PDA

View Full Version : Dems want 10 dollar/hour minimum wage.....



Nixon's Ghost
07-06-2012, 02:04 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/231417-house-dems-propose-10hour-minimum-wage


Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) and 17 House Democrats, including several Congressional Black Caucus members, proposed legislation Wednesday that would increase the minimum wage to $10 an hour.

Even though this sounds like something that would be great, like everything the Democrats promote, it would have its drawbacks. The last time minimum wage was increased, in 2007, we had the Great Recession and lots of bankruptcies. We must hope this doesn't mularkey does not repeat itself.

Valandui
07-06-2012, 06:12 AM
This is a brilliant idea.

rob19
07-06-2012, 07:35 AM
This is a brilliant idea.

I think so too.

jared81
07-06-2012, 07:40 AM
Of course they do, and a Lamborghini for everyone too. I really believe that politicians think every company is as rich as Exxon. Do they know that the average business is a small business. This just means they will hire less and make people that have jobs do more work. Most small businesses are hurting and this only makes it worse. They are either too stupid to see this or don't care.

Tetragrammaton
07-06-2012, 07:46 AM
The last time minimum wage was increased, in 2007, we had the Great Recession and lots of bankruptcies.

The minimum wage had nothing to do with the collapsing housing market.

People always like to play boogeyman with the minimum wage. There was an increase in Florida a few years back, before the national increase, and everyone pretended the cost of everything was going to go so high that it would be a wash. It never happened, though, just helped poor people.

rob19
07-06-2012, 07:52 AM
Of course they do, and a Lamborghini for everyone too. I really believe that politicians think every company is as rich as Exxon. Do they know that the average business is a small business. This just means they will hire less and make people that have jobs do more work. Most small businesses are hurting and this only makes it worse. They are either too stupid to see this or don't care.

Where do you live? I live in Miami and most of the businesses down here aren't small businesses. In fact, unless you know where to look you'd have a hard time finding a restaurant that isn't a chain. Besides, a 2.50 an hour increase isn't breaking anyone's bank. For the average 40 hour worker it's a 100$ a week raise, (btw, God Bless anyone who works 40 hours a week on minimum wage). & Maybe now that all the minimum wage workers (most of the youth) have a couple extra dollars to spend, maybe some of them come spend it at your establishment; ya know, "trickle down economics", or whatever you guys call it.

jared81
07-06-2012, 08:10 AM
Where do you live? I live in Miami and most of the businesses down here aren't small businesses. In fact, unless you know where to look you'd have a hard time finding a restaurant that isn't a chain. Besides, a 2.50 an hour increase isn't breaking anyone's bank. For the average 40 hour worker it's a 100$ a week raise, (btw, God Bless anyone who works 40 hours a week on minimum wage). & Maybe now that all the minimum wage workers (most of the youth) have a couple extra dollars to spend, maybe some of them come spend it at your establishment; ya know, "trickle down economics", or whatever you guys call it.


http://web.sba.gov/faqs/faqIndexAll.cfm?areaid=24

Miami may be the only city in America that doesn't have small businesses. The link above post facts. I work for a company that sells HR products to small businesses. Believe me there are a ton of small businesses. My territory is about 10 square miles. There are over 7,000 small businesses in those areas. You just don't notice, Many of those business owners are poor and minority. They barely have the money to pay their tax liability, so this just gives them more reason to pay under the table.

rob19
07-06-2012, 08:29 AM
Okay, Obama extends Bush Tax cuts, Romney's paying 15% in federal taxes, we have some of the lowest corporate tax rates on the planet, when do we give back to the poor? Isn't that part of the whole Reaganomics deal? They scratch your back, and you scratch their's? You may or may not have a point about small business owners, I don't know enough about that to prove or disprove that, but I do know there's a heck of a lot less small business owners than there are people working minimum wage jobs; So maybe this does hurt some people, but it helps a whole heck of a lot more. I'd encourage everyone to pick up a World History book though, see what happens when the people at the top have too much and the people at the bottom too little.

Spesh
07-06-2012, 09:51 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/231417-house-dems-propose-10hour-minimum-wage



Even though this sounds like something that would be great, like everything the Democrats promote, it would have its drawbacks. The last time minimum wage was increased, in 2007, we had the Great Recession and lots of bankruptcies. We must hope this doesn't mularkey does not repeat itself.



:lol:

Dont forget it directly led to confrontation with Iran, the earthquakes in Japan, and the overturn of California Proposition 8. Damn you godless commie liberals! Why are they trying to destroy America with their constant insistence on raising minimum wage!

DisturbedShifty
07-06-2012, 09:56 AM
And people would still be scraping by. The cost of living in most places is too high. I could be wrong. I personally am about 40 cents off from making ten bucks an hour and barely have money for food.

Forgive my spelling. This was sent from my phone.

LouPhinFan
07-06-2012, 10:24 AM
The fact of the matter is everyday living costs are out of whack. As Disturbed points out and film maker Morgan Spurlock found out, minimum wage is too low to have a decent standard of living, at least by US standards. But jared81 is also correct, small business owners are barely getting by as well and paying their shop of, say, 40 workers $100 more a week (as rob says) is $4000 more dollars to spend a week than most of them probably have. Does Pizza Hut, BP, and Burger King have it? Of course they do but small business owners are the back bone of this country and supply the most jobs (especially in more rural areas than Miami). I wish I had an answer for this but it's a complex issue and I don't have the necessary business sense to brainstorm a way out of it.

rob19
07-06-2012, 10:41 AM
$100 more a week (as rob says)

That is assuming they work the absolute minimum wage. In Shifty's case it's only a 16$ a week raise.

jared81
07-06-2012, 10:47 AM
Okay, Obama extends Bush Tax cuts, Romney's paying 15% in federal taxes, we have some of the lowest corporate tax rates on the planet, when do we give back to the poor? Isn't that part of the whole Reaganomics deal? They scratch your back, and you scratch their's? You may or may not have a point about small business owners, I don't know enough about that to prove or disprove that, but I do know there's a heck of a lot less small business owners than there are people working minimum wage jobs; So maybe this does hurt some people, but it helps a whole heck of a lot more. I'd encourage everyone to pick up a World History book though, see what happens when the people at the top have too much and the people at the bottom too little.


You aren't getting it. Most people are employed by small businesses (not apple, mobil, wal-mart, these huge companies ran by old white men that nancy pelosi would have you believe). These people are barely scraping by, I see it everyday. These aren't all old white men. They are young, old, black, white, Indian, hispanic, these people don't have the money to pay an additional 25% towards payroll. There are other ways to help the less fortunate then getting it off the back of small business owners. I was a kid once and worked for low wages, I worked my way up, the rest of these people can too.

JamesBW43
07-06-2012, 10:49 AM
So what I gathered from this thread is that the last minimum wage increase caused the recession, 17 House democrats = all democrats, and a $2 bump in the minimum wage is as unrealistic as giving everyone a lamborghini.

This is the very kind of hyperbole that makes liberals so ready to blame conservatives for not getting what they want from their party. It keeps moving the goalposts until an authoritarian moderate that seems to implement just as many conservative ideas as liberal ones (if not more) becomes the most liberal President in US history.

jared81
07-06-2012, 10:56 AM
So what I gathered from this thread is that the last minimum wage increase caused the recession, 17 House democrats = all democrats, and a $2 bump in the minimum wage is as unrealistic as giving everyone a lamborghini.

This is the very kind of hyperbole that makes liberals so ready to blame conservatives for not getting what they want from their party. It keeps moving the goalposts until an authoritarian moderate that seems to implement just as many conservative ideas as liberal ones (if not more) becomes the most liberal President in US history.

