manor? The truth is, every person earning their living in the USA is compensated much more than people doing the same thing in most of the world. But you people just want to zero in on the wage earner and pull them down to world levels.

If a business can’t pay minimum wage in the USA, then that business is so inefficient and, maybe just not needed in our economy, that we have no reason to try and prop up such businesses with low wages or even cheaper illegal immigrant labor.

Here’s the dirty little secret...we are ALL working for ‘minimum wages’. How so you ask? Our wages BECOME minimum when this piggish Govt. extorts way more than its fair share of your wages....that most of us have to work until June or July just to satisfy the tax burdens = minimum wages
for us producers and contributors! My friends we are chumps
being stolen blind by criminal politicians! More for them = less for us....yes ALL our wages are minimum and marginalized!

We should be able to negotiate freely with employers or employees. Once in a while, someone will offer to pay to work for you in order to gain experience. I believe that minimum wage laws are unconstitutional since the 1st Amendment includes the freedom to peaceably assemble.

“We should be able to negotiate freely with employers or employees. Once in a while, someone will offer to pay to work for you in order to gain experience. I believe that minimum wage laws are unconstitutional since the 1st Amendment includes the freedom to peaceably assemble.”

Finding the minimum wage unconstitutional because of the right to peaceably assemble is about as creative a finding an abortion right in a never mentioned right to privacy, and other liberal, activist approaches to the constitution.

This minimum wage issue is big loser for Republicans. Nothing sounds more miserly and greedy, particularly when it often comes from very affluent individuals.

We could also increase our competitiveness and create more jobs if we got rid of all child labor laws, and made slavery legal again.

And I’d like a comparison of what this columnist or editorial writer who wrote the article makes, comparing that to columnists in Mexico, India, China, etc. I feel sure this writer is paid far more than he or she is worth in the global economy. Don’t you feel we must adjust the compensation of all Americans, including business owners, to the average level in the global economy?

The MSM hopes it’s a watershed moment in that raising the minimum wage, perhaps the Left can get a large jump in unemployment rates to crow about for the next 4 months.

How much are you worth? Tell us what you do and how much you make, and let’s compare your compensation to someone doing the same thing in Mexico, India, China, etc.

The job is worth whatever someone is willing to do it for, at the same quality for the benefit of the company.

Companies responsibilities are not to provide jobs but rather make money, pure and simple. Anything the government puts in the way of this is interference.

It's not about PAYING the minimum wage...it's about the effect up the payroll...if miniumum wage goes up 70c, I have to raise ALL my employees 70c to keep the spacing in their employment right...so I raise my $8 guys to $8.70, etc...magritte

“The job is worth whatever someone is willing to do it for, at the same quality for the benefit of the company.”

A pretty weak dodge of the question. You want wage earners in the US to be compared to wage earners around the world. You think they are overcompensated.

ALL Americans, no matter what job they do, or what sort of business they own or manage, are overcompensated compared most others in the world. Not just wage earners, but business owners, professionals, physicians, attorneys, EVERYONE INCLUDING YOU is overcompensated compared to most of the world.

You are overcompensated for all the same reasons wage earners are. We once called that the American standard of living, and took pride in it, but now some, such as you, want to lower the living standards of some Americans, very likely so they can earn even more.

But, again, tell us what you do and how much you earn. We can then compare that to China, India, Mexico, to determine how much you are overcompensated. Just as you want wage earners to be compared.

This in the much abused category of unfunded mandate.

“It’s not about PAYING the minimum wage...it’s about the effect up the payroll...if miniumum wage goes up 70c, I have to raise ALL my employees 70c to keep the spacing in their employment right...so I raise my $8 guys to $8.70, etc...magritte”

What requires you to do that? Are you required by law to raise everyone? That’s nonsense. I’ve worked in a number of businesses and that was never the case. And, in a couple, minimum wage was paid to new hires and part timers, but minimum wage increases never caused increases of the entire scale because all employees who’d been around a year or more had progressed out of that range.

Maybe you just don’t pay competitive wages for your area if a minimum wage increase gives your other employees incentive - and opportunity - to find something better elsewhere.

It’s not the government’s job to make you or anyone else wage competitive by freezing or eliminating the minimum wage.

A pretty weak dodge of the question.

Actually, no, it answers your question dead on.

You are confusing compensation with profitability as well as quality of life. If it costs more to make a product, thus meaning it sells for a higher price, but the margin is higher, then it is more profitable. Lowest cost is not the only factor in whether a product is profitable.

