Underhill
Well-Known Member
Then I think we agree that minimum wage is a guessing game?
I don't know if I would go that far. But it isn't cut and dry. It affects different places in different ways.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Nice Going Governor.. 15 an hour for Fast Food Workers across the State of New York. oh boy.....
- Thread starter Twilight Hue
- Start date
I don't know if I would go that far. But it isn't cut and dry. It affects different places in different ways.
Then I think we agree that minimum wage is a guessing game?
It may be for you, but for most of the country, minimum wage is not something you guess, its something decided by the government, if you don't like it you can vote against it, or run for office.
That's my point, it's subjective because everyone's goal post is different.
I'm saying we need something more concise and that we can account for...
I think you're missing context here...
Yes, you're correct in what you said but its little off topic. I don't like and I won't vote for it. Thanks
Underhill
Well-Known Member
Like what? Economic policy is almost never concise.
That's not exactly true and that should not be a valid reason to continue to push the same inconcise policies. If we're not learning what minimum wage is doing then what's the point?
On this forum you seemed so well off.
But now I notice that you're a stick figure.
I can help with that.....
It's actually a lot more complicated than this. You're generalizing and again missing much of my conversation.
Do you really think minimum wage will help ALL the poor? If you want a program to help ALL the poor, then I'm pretty sure minimum wage will not do this. It could even distinguish a poorer categorization of the population that cannot get jobs. You're assuming there will still be the same number of available positions before and after minimum wage. I just don't see how this can be true.
Underhill
Well-Known Member
We know what minimum wage is doing. When I say it isn't concise I mean measuring the impact precisely is difficult. But we know what the impact will be.
When we pass free trade agreements, we have no idea what all the fallout will be. When we pass new taxes or cut taxes, we do not the know the precise impact of those changes. That doesn't mean these things shouldn't be done. We write policy based upon projections, economic models. These models give you an idea, but can almost never cover all the variables.
And it's not like anyone is proposing we make the minimum wage $15 an hour tomorrow. These policies are always implemented gradually. This means two things. First, we can make adjustments if needed. And second, by the time inflation takes it's toll, a 30% increase to the minimum wage ends up being more like 15 or maybe 20 by the time it is fully implemented. .
Underhill
Well-Known Member
I'm not sold on the notion there will be less jobs or at least substantially less jobs. You raise the minimum wage that also has the impact of putting more money out there being spent by those employees, meaning more sales by companies, who will need to hire to meet demand.
There will be some losses and some gains.
If I ran the show, I would implement a $15 minimum over the next 7 years. This allows companies to plan for the future, gives those who need the boost in pay something to look forward to, and, when adjusted for inflation, means the real minimum wage won't be out of line with where it has been in the distant past (probably between $11-12 an hour in today's dollars). Ideally you would then peg the minimum to the inflation rate.
I disagree with you, I don't think we know what minimum wage is doing. I don't know if it's truly helping the target population. So some people have more money in their pockets. Some people will have less money in their pockets. What does this truly mean?
If your goal is to give a percentage of people a bit more money and take away money from another population of people, then minimum wage is doing this goal. Otherwise, I haven't seen reports to suggest that this increases education level, skill level, seniority... Anything that is core and beneficial to the individual in a working environment.
We're repeating our discussions. At this point, I think we need to add studies and such...
Underhill
Well-Known Member
Okay here is one from the Department of Labor. Supports pretty much every word of what I've been saying.
http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
While I oppose min wages, this phased in approach has one often unknown benefit.....
Economics is very much driven by psychology which is less than economically rational thought.
Sudden changes precipitate over-reaction & turmoil.
So I look at phased in high min wage as doing the wrong thing in the right way.
That's about the best we can expect from government.
I found this link a month ago. The only problem with the link is that it doesn't provide further data as it suggests. I personally want to see the details of the data, instead of reading a summary. I've BOLDED the points that I feel are important to our discussion. Other points, I don't care so I will concede them.
Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens. - Sure this will benefit people outside of teens. Not a big deal to me.
Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs. - This report was done on an upswing in the economy. So not sure if the stablization or upswing in jobs actually had any correlation from minimum wage. One could infer that the upswing in the economy was the reason. If the same economy was on a downswing in the market. Jobs will obviously be lost. But does that prove correlation to minimum wage.