Its called sarcasm. So Obama has a history of being a moderate? He was the most liberal member of the senate before he was president. I don't believe Obama is a socialist, but I do believe people make a valid point when they call him liberal.

I have experience with small business owners. My point is they arent all rich white people. All I was saying is raising the min wage would hurt them. It's really easy for you to talk about spending other people's money.

MadDog 88
07-06-2012, 11:10 AM
So small businesses are going broke and the economy which started its disastrous downturn in 2002 is caused by the raise in the minimum wage in 2007? So typical of conservatives to support only what isn't beneficial to all.

Spesh
07-06-2012, 11:14 AM
You aren't getting it. Most people are employed by small businesses (not apple, mobil, wal-mart, these huge companies ran by old white men that nancy pelosi would have you believe). These people are barely scraping by, I see it everyday. These aren't all old white men. They are young, old, black, white, Indian, hispanic, these people don't have the money to pay an additional 25% towards payroll. There are other ways to help the less fortunate then getting it off the back of small business owners. I was a kid once and worked for low wages, I worked my way up, the rest of these people can too.

With that logic, then we should raise the minimum wage. I mean, everyone here has seen small businesses become big ones. If they can do it, why can't other small businesses?

And whenever i hear people point out that the poor live better here then elsewhere it brings to mind a news report in which the "reporter" angerily listed off the things the supposed poor had. They actually had the audacity to have a refrigerator! They actually had the balls to store their food in the cold, dont they know they are suppose to throw salt on it and hang it from the roof to keep the rats away! GAWD, people these days! Because, you know, we should totally be trying to emulate how third world countries(or those in the middle ages) treat their peasants....i mean poor.

DisturbedShifty
07-06-2012, 11:16 AM
I almost let bad from you until I realized you have a smartphone. You can barely eat, but at least you got 4g!
The poor in this country live very well compared to the rest of the word.

It's call tax returns buddy. That and my rent was raised by forty bucks back in April. Just because I have a few nice things doesn't mean I'm lying. Also, we don't have 4G where I live.

Forgive my spelling. This was sent from my phone.

jared81
07-06-2012, 11:18 AM
So small businesses are going broke and the economy which started its disastrous downturn in 2002 is caused by the raise in the minimum wage in 2007? So typical of conservatives to support only what isn't beneficial to all.

Who said that? Do you just make this stuff up or is it just supernatural? Just because some of us have an issue with small businesses paying more money in payroll, doesn't make us heartless, racist.

Ill turn it around on you. Why do you hate small businesses?

jared81
07-06-2012, 11:20 AM
It's call tax returns buddy. That and my rent was raised by forty bucks back in April. Just because I have a few nice things doesn't mean I'm lying. Also, we don't have 4G where I live.

Forgive my spelling. This was sent from my phone.

Im sorry you only have 3g, ill say a prayer for you tonight. What does having a tax return have to do with anything? It's still your money and you choose to buy a smartphone and internet service for it monthly. Yet you want to complain that you can barely eat. Only in America folks.

MadDog 88
07-06-2012, 11:35 AM
Who said that? Do you just make this stuff up or is it just supernatural? Just because some of us have an issue with small businesses paying more money in payroll, doesn't make us heartless, racist.

Ill turn it around on you. Why do you hate small businesses?
Make what up? Did you not read the OP blaming the 2007 increase as an underlying cause of the "great recession"? And where do you read I hate small business? Are you having comprehension problems today? :chuckle:

Small businesses are the backbone and are having issues paying wages as you pointed out and like Lou, I don't have the answers in this complex issue. However, there is no reason I see that the minimum wage cant be raised annually with a cost of living increase.

As for my shot at conservatives, it's the truth. Conservatives only give consideration as to what is in their own best interests, not what benefits everyone.

Spesh
07-06-2012, 11:37 AM
Im sorry you only have 3g, ill say a prayer for you tonight. What does having a tax return have to do with anything? It's still your money and you choose to buy a smartphone and internet service for it monthly. Yet you want to complain that you can barely eat. Only in America folks.

He has a phone and food? What a commie. Doesnt he know that your suppose to dig through trash cans and commit crime for our scarce resources! Man this country is going down the tube. If he tells us he has a microwave and a ceiling fan on top of having food we should stone him!

jared81
07-06-2012, 11:56 AM
He has a phone and food? What a commie. Doesnt he know that your suppose to dig through trash cans and commit crime for our scarce resources! Man this country is going down the tube. If he tells us he has a microwave and a ceiling fan on top of having food we should stone him!

Make a point, instead of just spouting off sarcastic comments. Don't complain about your financial situations and have luxurys. That is hypocritical.

DisturbedShifty
07-06-2012, 11:58 AM
Im sorry you only have 3g, ill say a prayer for you tonight. What does having a tax return have to do with anything? It's still your money and you choose to buy a smartphone and internet service for it monthly. Yet you want to complain that you can barely eat. Only in America folks.

Tax returns allows people to buy nice things they can't afford the rest of the year. I am single and don't have any kids. So any extra tax return left over after paying bills can go towards whatever I want it to. Same goes for you.

Also I don't have Internet at home. I only use the Internet when I am at work. Which, before you bring that up, is during a grave yard shift at a hotel on my hand-me-down laptop from my brother. I don't have any luxuries outside of what I bought before I lost a really good paying job. I pay rent on a one bedroom apartment, gas and electric, cell phone bill (I am on a family plan with my parents. If I wasn't in couldn't afford my phone bill), car payment (I chose to keep my car over the house I had to short sale), insurance and gas for said car. What money I have left over goes towards food.

But I have a better question. Who are you to look down on me? I know I am not as bad off as some folks. I at least take responsibility for the situation I have created for myself. But raising the minimum wage to ten dollars isn't going to make that much of a difference when cost of living is so high across the nation. Sure it might get some folks off government funded programs. But they will still be in the same boat just without the assistance.

Forgive my spelling. This was sent from my phone.

JamesBW43
07-06-2012, 11:59 AM
Its called sarcasm. So Obama has a history of being a moderate? He was the most liberal member of the senate before he was president. I don't believe Obama is a socialist, but I do believe people make a valid point when they call him liberal.

I have experience with small business owners. My point is they arent all rich white people. All I was saying is raising the min wage would hurt them. It's really easy for you to talk about spending other people's money.

It's also called reductio ad absurdum. I appreciate sarcasm as much as anyone, but when it's in response to a legitimate idea, I think it opens the door for people (mostly politicians and pundits) to go to those extremes and absurdities as their default position. And in turn, the less informed actually buy into such things as legitimate counter arguments. (No, I'm not saying we should never use sarcasm... just to be wary of it and not take it too far, like implying that raising the minimum wage caused the recession).

I'm sure you're right about raising the minimum wage. If it wouldn't hurt anyone it would be a no-brainer decision. Those, however, are quite rare in public policy.

As for the President being the most liberal member of the Senate, that's also hyperbolic. What you're referring to is an attempt to quantify an ideology (among a group set of only 100 people I might add) simply by the number of yes or no votes cast on a very select set of laws. And in that flawed method, the President was only considered the most liberal for one year, the year he missed a lot of votes because he was campaigning for the presidency. And even if all of that wasn't true, his votes in the Senate do not alter his actions as the President.

phins_4_ever
07-06-2012, 12:00 PM
That increase in minimum wages would increase purchasing power. Good move.

And to the conservatives: most small business who hire people are either near or above $10/hour anyways. The mom and pop at home business would not have hired anybody anyways be at $8 or $10/hour. I am considered a small business and I have not one employee at 10/hour. To get qualified people you have to be at least at 14/hour.