Artificial limits, such as the minimum wage or labor unions are the only factors that cause overcompensation, as you put it. The other factors of cost and profitability are factors of the free market. If there is no profitability in any given job, they would all be shipped away to the lowest bidder (regardless of geographical location). However, we continue see many jobs being done here in the United States rather than in lower cost locations thereby making your point moot. If I am indeed overcompensated, the free market will replace me with a fairly compensated resource.

The fact remains, the fair wage for a job is what someone is willing to do that particular job for. This is a basic economic principle.

The Review-Journal here in Las Vegas had an interesting article on the subject yesterday. It highlighted one lady originally from Puerto Rico who has been a minimum wage worker for 18 YEARS. She says she needs $50 a week more to pay her bills. The Nevada MW increase is 70 cents per hour. I crunched the numbers and found it gives her $28 more per week, $168 per month and $2,016 per year. She will get more when the federal MW kicks in soon. Other increases are scheduled for next year.

Here are some important facts, using the lady’s situation.
Her current employer is a government contractor producing military clothing. It is reasonable to assume the lady’s productivity will NOT increase. Mandatory adjustments are made to the contract for any costs not included in the original bid. Hence the government will be paying the for the new MWs.

Smart private sector employers started raising prices long before effective date of the mandates. Many also started reducing staffs, cutting worker hours, dropped expansion plans, reduced non-labor costs, outsourced operations, and some are just going out of business. Multiply this situation across our economy and you have the law of unintended consequencies big time. It’s the old Roman bread and circuses act.

The lady will get her raise without having to work any harder. Since she has not advanced beyond entry level employment for 18 years makes it unlikely she will ever be promoted. Her buying power will not increase. A fast food burger she paid $5 last month will now be $6. The $50 more she needed to pay her weekly bills will now be $75.

The whole thing is just another liberal ponzi scheme.

All you’ve done is dodge the issue you yourself raised in your #8:

“We aren’t competitive on the world market because between the minimum wage and unions, we are forced to pay people far more than they are worth.”

You plainly want wage earners pay, who you plainly said are paid FAR MORE THAN THEY ARE WORTH - to be compared to wage earners in other parts of the word.

There is absolutely nothing special about you. You just want the advantages of the US economy for yourself while denying it to others.

You earn far more than you are worth. No matter what you do.

Come on. What do you do, and how much do you earn? Let’s determine how much you are overcompensated. There are wage, salary and profitability figures on the net for all sorts of job and business activities in different nations.

Zakeet

There ain’t no free lunch. Businesses are not in business to be the money tree for liberal’s feel good schemes. They have to make a profit. It’s called capitalism. Anything else is called socialism.

You are obviously a class envy a$$ of the first order.

Originally and Constitutionally, the value of the dollar was fixed to gold/silver. That connection was severed in 1933, partially restarted in 1946 and finally killed in 1971. That left the dollar with no basis save what someone chose to trade for it. To have meaning, however, a currency really does need to be fixed to something with an inherent value.

"Minimum wage jobs" are largely those which must be done for a business to survive, can be done by anyone, for which there is a basically endless supply of willing laborers. It's cheap work, but supply-and-demand historically means that work has consistently stable inherent value. For example, every business needs floors swept to function, and the cost (whatever the currency) of that task remains largely stable throughout any business anywhere and performed by anyone.

May I suggest that today, thanks to the "minimum wage" being mandated by fiat to $6.55/hr, the dollar is fixed to the value of 9.16 minutes of floor sweeping. As such, the Law of Supply and Demand will dictate that eventually prices will adjust to match. No matter what Congress decrees, a gallon of gas is worth about 40 minutes of floor sweeping: both are essentially stable commodities, are so deeply ingrained in our society as to maintain stable demand and value, and thus the currency used to buy/sell each will adjust in practical value to support and maintain that equivalence.

Ergo, certain facts about "minimum wage" are revealed:
- The value of $1 is fixed by act of Congress to 9.16 minutes of floor sweeping ($6.55/hr).
- As Congress increases the minimum wage, the value represented by a dollar naturally decreases.
- One reason gas price is so high is because Congress demands we pay so much for floor sweeping (etc.): a gallon of gas is simply not worth less than 40 minutes of floor sweeping, so if more pay is mandated the value of that payment unit (dollar) decreases accordingly.
- The notion of "minimum wage" equating to a "living wage" is a fallacy: such jobs simply are not worth enough to support a family of four, and increasing the "wage" simply results in devaluing the dollar to a point where it still isn't enough to live on.

Thoughts?

If you can just arbitrarily set a wage for labor, why not pay everyone a minimum of $100/hour?

