Well, as a general rule, the minimum wage must either do nothing or cost jobs. It's pretty basic economics. Labor is like any other good: it has a supply curve and a demand curve, and if the price (wage) is higher than the equilibrium point, it WILL create a deadweight loss and leave some people unemployed who would otherwise be employable. If below, it will do nothing.

Wage elasticity, how does it work?

If the minimum wage is so horrable why don't we just abolish it? Because spending 80 hours a week making $1/hour digging ditches is EXACTLY what this economy needs.

/idiots.

Ambivalence: If the minimum wage is so horrable why don't we just abolish it? Because spending 80 hours a week making $1/hour digging ditches is EXACTLY what this economy needs.

/idiots.

I'm sure some people simplify this to, "It's a bad thing to raise minimum wage." It's not that we shouldn't have one. It's that people should be aware of the trade-offs. The point is that you have to balance any potential benefits against the fact that it will cause fewer people to be employed/fully employed. This is not something that people have an easy time accepting.

Ricardo Klement: The point is that you have to balance any potential benefits against the fact that it will cause fewer people to be employed/fully employed. This is not something that people have an easy time accepting.

Wouldn't there be a similar problem if there were no minimum wage (or if it were lowered significantly)? A few more people might be able to find jobs, but a whole lot of people would have less money to spend. Less spending means less revenue for employers, which means fewer workers needed.

Ricardo Klement: Ambivalence: If the minimum wage is so horrable why don't we just abolish it? Because spending 80 hours a week making $1/hour digging ditches is EXACTLY what this economy needs.

/idiots.

I'm sure some people simplify this to, "It's a bad thing to raise minimum wage." It's not that we shouldn't have one. It's that people should be aware of the trade-offs. The point is that you have to balance any potential benefits against the fact that it will cause fewer people to be employed/fully employed. This is not something that people have an easy time accepting.

Oh I think you underestimate the level of derp over this issue. There are plenty of people who think the minimum wage should be abolished entirely because...freedom.

There is a balance to be had. But when someone can't subsist (and I mean that in the barest sense) on a minimum wage, then the minimum wage is too damn low.

skinnycatullus: Ricardo Klement: The point is that you have to balance any potential benefits against the fact that it will cause fewer people to be employed/fully employed. This is not something that people have an easy time accepting.

Wouldn't there be a similar problem if there were no minimum wage (or if it were lowered significantly)? A few more people might be able to find jobs, but a whole lot of people would have less money to spend. Less spending means less revenue for employers, which means fewer workers needed.

Well, I'm talking about a hypothetical rise in the minimum wage - not a hypothetical cut. But in theory, the wage cut would yield greater employment, arguably offsetting any loss in the floor for some positions.

Ambivalence: Oh I think you underestimate the level of derp over this issue. There are plenty of people who think the minimum wage should be abolished entirely because...freedom.

There is a balance to be had. But when someone can't subsist (and I mean that in the barest sense) on a minimum wage, then the minimum wage is too damn low.

Oh, I acknowledged some people would make that argument. I am not sure how the math works out, but if the public is paying for food stamps and housing assistance to minimum-wage-earners, that suggests that it's effectively a public subsidy of business - that your tax dollars go to help make up the shortfall between minimum wage and subsistence. It would be an interesting study for an ambitious economics PhD candidate.

On the plus side, more money aval for buying cheap Chinese made goods. On the minus side, small businesses could be hurt.

cman: On the plus side, more money aval for buying cheap Chinese made goods. On the minus side, small businesses could be hurt.

"could be" for sure. Small business could also get hit by meteors. They could also get crushed by Walmart.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaand it goes green. Alas, I have to go to bed, so I'll miss the "fun".

Why would we trust the graphs from labor economists when those geniuses can't even figure out what kind of economy we currently have, need or want. How to maximize employment, and how to do so in a cost effective way.

It's all a farking theory when the real focus needs to be on driving up demand by getting more people employed immediately at higher wages so they can purchase sh*t they don't really need.

We're f*cked right now. If we can't increase demand we're not going to increase employment. The only way to do that is to get more money into more people's pockets so they can spend it.

I'd be fine with a min. wage hike, but that will not solve our problems. We need to put down the tax cuts for the wealthy crack pipe and focus on getting more money to people who can spur demand.

Just use basic math. If you give $500 billion to 5,000,000 people in the form of a tax cut or tax credit, you are going to create far more demand for products and jobs than if you give that same amount to 500,000 people. The multiplier effect works, but you have to target it to the group of people that is most likely to spend all of it in our economy.

Bucky Katt: cman: On the plus side, more money aval for buying cheap Chinese made goods. On the minus side, small businesses could be hurt.

"could be" for sure. Small business could also get hit by meteors. They could also get crushed by Walmart.

I am not talking about just about Walmart.

There is a family run produce processing plant not far from where I live. The name of this business is called Curran. The VA program I was in at the time had many people working there. They only paid minimum wage, no benefits, because thats all they could afford. The company employes (IIRC) about 70 people full time. These people at times can barely make the payroll as is, and adding more to the minimum wage would force them to let go of a few employees.