But it affects the service industry like waiters, bartenders, tourism, dock workers, warehouse workers - hardly what you call small business.

And when has any conservative been in a small business the last time? How often have you forgone Home Depot for the small mom and pop hardware store at the corner?

Spesh
07-06-2012, 12:18 PM
Make a point, instead of just spouting off sarcastic comments. Don't complain about your financial situations and have luxurys. That is hypocritical.

Dont want me to make humorous comments? Stop making it so easy.

I honestly didnt take this for a serious discussion. Your questioning someone on how he spends his hard earned money(go small government!!!!) by pointing out he has what many consider basic tools in today's life(perhaps he needs a phone for business purposes? WHOA! Phones being used for business, mind blowing!) as some huge luxury spending. The justification your using for this is that other countries are worse. How am i suppose to take this sort of "logic" as something other than humor?
You know whos really poor? Slaves. Perhaps we should emulate that model. I will admit cost would go down.

Edit: as Lou pointed out earlier, this is a complex situation and i would have no problem reading a thread about it and jumping in for the discussion. You know, with those that are actually interested in discussing it instead of those who are more interested in pointing out one member has a cellphone and declaring that somehow means his argument is moot and he is some huge spender who has no room to say anything about making minimum wage. Basically, i dont take "Ad Hominem" attacks as serious point making.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 12:54 PM
Rasing min wage to 10 dollars sounds great in theory. But places like Mcdonalds and Taco Bell that employ the most people on min wage will hire less workers. If anything it will increase unemployment.

Perfect23
07-06-2012, 01:27 PM
Tax returns allows people to buy nice things they can't afford the rest of the year. I am single and don't have any kids. So any extra tax return left over after paying bills can go towards whatever I want it to. Same goes for you.

Also I don't have Internet at home. I only use the Internet when I am at work. Which, before you bring that up, is during a grave yard shift at a hotel on my hand-me-down laptop from my brother. I don't have any luxuries outside of what I bought before I lost a really good paying job. I pay rent on a one bedroom apartment, gas and electric, cell phone bill (I am on a family plan with my parents. If I wasn't in couldn't afford my phone bill), car payment (I chose to keep my car over the house I had to short sale), insurance and gas for said car. What money I have left over goes towards food.

But I have a better question. Who are you to look down on me? I know I am not as bad off as some folks. I at least take responsibility for the situation I have created for myself. But raising the minimum wage to ten dollars isn't going to make that much of a difference when cost of living is so high across the nation. Sure it might get some folks off government funded programs. But they will still be in the same boat just without the assistance.

Forgive my spelling. This was sent from my phone.

:sidelol: that's a good one.

phins_4_ever
07-06-2012, 01:43 PM
Rasing min wage to 10 dollars sounds great in theory. But places like Mcdonalds and Taco Bell that employ the most people on min wage will hire less workers. If anything it will increase unemployment.

I doubt that. Business is what it is. Maybe we have less of the $1-2-4-1 fatty Burger deals. Maybe it will only be $1.50-2-4-1 deals.

The profit margin is huge. If I can do a simple cheeseburger cheaper at home than purchased at McD then what do you think their profit margin is?

6 hamburger buns @ 0.99 (0.16 per Burger)
6 prepackaged burger @ 1.99 (0.33 per Burger)
18 slices of processed cheese @$1.75 (0.10 per Burger)

59 cents per burger. I'd say the max cost is around 1/3 over retail ($0.20).

Tetragrammaton
07-06-2012, 02:02 PM
Rasing min wage to 10 dollars sounds great in theory. But places like Mcdonalds and Taco Bell that employ the most people on min wage will hire less workers. If anything it will increase unemployment.

Why would they hire less workers? They still need workers to do tasks. Those places run as minimally as they can already.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 03:21 PM
Why would they hire less workers? They still need workers to do tasks. Those places run as minimally as they can already.

Places like Mcdonalds usually hire teens and pay them around 7 bucks an hour. If you raised it to 10 then they will more than likely hire less people and give the one's they have more work to do.

JTC111
07-06-2012, 04:28 PM
Places like Mcdonalds usually hire teens and pay them around 7 bucks an hour. If you raised it to 10 then they will more than likely hire less people and give the one's they have more work to do.

I know that makes sense in your head, but it's never actually been the reality. Every time the issue of raising the minimum wage comes up the rightwingers make the same claim: it will lead to a loss of jobs. The problem is that if you walk it past the first step that seems to make sense, it clearly doesn't. And here's why...

Businesses don't hire or fire based upon what the minimum wage is. They hire based upon a need for labor. Let's take your McDonald's example and go with that. Let's say the McDonalds in Anytown, USA currently has 25 employees. Why did the manager of that store settle on the number 25? Why not 24 or 26. The manager's primary concerns in determining staffing needs are:
One, having enough workers to complete all necessary tasks completed.
Two, having enough workers to provide a level of customer service that provides him with a happy customer base who will frequent his establishment on a regular basis.
He has 25 employees because that's what he's determined it takes to accomplish those two goals.

So now along comes a minimum wage increase. According to you, the manager would now lay off workers. But in doing so, he's also going to have to accept that needed work will go undone and that his customer base will receive a less satisfactory experience than that to which they've been accustomed. You say he'll simply require that the workers do more work. This assumes that his workers have extra time during their working hours to accomplish extra work; but they don't. If they did, they'd be working for a poor manager who allows his employees to hang around doing nothing part of the time. No, the only way you can get the employees to do "more work" is to have them spend less time doing the jobs they already have to do.

So where can he find that extra time? Food has to be cooked a certain amount of time, so we can't find it there. He can reduce the number of people attending cash registers but the result of that would longer lines and negative impact upon the dining experience of his customers. Plus, he'd likely lose the customers who are unwilling to wait in long lines. Customers lost are hard to win back, so that isn't an attractive option. He could decrease the amount of time he allowed his staff to perform cleaning chores, but the result of that would be a dirtier, less hygienic dining experience leading to a loss of customers.

If the manager was running his store efficiently prior to the minimum wage increase, he can't just give the workers more work to do. To cover a minimum wage increase of $3 an hour for $25 employees, assuming they're all working 40 hour weeks, would require additional revenues of $3000 per week. Raise the price of shakes, sodas, and fries by $0.10 and he's probably right there with very little chance that such a modest increase would impact his customer base.

Further, studies have been done on the issue and minimum wage increases have been shown to have very little impact at all in the way you fear. Of course, that doesn't stop outlets like Faux News from stating the exact opposite of what is true. But that shouldn't surprise anyone.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 04:38 PM
I know that makes sense in your head, but it's never actually been the reality. Every time the issue of raising the minimum wage comes up the rightwingers make the same claim: it will lead to a loss of jobs. The problem is that if you walk it past the first step that seems to make sense, it clearly doesn't. And here's why...

Businesses don't hire or fire based upon what the minimum wage is. They hire based upon a need for labor. Let's take your McDonald's example and go with that. Let's say the McDonalds in Anytown, USA currently has 25 employees. Why did the manager of that store settle on the number 25? Why not 24 or 26. The manager's primary concerns in determining staffing needs are:
One, having enough workers to complete all necessary tasks completed.
Two, having enough workers to provide a level of customer service that provides him with a happy customer base who will frequent his establishment on a regular basis.
He has 25 employees because that's what he's determined it takes to accomplish those two goals.

So now along comes a minimum wage increase. According to you, the manager would now lay off workers. But in doing so, he's also going to have to accept that needed work will go undone and that his customer base will receive a less satisfactory experience than that to which they've been accustomed. You say he'll simply require that the workers do more work. This assumes that his workers have extra time during their working hours to accomplish extra work; but they don't. If they did, they'd be working for a poor manager who allows his employees to hang around doing nothing part of the time. No, the only way you can get the employees to do "more work" is to have them spend less time doing the jobs they already have to do.