If we did that, a dollar would be worth (in terms of stable commodities like gasoline) 1/15th of what it is now. Make an employer pay $100/hr to floor sweepers, and $100 comes to represent the value inherent to sweeping a floor for an hour.

Kinda like what's being demonstrated in Zimbabwe: being a billionare is no big deal if a unit of currency is worth basically zero.

“We aren’t competitive on the world market because between the minimum wage and unions, we are forced to pay people far more than they are worth.

Actually, I addressed the issue head on. We are shipping jobs overseas because we are not competitive. By the fact that we ship jobs overseas it demonstrates that tasks can be accomplished overseas in a more cost effective environment. As soon as it is more cost effective to do jobs here, the market would dictate they move back to the United States. As long as we have such artificial factors like the minimum wage and allow organized extortion groups to force employers to pay more than the job is worth, then we will continue to move jobs to more cost effective environments.

Come on. What do you do, and how much do you earn? Let’s determine how much you are overcompensated.

I neither belong to organized crime/extortion rings (aka labor unions) and I still have a job. Therefore by definition of the free market, I am not over compensated. Again, when my job can be replaced and produce in the same quality what I do at a lower cost, I would expect the free market to replace me.

Your points are well made: 1)you support government restrictions on business that favor the worker, even at the cost of the stockholders, and 2) You support people being given things they do not earn/deserve.

“2) You support people being given things they do not earn/deserve.”

You’re the one who supports that. You want people such as yourself to be paid far more for doing a job within the US than the same job can be done for overseas. Why not just cut your pay to say, Mexican or Indian level and insure that the job will remain here.

Anyone who looks at the current economic situation knows what’s happening. If the law (GOVERNMENT!) has made a treaty that allows it (and reduces tariffs back to the US), jobs are moved to cheap labor. Some jobs (maybe yours) are still protected by the government, as are many industries.

But nothing you say means anything unless you tell what you do and how much you make, and what government protection you might be benefiting from. Or, maybe you have a job that can’t be moved. But since you won’t give us details, it’s a waste of time to discuss this any further, and nothing you’ve said can be taken at face value.

Could an illegal immigrant do your job cheaper?

You’re the one who supports that.

Uh no... I am against the minimum wage and all labor unions. All of my points have supported that position.

Could an illegal immigrant do your job cheaper?

Absolutely not... An illegal immigrant would not be eligible for my job, therefore they can't "do" it at all. Being a legal resident is a prerequisite of my job.

Artificially increasing the cost of labor is always a bad idea because it distorts the free market. But the timing for this latest minimum-wage hike, amid a weak economy, could hardly be worse.

Well, the Wall Street Journal has this part right, but somehow they still think that an unlimited supply of illegal aliens dumped into the labour market has no effect. If I had to choose between the two, I'd still pick the minimum-wage hike.

“Absolutely not... An illegal immigrant would not be eligible for my job, therefore they can’t “do” it at all. Being a legal resident is a prerequisite of my job.”

That is so silly. Illegal aliens aren’t “eligible” to do any job in the US? But they are doing millions of jobs, including some classified jobs. Illegal aliens range from illiterate school drop-ups to Ph. Ds overstaying their visas. They can do any job in this country, and are doing jobs in practically every category.

Sounds like you have a job that limits competition through protectionism, or some other barrier to competition and the free market for labor.

...about as creative a finding an abortion right in a never mentioned right to privacy, and other liberal, activist approaches... create more jobs if we got rid of all child labor laws, and made slavery legal again

  Nope.. I'd have to put my foot down when it comes to involuntary servitude. The minimum wage started with unions trying to keep out the competition. Now, there are no $5/hour jobs left. Peaceable assembly without the ability to make reasonable contracts defeats the purpose of peaceable assembly. It's unconstitutional and even if it was constitutional, it causes great harm to the same people it purports to help. By definition, it eliminates low wage jobs.

“It’s unconstitutional and even if it was constitutional, it causes great harm to the same people it purports to help. By definition, it eliminates low wage jobs.”

Lol, it’s not unconstitutional. And if it was, it would be found in some commerce clause of the constitution, not in the Bill of Rights. What twisted logic. And I believe it’s 23 states that have their own minimum wage law.

The minimum wage laws exist for the same reason work safety laws exist: some employers must be required by law to treat employees humanely. Man will enslave his fellow man if allowed, and pay them nothing. We have several thousand years of history that attest to that. Man will also put children to work in dangerous situations if allowed. Plenty of history of that, both slavery and child labor still exists in the world.