DeltaPunch: $$$ to his 15 trilloin debt.

So, it's his debt? Dayum! I hope he can roll that over to a 0% interest Discover card. Those monthly payments must be a b*tch.

cman: Bucky Katt: cman: On the plus side, more money aval for buying cheap Chinese made goods. On the minus side, small businesses could be hurt.

"could be" for sure. Small business could also get hit by meteors. They could also get crushed by Walmart.

I am not talking about just about Walmart.

There is a family run produce processing plant not far from where I live. The name of this business is called Curran. The VA program I was in at the time had many people working there. They only paid minimum wage, no benefits, because thats all they could afford. The company employes (IIRC) about 70 people full time. These people at times can barely make the payroll as is, and adding more to the minimum wage would force them to let go of a few employees.

As a way of offsetting this, perhaps some tax breaks to smaller businesses such as the one you refer to would be a food thing.

DeltaPunch: .. while adding $$$ to his 15 trilloin debt.

Yes...becuase he is responsible for that ENTIRE 15 trillion.

Idiot.

cman: There is a family run produce processing plant not far from where I live. The name of this business is called Curran. The VA program I was in at the time had many people working there. They only paid minimum wage, no benefits, because thats all they could afford. The company employes (IIRC) about 70 people full time. These people at times can barely make the payroll as is, and adding more to the minimum wage would force them to let go of a few employees.

I think one of the biggest question is, why is that all they can afford? A business is supposed to be competative, but not starving. Why does THAT company struggle to pay their workers a living wage?

SilentStrider: cman: Bucky Katt: cman: On the plus side, more money aval for buying cheap Chinese made goods. On the minus side, small businesses could be hurt.

"could be" for sure. Small business could also get hit by meteors. They could also get crushed by Walmart.

I am not talking about just about Walmart.

There is a family run produce processing plant not far from where I live. The name of this business is called Curran. The VA program I was in at the time had many people working there. They only paid minimum wage, no benefits, because thats all they could afford. The company employes (IIRC) about 70 people full time. These people at times can barely make the payroll as is, and adding more to the minimum wage would force them to let go of a few employees.

As a way of offsetting this, perhaps some tax breaks to smaller businesses such as the one you refer to would be a food thing.

I am unsure of how much they pay in federal and state taxes. Tax breaks are useful up to a point, but if your company is still losing money, tax breaks really wont help much.

Abox: Raising minimum wage doesn't increase the value of minimum wage jobs.

Unless those jobs are undervalued as they are. Who determines the value of a job? The employer? The employee? The company's customer?

Ambivalence: cman: There is a family run produce processing plant not far from where I live. The name of this business is called Curran. The VA program I was in at the time had many people working there. They only paid minimum wage, no benefits, because thats all they could afford. The company employes (IIRC) about 70 people full time. These people at times can barely make the payroll as is, and adding more to the minimum wage would force them to let go of a few employees.

I think one of the biggest question is, why is that all they can afford? A business is supposed to be competative, but not starving. Why does THAT company struggle to pay their workers a living wage?

Produce is not exactly known for its high profit margins. Plus it is in Maine. Our economy isn't that bad, but there are far bigger companies that handle more product more efficiently and cheaply.

Don't you love it when business shills on radio treat the impact of wages on the economy as a zero-sum game but their press releases tout economic growth?
Their cognitive dissonance self-defeating cynicism is literally incredible.

/And when you apply the other edge of that razor, a CEO who takes in 7500 times the median company wage is killing 7400 jobs - give or take, isn't s/he?

RowdyRough: The minimum wage in Austrailia is about 15$ an hour American. They don't seem to be doing too badly in this recession.

They have an export heavy economy thanks to their natural resources and small population. Pretty bad analogy for the American economy.

Tumunga: Ambivalence: If the minimum wage is so horrable why don't we just abolish it? Because spending 80 hours a week making $1/hour digging ditches is EXACTLY what this economy needs.

/idiots.

If raising the minimum wage is so great, to hell with these little piddly, quarter an hour, raises. Why not just make it $20 and hour? $25? $30? No one should have to work for less than $40/hour. Why not?

/idiots

Yes, because clearly the solution to an extremist position in one direction (made sarcasticly I might add) is an extremist position in the other direction.

As I said previously, there has to be a balance. But if you can't subsist (in the barest definition of the term) on a minimum wage job, the minimum wage is too damn low.

I don't think anyone is suggesting the solution is everyone make 40k/year.

Idiot.

How about everyone just work for food and live in giant warehouses?

iheartscotch: Um; doesn't increasing the minimum wage have a corrilating effect on inflation and the general cost of living?

/ I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing; but increasing the minimum wage can create problems.

Wages have been pretty stagnant for years, but inflation (especially in areas of food and energy) have skyrocketed. One does not neccessarily cause the other. There are many other factors involved.