So where can he find that extra time? Food has to be cooked a certain amount of time, so we can't find it there. He can reduce the number of people attending cash registers but the result of that would longer lines and negative impact upon the dining experience of his customers. Plus, he'd likely lose the customers who are unwilling to wait in long lines. Customers lost are hard to win back, so that isn't an attractive option. He could decrease the amount of time he allowed his staff to perform cleaning chores, but the result of that would be a dirtier, less hygienic dining experience leading to a loss of customers.

If the manager was running his store efficiently prior to the minimum wage increase, he can't just give the workers more work to do. To cover a minimum wage increase of $3 an hour for $25 employees, assuming they're all working 40 hour weeks, would require additional revenues of $3000 per week. Raise the price of shakes, sodas, and fries by $0.10 and he's probably right there with very little chance that such a modest increase would impact his customer base.

Further, studies have been done on the issue and minimum wage increases have been shown to have very little impact at all in the way you fear. Of course, that doesn't stop outlets like Faux News from stating the exact opposite of what is true. But that shouldn't surprise anyone.


Bottom line is money. Mcdonald's won't take the hit for raising Min Wage. They will cut back on hiring and raise prices to cover the increase. Places like that have such a high turnover rate they really don't give a crap about giving their workers more work to do. I don't know about you but places like this aren't exactly the greatest when it comes to customer service.

Tetragrammaton
07-06-2012, 04:50 PM
Places like Mcdonalds usually hire teens and pay them around 7 bucks an hour. If you raised it to 10 then they will more than likely hire less people and give the one's they have more work to do.

McDonald's doesn't give out jobs as welfare. It hires as many employees as it needs to cover its operation. If they could hire less now, they would.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 04:53 PM
McDonald's doesn't give out jobs as welfare. It hires as many employees as it needs to cover its operation. If they could hire less now, they would.

Then why stop at 10???

Let's do 15 or 20.

rob19
07-06-2012, 05:06 PM
Then why stop at 10???

Let's do 15 or 20.

or a gajillion, or some other irrational number.

McDonalds won't feel a 2$ an hour raise. They'll raise the price of fries 10c and keep on rolling. These mega-corporations are not the one's you need to be worried about.

Tetragrammaton
07-06-2012, 05:24 PM
Then why stop at 10???

Let's do 15 or 20.

You are sounding like a corporatist.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 05:37 PM
You are sounding like a corporatist.

No a corporatist will mandate that everyone has to buy Mcdonalds for food. Even you know that too high of a min wage will have disastrous effects. 10 dollars an hour min isn't so bad in my eyes. But to think that it won't have any negative effects is make-believe.

---------- Post added at 05:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:35 PM ----------


or a gajillion, or some other irrational number.

McDonalds won't feel a 2$ an hour raise. They'll raise the price of fries 10c and keep on rolling. These mega-corporations are not the one's you need to be worried about.

It would be more than 10 cents along with other things. The one's that it will hurt the most will be local businesses and mom and pop stores.

JTC111
07-06-2012, 05:38 PM
No a corporatist will mandate that everyone has to buy Mcdonalds for food.

You'd better check that definition.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 05:39 PM
You'd better check that definition.

How is it wrong?

rob19
07-06-2012, 05:41 PM
No a corporatist will mandate that everyone has to buy Mcdonalds for food. Even you know that too high of a min wage will have disastrous effects. 10 dollars an hour min isn't so bad in my eyes. But to think that it won't have any negative effects is make-believe.

On the other side of the coin though, to think it won't have positive effects is also make believe I think. You are increasing the standard of living for a lot, lot, of people.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 05:43 PM
On the other side of the coin though, to think it won't have positive effects is also make believe I think. You are increasing the standard of living for a lot, lot, of people.

Barely. They still won't be able to survive without assistance or a second job.

rob19
07-06-2012, 05:50 PM
Barely. They still won't be able to survive without assistance or a second job.

Your right, we should lower it instead.

Eshlemon
07-06-2012, 05:55 PM
Rasing min wage to 10 dollars sounds great in theory. But places like Mcdonalds and Taco Bell that employ the most people on min wage will hire less workers. If anything it will increase unemployment.

Yes, unemployment increases until business raise prices...or unemployment stay increased with increased labor efficiency to get by with 2 workers instead of 3.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 05:59 PM
Your right, we should lower it instead.

For me I'm against a national min. wage. I think the states should be the one's to determine min wage and not the federal government. 10 dollars an hour sounds great an all but really doesn't change anything really. Even at 40 hours a week (which is being too generous because most places that have min. wage workers don't give you 40 hours a week. They always try to cut your hours long before that) after taxes you're making around 350 a week. Which still is a drop in the bucket when compared to the cost of living.

jared81
07-06-2012, 06:11 PM
Your right, we should lower it instead.

Maybe we should raise it to $100 an hour.

Eshlemon
07-06-2012, 06:25 PM
For me I'm against a national min. wage. I think the states should be the one's to determine min wage and not the federal government. 10 dollars an hour sounds great an all but really doesn't change anything really. Even at 40 hours a week (which is being too generous because most places that have min. wage workers don't give you 40 hours a week. They always try to cut your hours long before that) after taxes you're making around 350 a week. Which still is a drop in the bucket when compared to the cost of living.

Or at the very least have the national state adjusted.

rob19
07-06-2012, 07:19 PM
For me I'm against a national min. wage. I think the states should be the one's to determine min wage and not the federal government. 10 dollars an hour sounds great an all but really doesn't change anything really. Even at 40 hours a week (which is being too generous because most places that have min. wage workers don't give you 40 hours a week. They always try to cut your hours long before that) after taxes you're making around 350 a week. Which still is a drop in the bucket when compared to the cost of living.

I hear you, I know it's not going to move any of these people into the burbs, it's still better than nothing though. I think we're 1 or 2 bad presidential terms away from revolution though anyway, so why not throw the poor a bone. Like I said, extended Bush tax cuts, low federal taxes for the wealthy, low corporate tax, time to give back a little imo. I think this helps a lot more people than it hurts.

At 40 hours a week though, a 100$ weekly raise to someone who works 50+ weeks is around 5,000$.

rob19
07-06-2012, 07:23 PM
Yes, unemployment increases until business raise prices...or unemployment stay increased with increased labor efficiency to get by with 2 workers instead of 3.

They're magically gonna get more production? Were all the employees slacking off beforehand because times were so good?

JTC111
07-06-2012, 07:33 PM
Bottom line is money. Mcdonald's won't take the hit for raising Min Wage. They will cut back on hiring and raise prices to cover the increase.
I just gave you a very lengthy explanation explaining why you're wrong. I connected all the dots for you. Neither history nor logic is on your side in this one.


Places like that have such a high turnover rate they really don't give a crap about giving their workers more work to do.
That has no bearing on whether a minimum wage increase would lead to job losses.


I don't know about you but places like this aren't exactly the greatest when it comes to customer service.
Of course they care about customer service. Would you wait on line 15 minutes to get a McD's burger? No. Their food is attractive to people mostly for the convenience of a quick line or for the convenience of not having to get out of your car. If you eliminate the convenience, you lose quite a bit of the customer base. No one stays in a highly competitive business for very long if they don't care about customer service.


It would be more than 10 cents along with other things.
Dude, I did the math for you. I made it very easy for you to see that the cost of the raise could easily be covered by a very slight increase in the cost of just a few menu items. If you're going to dispute that, provide the math that backs up your version.