Making slavery illegal eliminated jobs. Child labor laws eliminated jobs.

Sorry, I know unions gained too much power and have harmed many businesses, but they exist because of the way employers will treat employees if there is nothing to prevent it. The historical behavior of unions is commendable compared to the historical behavior of employers, and slave masters.

It’s all connected, and whining about the minimum wage just makes people look foolish, and it makes conservatives look like misers, and it costs Republican candidates votes.

And, as I’ve said, the government has no duty to make any business wage competitive. If a business isn’t successful enough to pay a reasonable wage, it’s best if that business fails.

But, I guess some can dream of all the new businesses and job creation we would see if we just made slavery and child labor legal again. And both of those were once definitely constitutional.

Yes, but it sets the floor for wages, an artificial one at that.

That is the key. Union wages are set based on the minimum wage. So as it goes up, so does the union scale. That is why the Dems love it, it keeps union thug donations flowing.

Good point.
The unions in my sector (education) take 1% of members’ incomes. Half of that 1% goes into political activism costs. Democrat activism. It stinks!

And, why do they (”all” union members) get a COLA? Some deserve MORE money, some deserve a PAY CUT. It depends on each workers’ productivity, and market conditions!

Collective bargaining is for communists. What a bunch of cowards, “afraid” of being “exploited” by “competition” (Read: consumer choices and voluntary trade). Cowardly bullies...

Exactly so

I don’t buy the FREEDOM=SLAVERY argument. Employees are free to seek the best wages. I’m paying above minimum wage and I wouldn’t think of going out and buying slaves. It’s unseemly!

“I don’t buy the FREEDOM=SLAVERY argument. Employees are free to seek the best wages. I’m paying above minimum wage and I wouldn’t think of going out and buying slaves. It’s unseemly!”

Nobody’s making a freedom=slavery argument. Slavery and child labor laws, and many other laws were put into effect because of the way employers (or slave masters) treated people in the past.

There’s a history that led to all the labor relations laws. At times things have swung too much to the employees advantage when unions were involved, but these issues have been around for more than century.

There is certainly a long history of socialism and the CPUSA continues to push for higher and higher minimum wages. I disagree with the idea of any minimum wage. It eliminates all jobs below the minimum wage. Since wages are competitive, employers can never be slave masters. Some employers, however, will become non-employers when the minimum wage is raised above the wage they are currently paying.

That is so silly. Illegal aliens aren’t “eligible” to do any job in the US?

Not sure what you mean here... I can assure you that someone without legal documentation could not fill my position. I'm not sure why you can't understand that legal proof of residence can be required for employment.

Let me restate: a requirement of my job is proof of legal residence. Therefore, by definition, an illegal alien can not fill my position. What part of this are you struggling with?

I'm assuming, based on your previous comments, that English may be a second language for you. To establish a basis to continue our discussion, here is a good site for you to reference: http://www.dictionary.com. It contains definitions to words used in the English language. This will help build a common basis for our discussion moving forward.

Sounds like you have a job that limits competition through protectionism...

Hmmm... I've never thought of the Constitution of the United States in this fashion, but if you say so...

Yep, the law of supply and demand escapes many people around here. If you read these threads not knowing better, you'd swear a huge number of people around here believed that there was some mysterious force behind gas prices and were anti-capitalists...

In the case of the minimum wage, it supports that fair compensation for a job is whatever someone will perform said job for (equilibrium). When you introduce an artificial force, such as the insane concept of minimum wage, you introduce a factor that skews the entire cost structure for jobs, from the bottom up.

A basic study in economics seems to be lacking for most people posting on FR these days...

“It eliminates all jobs below the minimum wage.”

Which is a good thing. I think the very high minimum wages of some European nations are ridiculous, and they probably do prevent job growth. But the US minimum was has always been at the lowest end of prevailing pay scales, and of the wage scales of the industrialized nations, whereas I believe some in Europe are in the $15-$20 per range.

I won’t be convinced that the US has any interest in providing marginal businesses with cheap labor. That’s also why I’m very much in favor strict enforcement of immigration and, and for severe penalties for employers who knowingly violate the law.

And something that’s rarely discussed are the numerous taxpayer funded subsidies to low end wages: Earned Income Tax Credits, food stamps, Medicaid (or unpaid medical bills that are added to the cost of everyone’s medical cost), various child medical insurance programs that add up to tens of billions in subsidies for low wages.

Why should government (the taxpayer) subsidize low wage job?

I’m against the minimum wage, all subsidies, public schools, the Department of Commerce, the Agriculture Department, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the income tax.