Minimum wage did not kill jobs.

Based on your arguement, which is somewhat correct, MOST jobs in america are sent over sea's because the cost of labor is too much for business' to accept (MW and working class wages.) Gotta get our bonus. Everything will become more and more streamline in business, that is encouraging for investors and health of a business. But personal responsibility MUST be encouraged. Allowing our current economic health to effect college students and people in middle america by causing them to work two jobs or work more than they can handle and still succeed in school or life is not acceptible. Its really easy to see things one way when you own a porsche or a sports car (no disrespect to anyone.)

I still see no real arguement that rising wages causes increases in living expenses. Living expenses raise no matter what.

Well, if you want people to get a better wage, why don't you start a business and start them off at a higher rate. Seems no matter what anyone says, how many examples you are given, you still aren't going to listen to the people who own & run business.

You could drop the MW to zero, where it should be Constitutionally, and it would affect almost no one.

When you say zero I assume you mean non-existant, because in reality there are jobs people would pay to have.

Yeah, I know, circumsizer in the elephant cage at the zoo. A chance to get ahead, and lots of tips.

I was thinking topless dancer at the cheetah club in Vegas, but hey, whatever floats yer boat:D

Those jobs are already here. Try a bellhop at a big name hotel.

It assumes an abundance of jobs...because that is the case. Why would you want to start with a fictional assumption?

Why else would a manufacturer incur the cost of moving their facility to another country...other than to make more money?

When the minimum wage goes up, I intend to raise the rents on all my lower-end rentals...I assume most other landlords will as well. Seems to me that it will certainly increase expenses for those folks...I hope, for their sake, that they are getting a raise too. I should be able to raise rents by at least 25%.

Brilliant, Fint. Those folks will be making MORE THAN A THOUSAND DOLLARS PER MONTH. I guess that's your signal to tap into the excess wealth. You certainly have a keen understanding of economics.

Let's see.....
$7.25 x 160hr= $1160 per month
-$600 rent=$560
-$200 gas=$360
-$60 car insurance=$300
-$300 food= $0

-$500 basic health insurance= -$500/mo

You forgot to deduct for Income Tax. Come on man it's America, all you have to do is die and pay taxes:-D

He can save money be using public transportation or alturnative trans, and he he shops and fixes his own food, uses coupons ect, that food bill will be much less than $300.
Lets not forget government assistance, = help with rent, food stamps ect and at that rate, they aren't paying taxes. And no one said that he couldn't work more hours or more than one job.

They won't be paying income tax, state or federal. Further, this "man" will likely be a single person about 17 or 18 years of age, and will only remain at minimum wage (were assuming he found one of these rare jobs, most pay more) for about 6 months.

I don't see a problem.

Pat, you haven't been following this thread, have you. This mythology about minimum wage workers being 17-18 years old will never die. Even when folks know that's not true, they'll continue pretending it is. At least, that's what it looks like. Because it's simply not true.

Remove those with tip income and what is the average age Sup?

Talk about misleading, you gotta straighten up on this one Jim. Just because a misleading statistic makes what you believe to be an admirable and useful point does not make it right to use it.

The real question is how many people really live on minimum wage+ gov assistance only.

"Oh man, my brothers bleeding on my floor after the car crash, and the hospital only takes cash. Hey, that guy has got a nice Porsche, let's jack him":D

It's been well and truly proved, beyond doubt, that what I posted is in fact true.

The only mythology here is those that continue to think that socialist activities will continue to work if only we have enough people that believe in them. Click those ruby slippers together, Kansas will be here soon.

I posted the information necessary to see through the bunk that alleges the minimum wage is only a positive thing, when the exact opposite is true.

Here it is again, What you need to know about the minimum wage.

That guy over there is Rick Lee, and you'd be dead.

There are no hospitals in America that are cash only to my knowledge, at least none that you'd go to as a trauma victim.

I think it's important to notice that those supporting the miminum wage have to resort to worst case scenarios, but no facts, to bolster their case. That's always been the case with these government funded, socialist scams.

In my universe, it is important to separate what we know from what we think and what we wish. Assumptions that serve to support our economic theories and wishes.

We KNOW there are 2 million workers in America who are earning at or less than federal minimum wage. At least, there were in 2005.

We're pretty sure that number will go up when federal minimum wage is raised.

Slightly less than half of them were over the age of 24.

Now, if we don't like these facts, let's just assume they're all members of that highly compensated industry called "food service."

Again, that is not a fact. We have two million workers in America whos income consists atleast partially of a minimum wage job.

Actually, we know that the vast majority are earning less than federal minimum wage. That's part of the breakdown provided by BLS. And it lends credence to your theory that a portion of these workers fall under the minimum wage exemption for workers earning tips.

But it would be self-serving to dismiss this whole issue by declaring the workers to be highly compensated tip earners. Other exemptions to federal minimum wage exist. Any company, in any industry, meeting certain requirements will be exempt. I've dealt with companies that deliberately do this. They do not accept VISA payments, for example, because that's interstate trade and would subject them to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) which invoked minimum wage, overtime, etc.

So yeah. Some of those workers are paid tips.

And no, I'm not going to dismiss this issue on the theory there is no problem. Your assumptions may support that, but you don't have data to support it. Just a political/economic wish/belief.