The one's that it will hurt the most will be local businesses and mom and pop stores.
Mom and Pop stores are being killed by the big box stores underselling them and by a lack of customers due to the poor economy. Put an extra $3 an hour in the hands of the poorest paid people in this country and they're going to put that money right back into the economy driving up demand for goods and services. Increasing the number of potential customers out there is just what the Mom and Pop stores need.

rob19
07-06-2012, 07:46 PM
new guy droppin' bombs

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 09:02 PM
I just gave you a very lengthy explanation explaining why you're wrong. I connected all the dots for you. Neither history nor logic is on your side in this one.


That has no bearing on whether a minimum wage increase would lead to job losses.


Of course they care about customer service. Would you wait on line 15 minutes to get a McD's burger? No. Their food is attractive to people mostly for the convenience of a quick line or for the convenience of not having to get out of your car. If you eliminate the convenience, you lose quite a bit of the customer base. No one stays in a highly competitive business for very long if they don't care about customer service.


Dude, I did the math for you. I made it very easy for you to see that the cost of the raise could easily be covered by a very slight increase in the cost of just a few menu items. If you're going to dispute that, provide the math that backs up your version.


Mom and Pop stores are being killed by the big box stores underselling them and by a lack of customers due to the poor economy. Put an extra $3 an hour in the hands of the poorest paid people in this country and they're going to put that money right back into the economy driving up demand for goods and services. Increasing the number of potential customers out there is just what the Mom and Pop stores need.


IMO it will be a combo of price increases and more work out of less workers. That's all I'm saying.

Here's some good numbers to look at.

McDonald's Hourly Pay

http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/McDonald-s-Hourly-Pay-E432.htm

All wages would have to change for them considering that most shift managers don't even make 10 bucks an hour.

---------- Post added at 09:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 PM ----------


new guy droppin' bombs

Not really. Obama is the master of bomb dropping.

Perfect23
07-06-2012, 09:07 PM
I worked at McDonald's all throughout high school almost and I remember when they raised minimum wage everybody's hours got cut by a whole lot.

phins_4_ever
07-06-2012, 09:16 PM
new guy droppin' bombs

Not sure who he/she is. But I am liking him/her.

:hclap::thumbup:

Eshlemon
07-06-2012, 09:55 PM
They're magically gonna get more production? Were all the employees slacking off beforehand because times were so good?

Did you miss the "or"? Or not understand that the cost won't be simply just passed on to the customer at the cash register? A person taking on expanding reponsibilities has nothing to do with your slackers rhetoric, and in fact isn't possible if the workers where all slakers. Just shifts some of cost to the customer at service instead of just at the cash register.

rob19
07-06-2012, 10:39 PM
Did you miss the "or"? Or not understand that the cost won't be simply just passed on to the customer at the cash register? A person taking on expanding reponsibilities has nothing to do with your slackers rhetoric, and in fact isn't possible if the workers where all slakers. Just shifts cost to the customer at service instead of just at the cash register.

You can't make fries and work the register at the same time. My brother worked at McDonalds, if they could've worked him harder at the time they would've. If it means paying 10c more for fries, to know that a whole lot of people are making a little more money, than so be it.


I worked at McDonald's all throughout high school almost and I remember when they raised minimum wage everybody's hours got cut by a whole lot.

Can someone tell me why they do this? Whether you have 5 people working 40 hours a piece, or 10 people working 20 hours a piece, you're still having the same exact amount of hours worked, it's not like it's cheaper.

On the bright side, you are making more, so what took you 10 hours to earn before, you can now earn in 7. Also gives you more time to get a 2nd min. wage job if you so choose, where again, you'll be making more money.

Furthermore, since you have the power of hindsight on this issue, would you have preferred if they kept you at a lower salary but with more hours?

--
Here's what I want to know from the opponents of this, do you agree or disagree with the premise that raising minimum wage would help more people than it might hurt?

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 10:49 PM
You can't make fries and work the register at the same time. My brother worked at McDonalds, if they could've worked him harder at the time they would've. If it means paying 10c more for fries, to know that a whole lot of people are making a little more money, than so be it.



Can someone tell me why they do this? Whether you have 5 people working 40 hours a piece, or 10 people working 20 hours a piece, you're still having the same exact amount of hours worked, it's not like it's cheaper.

On the bright side, you are making more, so what took you 10 hours to earn before, you can now earn in 7. Also gives you more time to get a 2nd min. wage job if you so choose, where again, you'll be making more money.

Furthermore, since you have the power of hindsight on this issue, would you have preferred if they kept you at a lower salary but with more hours?

--
Here's what I want to know from the opponents of this, do you agree or disagree with the premise that raising minimum wage would help more people than it might hurt?


Shift managers don't even make 10 bucks an hour. Raising min wage to 10 dollars would require places like mcdonalds to totally redo their ENTIRE wage scale. And if you think an extra 10 cents on some fries will cover that then give me some of what you're smoking. That's some good sh!t.

rob19
07-06-2012, 10:58 PM
Can someone tell me why they do this? Whether you have 5 people working 40 hours a piece, or 10 people working 20 hours a piece, you're still having the same exact amount of hours worked, it's not like it's cheaper.

I just checked with my brother about this, and they do it because any McDonalds worker who works more than 40 hours is now working overtime, so they obviously avoid that like the plague.


Shift managers don't even make 10 bucks an hour. Raising min wage to 10 dollars would require places like mcdonalds to totally redo their ENTIRE wage scale. And if you think an extra 10 cents on some fries will cover that then give me some of what you're smoking. That's some good sh!t.

Hit me with some math then, homie. Or we could just keep pretending like we're Econ. professors.

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 11:03 PM
I just checked with my brother about this, and they do it because any McDonalds worker who works more than 40 hours is now working overtime, so they obviously avoid that like the plague.


[/COLOR]
Hit me with some math then, homie. Or we could just keep pretending like we're Econ. professors.

http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/McDonald-s-Hourly-Pay-E432.htm

rob19
07-06-2012, 11:10 PM
http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/McDonald-s-Hourly-Pay-E432.htm

That's all well and good, but that doesn't give me any information that if we sell "x" amount of "x" at "x" increased price the profit's going to be "x".

Eshlemon
07-06-2012, 11:22 PM
Shift managers don't even make 10 bucks an hour. Raising min wage to 10 dollars would require places like mcdonalds to totally redo their ENTIRE wage scale. And if you think an extra 10 cents on some fries will cover that then give me some of what you're smoking. That's some good sh!t.

Or not redo wage scale, just really improve labor efficiency with the jobs legislated away to the robots.


McDonald's to Replace Cashiers with Touch Screen Computers
McDonald's restaurants in Europe will soon be swapping the chain's legendary "service with a smile" with "service with a beep." European McDonald's restaurants are preparing to replace cashiers with touch screen computers at terminals where customers will be able to order up their hamburgers and fries and pay with credit cards.


http://news.yahoo.com/mcdonalds-replace-cashiers-touch-screen-computers-200601087.html

Dolphins9954
07-06-2012, 11:36 PM
That's all well and good, but that doesn't give me any information that if we sell "x" amount of "x" at "x" increased price the profit's going to be "x".

You will need McDonalds to open up their books and costs for that one. But it doesn't take an economist to figure out that it will cost a lot more than 10 cents extra on fries. For instance if a pee-on with no exp. get's 10 dollars an hour when a shift manager who who's been there awhile and has a lot more exp. is getting less than that. Then you come to realize that the whole entire pay scale of all Mcdonald employees will have to undergo a DRAMATIC change. Everyone will have to get a raise. How many people work for Mcdonald's???? Probably at least a million or so IDK. That means the majority of them will have to be paid quite more than before since the overwhelming majority of them work for less than 10 bucks an hour. I don't have the numbers but I'm sure Mcdonald's will not only raise their prices. But find ways to cut costs and labor too.