This is my ideal test:
* Two similar economies or markets in the same upward or downward trend. One with minimum wage. The other without minimum wage. I believe this will show true correlation between jobs and minimum wage. I think that's fair to suggest.
Trying to find the link.
Small business owners can't afford to pay their workers more, and therefore don't support an increase in the minimum wage. - Based on a survey. Where are the results?
Raising the federal tipped minimum wage ($2.13 per hour since 1991) would hurt restaurants.
Raising the federal tipped minimum wage ($2.13 per hour since 1991) would lead to restaurant job losses. - Lots of mixed data coming Seattle which has increased minimum wage. Is it still valid if Seattle proved that restaurants are disappearing?
Raising the federal minimum wage won't benefit workers in states where the hourly minimum rate is already higher than the federal minimum. - Not sure of the importantance of this so I won't debate it. But the answer was another theory and not actual results.
Younger workers don't have to be paid the minimum wage. - Every worker regardless age, sure.
Restaurant servers don't need to be paid the minimum wage since they receive tips. - Every worker regardless of service, sure.
Increasing the minimum wage will result in job losses for newly hired and unskilled workers in what some call a “last-one-hired-equals-first-one-fired” scenario.
Increasing the minimum wage is bad for businesses. - It mentioned academic research. I want to see this research. I can believe this will reduce turnover, but it could hurt in other areas. Just like to see that research. What did they actually base this on and how did they come to a conclusion.
Increasing the minimum wage is bad for the economy. - It assert GDP has been increasing. But what we don't is how much the GDP would increase if there wasn't any minimum wage. If this is solely based on our GDP, which I don't think it should be, then given the data, I think it's conclusive.
The federal minimum wage goes up automatically as prices increase. - Not sure how important this is to our discussion.
The federal minimum wage is higher today than it was when President Reagan took office. - Not sure how important this is to our discussion.
Increasing the minimum wage lacks public support. - I know this doesn't lack public support.
The minimum wage stays the same if Congress doesn't change it. - Not sure how important this is to our discussion.
In science and engineering, there is this concept called scientific control in an experiment. I'm not sure how much of these trials, surveys and studies were using control in their observations. This basically is to further ensure the correlation of minimum wage in their observations. I personally would like to see those studies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_control
I won't deny there is merit in this link, but some of us that can actually deduce from data would be better served with the actual studies. Plus, other experts can weigh their opinions on the studies as opposed to summaries.
Here's an article that suggests jobs are lost concerning minimum wage:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesdo...age-delusion-and-the-death-of-common-sense/2/
It goes into detail on the economic theory. It also suggests real life evidence from studies, but unfortunately do not cite the actual case studies.
Like I said earlier, there's just too much conflicting results to definitively suggest the merits of minimum wage.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesdo...age-delusion-and-the-death-of-common-sense/2/
It goes into detail on the economic theory. It also suggests real life evidence from studies, but unfortunately do not cite the actual case studies.
Like I said earlier, there's just too much conflicting results to definitively suggest the merits of minimum wage.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Weren't you the one who said we should neglect theory?
Yes, I agree with you... That's why I added the evidence from case studies. If you want, go ahead and ignore the theories. I was simply describing the article. I think it's almost complete except for it didn't cite the source of the case studies.
Theories are only as good as their results. Would you agree with that?
Since you're bringing this up again. The previous context was about discussing social idealisms. You wanted to purely discuss theory and I felt that it was more valuable to discuss reality.
If we could somehow create an ideal form of communism, I might even be for it. If it ensures security, stability, good health for everyone. I don't see a problem with that if that was truly realistic. I'm not arguing in such an ideal if we had a realistic path to this. But like I said previously, time and time again, any tangible form of communism simply does not work. Reality/history has shown this to be true.
Now compare any tangible form of communism to capitalism, and you find, again and again, that capitalistic societies prosper more. Communistic societies know this and they have switched over to capitalistic ideals concerning economics. Vietnam, China, the former USSR...
Like I said, reality speaks for itself. So next time, you quote me on my displeasure of social theories, please cut and paste this comment to explain the full context so I don't have to repeat myself again.