Indeed, that's what makes this so difficult for you sociofascists to scam.

Quote:

We KNOW there are 2 million workers in America who are earning at or less than federal minimum wage. At least, there were in 2005.

We know no such thing. The workforce total is 145,629,000 people, a number that changes daily, if not hourly. the national unemloyment rate is about 4.5%, a figure that dwarfs the one you present, even if your number is accurate which is unlikely.

Quote:

We're pretty sure that number will go up when federal minimum wage is raised.

Self fulfilling by law, raise the minimum wage then claim how many are making the new wage, as if no one will notice that those above the old minimum wage are now at the new minimum wage. Gee, will these old socialists never grow up?

Quote:

Slightly less than half of them were over the age of 24.

Hmmm, slightly less than half of less than two percent of the workforce, Oh my God, we're in a catastrophe.

Quote:

Now, if we don't like these facts, let's just assume they're all members of that highly compensated industry called "food service."

An irrelevancy.

Pat, please arm yourself with some information before you chime in with conclusions that serve only to illustrate your lack of information. This should help you, but I'm not always going to be there to give you links:

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat44.pdf

Among industry groups, the proportion of workers with reported hourly wages at or below $5.15 was highest in leisure and hospitality (about 15 percent). About three-fifths of all workers paid at or below the Federal minimum wage were employed in this industry, primarily in food services and drinking places. For many of these workers, tips supplement the hourly wages received. (See table 5.)

As I stated, using YOUR figure, you're asking Americans to raise the minimum wage for about 0.75% of the workforce while causing 4-6% of the workforce to lose their jobs.

Good work. These sociofascists always appear to be mired in the 1930's, for good reason.

I don't recall everyone getting this worked up over the 8 raises congress gave themselves since the last time the national minimum wage was raised.

Why don't you start a thread on this subject, and discover the answer, Bill?

It is of course, totally unrelated to the minimum wage, but as far as I'm concerned, the Congressional pay should be set at zero. And, they should meet once every two years for no more than 3-6 months. the presidents salary should be the same, with instant impeachment for any unConstitutional activities.

Perhaps you are forgetting that the minimum wage increase will cause a three trillion dollar decrease in taxpayers' costs toward social programs. Hey, if you can use made-up statistics, then so can I.

Well, if they are as few as you opine, then a tiny raise certainly can't hurt you or your economy.

"Sociofascists", excellent jibe - name calling is always the first sign of rational discourse.

Too bad you can't be bothered to answer a good point in rebuttal even though you always claim the privilege to move every thread onto your peculiar view of consitutional government. Only an ideologue views his own opinions as fact and opposing facts as opinion.

Please explain what someone's income of "MORE THAN A THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH" has to do with my understanding of economics. It appears from this statement that you are the one who fails to grasp even the most basic economic principles.

Sociofascist is a descriptor of a specific political philosophy, much the same a liberal or conservative, but more accurate.

It most certainly isn't name calling, but you may attempt to paint it as such, which is a sign of non-rational discourse.

I posted a huge reference within this thread, it's up to you to read it.

Further, anyone can find out the total number of the workforce in America, it's nearly ubiquitous. If you can't find it in 24 hours, get back to me.

I didn't get much sleep last night and still, this strikes me as quite amusing. If you want to see it, go find an economist....any economist....and tell them one of the posters on an Internet board fails to grasp even the most basic economic principles, like the inflation caused by a hike in the minimum wage. He'll show you the laugh.

The Mythology of the Minimum Wage written by economists, explains the economic problems with the minimum wage, which remains contrary to the US constitution.

I'm going to chime in with two items I ran across. I found them relevant to the question of whether or not raising minimum wage will decrease poverty.

Item 1) According to the US Census figures, approximately 60% of americans who were listed as being below the poverty level also listed as being unemployed.

My conclusion: No matter what the minimum wage, if you don't work you don't earn.

Item 2) According to a Federal Reserve analysis of the NAIRU, every time there has been a raise to minimum wage, there has been a corresponding rise in unemployment.

My conclusion: As you increase the costs of an entry level positions, there will be fewer entry level positions.


I personally believe the answers lie in various tax reforms and handout reforms.

To clarify, the part I thought was funny wasn't the suggestion that wage increases might bring some inflationary pressure. That's a given. Whether it is enough to actually cause measurable inflation, is not a given.

But if there's one thing that's universal in the field of economics, it's diversity of opinions. I had an Econ professor who administred a T/F quiz every Friday and discussed the correct answers on Monday. He once started to read a question that started "Economists agree that....." and he stopped. He said "This statement is obviously false" and, without smirking at all, moved onto the next question. The one thing I see economists ALL joke at, is this. Any economics conclusion that uses terms like "basic economic principles" or any other statement that pretends the conclusion is beyond criticism.....will make economists chuckle.

Pat, if you want to prove that prices are effected by sunspots, that's easy. Probably don't even need an economist for that.

Quite frankly, capitalism causes unemployment. It is a settled fact of economics (hehehe) that capitalism requires a certain amount of unemployment. Without that, there would be no available labor market. In that case, you would see rapid wage inflation. Economists are unanimous on this one. (hehehehe)

Not only that, but unemployment improves capitalist efficiency. Maybe everybody should quit working !