---------- Post added at 11:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:34 PM ----------


Or not redo wage scale, just really improve labor efficiency with the jobs legislated away to the robots.




http://news.yahoo.com/mcdonalds-replace-cashiers-touch-screen-computers-200601087.html


I was totally thinking that too. I go to Home Depot and Lowes a lot and always use the touch screen computers.

phins_4_ever
07-07-2012, 12:16 AM
You will need McDonalds to open up their books and costs for that one. But it doesn't take an economist to figure out that it will cost a lot more than 10 cents extra on fries. For instance if a pee-on with no exp. get's 10 dollars an hour when a shift manager who who's been there awhile and has a lot more exp. is getting less than that. Then you come to realize that the whole entire pay scale of all Mcdonald employees will have to undergo a DRAMATIC change. Everyone will have to get a raise. How many people work for Mcdonald's???? Probably at least a million or so IDK. That means the majority of them will have to be paid quite more than before since the overwhelming majority of them work for less than 10 bucks an hour. I don't have the numbers but I'm sure Mcdonald's will not only raise their prices. But find ways to cut costs and labor too.

---------- Post added at 11:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:34 PM ----------




I was totally thinking that too. I go to Home Depot and Lowes a lot and always use the touch screen computers.

Lowes and Home Depot? Where is your support for the small business?

---------- Post added at 12:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------


Or not redo wage scale, just really improve labor efficiency with the jobs legislated away to the robots.




http://news.yahoo.com/mcdonalds-replace-cashiers-touch-screen-computers-200601087.html

Yeah that will work great in Europe where hardly anybody has credit cards.

Eshlemon
07-07-2012, 01:10 AM
Lowes and Home Depot? Where is your support for the small business?

---------- Post added at 12:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------



Yeah that will work great in Europe where hardly anybody has credit cards.

Europe has plenty of credit cards and debit cards.



The new terminals will also phase out cash as an accepted payment method, as the machines will only take credit and debit cards. No word yet on whether McDonald's in the United States will be next in line to replace cashiers with computers, but the addition doesn't seem to be part of the ongoing $1-billion makeover of the company's U.S. restaurants.

Interesting as to why cash is phased out, and if that cash phase out at self-checkouts will come to the USA.

JTC111
07-07-2012, 01:18 AM
For instance if a pee-on with no exp. get's 10 dollars an hour when a shift manager who who's been there awhile and has a lot more exp. is getting less than that. Then you come to realize that the whole entire pay scale of all Mcdonald employees will have to undergo a DRAMATIC change. Everyone will have to get a raise.
The math I did for you assumed all the workers of a particular McDonalds were getting a $3.00 raise regardless of their starting point.

My own thoughts on the overriding issue are that the concept of a "minimum wage" was a mistake from the beginning because by it's very definition it should be minimal. What we really need is a "livable wage." I'd rather be having that fight every few years.

cdz12250
07-07-2012, 01:51 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/231417-house-dems-propose-10hour-minimum-wage



Even though this sounds like something that would be great, like everything the Democrats promote, it would have its drawbacks. The last time minimum wage was increased, in 2007, we had the Great Recession and lots of bankruptcies. We must hope this doesn't mularkey does not repeat itself.



Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

Dolphins9954
07-07-2012, 10:37 AM
The math I did for you assumed all the workers of a particular McDonalds were getting a $3.00 raise regardless of their starting point.

My own thoughts on the overriding issue are that the concept of a "minimum wage" was a mistake from the beginning because by it's very definition it should be minimal. What we really need is a "livable wage." I'd rather be having that fight every few years.

We're not going to agree dude. An extra 10 cents on fries won't come close to cover the cost of dramatically changing their ENTIRE wage scale.

As for a "livable" wage. Places like Mcdonalds aren't designed to be jobs with livable wages. That's why most people that work there are teens that still live at home with their parents.

Dolphins9954
07-07-2012, 10:45 AM
Lowes and Home Depot? Where is your support for the small business?

---------- Post added at 12:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------



Yeah that will work great in Europe where hardly anybody has credit cards.


Because their is no small business around me that supplies the products that Home Depot and Lowes do.

JTC111
07-07-2012, 11:06 AM
We're not going to agree dude. An extra 10 cents on fries won't come close to cover the cost of dramatically changing their ENTIRE wage scale.
You say that but you seem reluctant to pull out a calculator and make your case mathematically as I did for you.
So let me break this down into simpler parts....
If you have 25 employees working 40 hours per week, would that not equal approximately 1000 hours per month? If not, please explain.
If you gave each of those 25 employees a $3 raise for each of those 1000 hours, would that not come to an additional layout of $3000? If not, please explain.
Assuming this McDonalds sells 300 orders of fries per day, adding $0.10 to the price of each order would raise an additional $900 per month.
Assuming this McDonalds sells 400 sodas per day, adding $0.10 to the price of each order would raise an additional $1200 per month.
Assuming this McDonalds sells 100 shakes per day, adding $0.10 to the price of each order would raise an additional $300 per month.
Oh crap, you were right. That only raises $2400 worth of revenue. I'll have to raise the price of a 4th item. I'm shamed by this error.

...no, I'm not really shamed. I'm in the ballpark and I think I used pretty conservative sales numbers to get there. So we'll add $0.10 to the cost of a happy meal or something else and we'll hit the mark.

This is the second time I've done the math for you to illustrate my point. If you're still disputing the math, kindly show me the math.


As for a "livable" wage. Places like Mcdonalds aren't designed to be jobs with livable wages. That's why most people that work there are teens that still live at home with their parents.
Yeah, I wasn't talking about McDonalds at that point which is why I referred to it as the "overriding issue" regarding this topic. FYI, about half the people working for minimum wage are not teenagers (http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011tbls.htm#1).

tylerdolphin
07-07-2012, 11:26 AM
http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2012/07/11006841-1.jpg

Dolphins9954
07-07-2012, 11:26 AM
You say that but you seem reluctant to pull out a calculator and make your case mathematically as I did for you.
So let me break this down into simpler parts....
If you have 25 employees working 40 hours per week, would that not equal approximately 1000 hours per month? If not, please explain.
If you gave each of those 25 employees a $3 raise for each of those 1000 hours, would that not come to an additional layout of $3000? If not, please explain.
Assuming this McDonalds sells 300 orders of fries per day, adding $0.10 to the price of each order would raise an additional $900 per month.
Assuming this McDonalds sells 400 sodas per day, adding $0.10 to the price of each order would raise an additional $1200 per month.
Assuming this McDonalds sells 100 shakes per day, adding $0.10 to the price of each order would raise an additional $300 per month.
Oh crap, you were right. That only raises $2400 worth of revenue. I'll have to raise the price of a 4th item. I'm shamed by this error.

...no, I'm not really shamed. I'm in the ballpark and I think I used pretty conservative sales numbers to get there. So we'll add $0.10 to the cost of a happy meal or something else and we'll hit the mark.

This is the second time I've done the math for you to illustrate my point. If you're still disputing the math, kindly show me the math.


Yeah, I wasn't talking about McDonalds at that point which is why I referred to it as the "overriding issue" regarding this topic. FYI, about half the people working for minimum wage are not teenagers (http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011tbls.htm#1).

Then what happens if they don't sell that much??? You also don't factor in the costs of those items too. Like I said before. Mcdonald's will do a combo of prices increases and less labor. As Eshlemon pointed out they're already starting to phase out labor with comps. Raising min wage to 10 bucks will definitely speed up that process.

JTC111
07-07-2012, 11:50 AM
Then what happens if they don't sell that much??? You also don't factor in the costs of those items too. Like I said before. Mcdonald's will do a combo of prices increases and less labor. As Eshlemon pointed out they're already starting to phase out labor with comps. Raising min wage to 10 bucks will definitely speed up that process.
I've asked you several times to back up what you're saying with numbers. If you can't bother to do that, there's not much point to continuing this with you.

Dolphins9954
07-07-2012, 12:30 PM
I've asked you several times to back up what you're saying with numbers. If you can't bother to do that, there's not much point to continuing this with you.


Your numbers are based on your assumptions. You don't know how much they sell and for how much. What happens if they don't sell the amount you assume they sell???? You and I will not agree on this. You think that an increase of 3 dollars an hour with their entire labor force won't affect labor or hours at all. I think it will. We agree to disagreee.

JTC111
07-07-2012, 12:55 PM
Your numbers are based on your assumptions. You don't know how much they sell and for how much. What happens if they don't sell the amount you assume they sell???? You and I will not agree on this. You think that an increase of 3 dollars an hour with their entire labor force won't affect labor or hours at all. I think it will. We agree to disagreee.

Reasonable assumptions. There's a huge difference there. However, if you think my assumptions are unreasonable, make the case for that. I'd welcome the discussion, but at this point, you've offered very little except to say you disagree.

phinfan3411
07-07-2012, 05:27 PM
I, for one agree that both sides have valid points, i also do not understand JTC111 is talking about with 9954.

There is nothing CONCRETE on either side, you do can only work on assumptions, although i would think 9954's assumptions are pretty stout.

Am i to believe that businesses hire their workforce with no attention paid to what that workforce would cost?

I think that is ridiculous, of course cost of labor goes into how much you use.

I would also like to say I would like the minimum wage to be moved up to 10.00, as long as it does not affect the labor pool as a whole too badly.

I have no problem with my tax dollars going to people that have a mental or physical handicap, going from that, i have a problem with my tax money going to help people that refuse to help themselves. Growing up in a housing project helps you understand all the tricks they play to get even more aid, but that is another story.

I was trying to get to the point that i would like for times to be easier for people that work hard, but make too little money, so this may be a way to help, but as with everything else, there are always unwanted circumstances.

Most of those unwanted circumstances have already been discussed, i have one more, what about the little bit of low end manufacturing that still exists. I am obviously not talking about union jobs, but i am asking if there are manufacturing jobs in this country that this would affect?

Even if it does not affect the actual on the floor job, would it affect enough of the workforce (janitorial etc.) that more companies say screw it, let me talk with Mitt's old firm to see if he can hook us up in China?

Again, in a vacuum, i would love to help the min wage worker, there would be some adverse side effects from that action though, the only question is how bad they would be.

Eshlemon
07-07-2012, 09:35 PM
Your numbers are based on your assumptions. You don't know how much they sell and for how much. What happens if they don't sell the amount you assume they sell???? You and I will not agree on this. You think that an increase of 3 dollars an hour with their entire labor force won't affect labor or hours at all. I think it will. We agree to disagreee.

Exactly, where are the consumers getting this money to spend money on the increased prices even if its at his low end of JTCC price increases? Instead of 10 trips, you make 9, or spend less somewhere else. Love the economic semantics that gets used in this, a minimum wage raise won't have anything to do with employment, it's the loss of customers fault.

TheMageGandalf
07-09-2012, 04:50 PM
Haven't read the whole thread...figure you guys are battling this one out nicely lol...

However, wasn't the minimum wage increased to $10 in San Fran? I don't think I've heard of any economic wasteland or fallout from that......

Dolphins9954
07-09-2012, 05:12 PM
Haven't read the whole thread...figure you guys are battling this one out nicely lol...

However, wasn't the minimum wage increased to $10 in San Fran? I don't think I've heard of any economic wasteland or fallout from that......


Cost of living in San Fran is through the roof. I'm pretty sure Mcdonalds cost considerably more in San Fran than most places.

http://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/cities-with-most-expensive-cost-of-living-2011/4.html

Having 10 dollar min in San Fran is a lot different than having it in places like Brownsville, Tex. That's my problem with a National Min Wage. It doesn't take into consideration that the markets and labor wages are different from city to city. It's best for the states to make these decisions because they are more aware of their own local markets than the federal government.

phins_4_ever
07-09-2012, 06:01 PM
Haven't read the whole thread...figure you guys are battling this one out nicely lol...

However, wasn't the minimum wage increased to $10 in San Fran? I don't think I've heard of any economic wasteland or fallout from that......

Yeah. This year. Didn't hurt unemployment rate. Neither did the 2007 increase by $2.xx. Its a boogeyman. Of course unfortunately the last raise in minimum wage crossed right into the 2008 disaster.

Dogbone34
07-09-2012, 08:12 PM
Having 10 dollar min in San Fran is a lot different than having it in places like Brownsville, Tex. That's my problem with a National Min Wage. It doesn't take into consideration that the markets and labor wages are different from city to city. It's best for the states to make these decisions because they are more aware of their own local markets than the federal government.

ding ding ding...we have a winner

CedarPhin
07-09-2012, 08:29 PM
Cost of living in San Fran is through the roof. I'm pretty sure Mcdonalds cost considerably more in San Fran than most places.

http://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/cities-with-most-expensive-cost-of-living-2011/4.html

Having 10 dollar min in San Fran is a lot different than having it in places like Brownsville, Tex. That's my problem with a National Min Wage. It doesn't take into consideration that the markets and labor wages are different from city to city. It's best for the states to make these decisions because they are more aware of their own local markets than the federal government.

Ya, but according to you, businesses should be flocking out of The City right now, which is hardly the case. At the very least, they shouldn't be hiring.

phinfan3411
07-09-2012, 08:38 PM
Ya, but according to you, businesses should be flocking out of The City right now, which is hardly the case. At the very least, they shouldn't be hiring.

Why does everyone try to take a point to the extreme to attempt to make their point?

I do not think 9954 is trying to say no employer would ever hire again, but that is what everyone is trying to lay on him.

I think it is reasonable to expect fallout from it, because there will be.

The question is how much, will it be a small increase in prices?

Will it be a cut back in hours allowed to each establishment?

Will it be a cut back in hiring, for instance you need 4 overnight stockers, but only hire 3?

I think it is unreasonable to assume absolutely nothing will happen, and i would love for the minimum wage to be raised, no bogeyman, i would just hope it would help those workers as a whole, and i am not sure that would be the case.

Dolphins9954
07-09-2012, 08:42 PM
Ya, but according to you, businesses should be flocking out of The City right now, which is hardly the case. At the very least, they shouldn't be hiring.

No according to me the price increases would be a lot more significant than 10 cents on fries with possible hour and labor cuts. In the case of San Fran the price increases went WAY UP. San Fran also has over 8% unemployment as well. Saying that I said "businesses would be flocking out of the city" is complete nonsense and totally manipulating my arguement.

Dolphins9954
07-09-2012, 10:03 PM
Why does everyone try to take a point to the extreme to attempt to make their point?

I do not think 9954 is trying to say no employer would ever hire again, but that is what everyone is trying to lay on him.

I think it is reasonable to expect fallout from it, because there will be.

The question is how much, will it be a small increase in prices?

Will it be a cut back in hours allowed to each establishment?

Will it be a cut back in hiring, for instance you need 4 overnight stockers, but only hire 3?

I think it is unreasonable to assume absolutely nothing will happen, and i would love for the minimum wage to be raised, no bogeyman, i would just hope it would help those workers as a whole, and i am not sure that would be the case.

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2012/07/Facebooklikebutton-1.png

Eshlemon
07-10-2012, 12:05 AM
San Franciso is such a a heartless and cold town. With a cost of living nearly double where I live and the national average and a minimum wage only 40% higher....greedy corporatists 'slave' drivers.

CedarPhin
07-10-2012, 05:21 AM
No according to me the price increases would be a lot more significant than 10 cents on fries with possible hour and labor cuts. In the case of San Fran the price increases went WAY UP. San Fran also has over 8% unemployment as well. Saying that I said "businesses would be flocking out of the city" is complete nonsense and totally manipulating my arguement.

Clearly the 5% job growth the past 3 months proves your point. laff laff laff.

"Well ****, things are expensive over there in San Francisco, it's just got to be the minimum wage being $10/hour!"

The prices aren't expensive, either. Maybe for someone living in the sticks, but the only thing really expensive in The City are rents and gas. Why are rents expensive? Clearly the $10 minimum wage, but it's probably more that it's a city built on a 7 mi x 7 mi peninnsula. Instead of blaming this "WAY UP" prices on the minimum wage, let's look at the more reasonable explanation that rents are high and things might be a little higher. But, in SF's case, it's not really noticeable. There are expensive places around town, but you can expect that in the banking center of the Left coast. It's a big city with a lot of rich people. There are going to be expensive places.

Your minimum wage argument is a complete strawman. Find the scarecrow's heart before proceeding.

ROADRUNNER
07-10-2012, 01:53 PM
$10 sounds about right, i think here in Scotland it's about 6.35 about the same as $10................

Dolphins9954
07-10-2012, 01:54 PM
Clearly the 5% job growth the past 3 months proves your point. laff laff laff.

"Well ****, things are expensive over there in San Francisco, it's just got to be the minimum wage being $10/hour!"

The prices aren't expensive, either. Maybe for someone living in the sticks, but the only thing really expensive in The City are rents and gas. Why are rents expensive? Clearly the $10 minimum wage, but it's probably more that it's a city built on a 7 mi x 7 mi peninnsula. Instead of blaming this "WAY UP" prices on the minimum wage, let's look at the more reasonable explanation that rents are high and things might be a little higher. But, in SF's case, it's not really noticeable. There are expensive places around town, but you can expect that in the banking center of the Left coast. It's a big city with a lot of rich people. There are going to be expensive places.

Your minimum wage argument is a complete strawman. Find the scarecrow's heart before proceeding.

You're the one totally twisting, manipulating and misrepresenting my arguement then have the nerve to call me the strawman!?!?

Unbelievable. I never said anything about "businesses would be flocking out of the city" that's complete horsesh!t and you know it.

I'm not blaming min wage for the high cost of living in San Fran. They've had a dramatically high cost of living long before the 10 dollar min wage. What I'm trying to explain is simple economics. That raising min wage in San Fran is quite different than any where else in the country. San Fran can handle and manage 10 an hour min wage a lot better than anywhere else. Why? Because the cost of living there is dramatically higher than the overwhelming majority of the country. So much so that San Fran is ranked in the TOP TEN of the most expensive cities to live in. Top ten out of hundreds and hundreds of cities across the country. So things like a number 2 at Mcdonalds or a number 3 at KFC or products you by at places like Wal-Mart or Target. Cost a lot more in San Fran than let's say Brownsville, Tex or Knoxville, Tenn. Employers in San Fran have a lot more money to play with when it comes to 10 dollar min wage because cost of living and products cost more in San Fran. And I'm sure that prices did go up more when the min wage took affect.

Now places like Brownville and Knoxville will have a lot harder time adjusting and managing a 10 dollar an hour min wage. There will be plenty of negative effects like price increases which will raise the cost of living throughout the city. You will also see things like hours getting cut and labor too. Like other people pointed out they will probably hire less people and get more work out of less people to adjust to the change in wages. This is all simple math and economics not a strawman at all. Which is why it's best this matter is left to the states and local cities to decide and not the federal government. If people of San Fran wanted and voted for 10 dollar min wage then good for them. But don't think for a second that the same can be done in other cities without suffering far more negative effects.

NY8123
07-10-2012, 04:04 PM
Wow I can almost come off unemployment and make just as much money working at BK for 40 hours a week! Plus I get a discount on my Whoppers!

Sign me up!

CedarPhin
07-10-2012, 04:55 PM
You're the one totally twisting, manipulating and misrepresenting my arguement then have the nerve to call me the strawman!?!?

Unbelievable. I never said anything about "businesses would be flocking out of the city" that's complete horsesh!t and you know it.

I'm not blaming min wage for the high cost of living in San Fran. They've had a dramatically high cost of living long before the 10 dollar min wage. What I'm trying to explain is simple economics. That raising min wage in San Fran is quite different than any where else in the country. San Fran can handle and manage 10 an hour min wage a lot better than anywhere else. Why? Because the cost of living there is dramatically higher than the overwhelming majority of the country. So much so that San Fran is ranked in the TOP TEN of the most expensive cities to live in. Top ten out of hundreds and hundreds of cities across the country. So things like a number 2 at Mcdonalds or a number 3 at KFC or products you by at places like Wal-Mart or Target. Cost a lot more in San Fran than let's say Brownsville, Tex or Knoxville, Tenn. Employers in San Fran have a lot more money to play with when it comes to 10 dollar min wage because cost of living and products cost more in San Fran. And I'm sure that prices did go up more when the min wage took affect.

Now places like Brownville and Knoxville will have a lot harder time adjusting and managing a 10 dollar an hour min wage. There will be plenty of negative effects like price increases which will raise the cost of living throughout the city. You will also see things like hours getting cut and labor too. Like other people pointed out they will probably hire less people and get more work out of less people to adjust to the change in wages. This is all simple math and economics not a strawman at all. Which is why it's best this matter is left to the states and local cities to decide and not the federal government. If people of San Fran wanted and voted for 10 dollar min wage then good for them. But don't think for a second that the same can be done in other cities without suffering far more negative effects.

No dude, you explicitly said that "In the case of San Francisco, prices went WAY UP", and attributed it to this high minimum wage. When you get called on it, you just re-set up your whole argument. You're spinning worse than nyjunc. Like I said, things really don't cost more there than most other places. I know, because that's my home turf.

Obviously, you've never been there, yet you feel comfortable enough to comment on something you know absolutely nothing about, except for the black and white of stats and charts. You don't take into effect that rents are high because of the premium on buildable land in the city. Gas is expensive, given that you can only get into SF via two bridges or via a clogged freeway. Are there expensive restaurants? Absolutley, but it's a rich city, not like Brownsville, TX or Knoxville (not really sure why you're focused on them only, of course things are going to be markedly different between the places).

Let's face it, you have zero idea what you're talking about when it comes to SF's minimum wage, and would rather just throw a bunch of stats and garbage nominal economics statements on how things should be. Unless you have ever been here, you have zero room to stand on and pontificate about how expensive things are. It'd be like me giving commentary on the effects of a minimum wage in Vietnam. Like the whole "Unemployment is 8!!!!", when actually job growth has expanded over the last 3 or so months. Obviously, you're not a golfer.

Keep it up, scarecrow. Maybe you and the Tin Man can go wax poetically about the "Good ol' days" in Kansas.

Locke
07-10-2012, 05:02 PM
Companies hire the bare minimum they need to in order to get the job done as is. Raising the minimum wage won't change that. There is a "sweet spot" where productive and work staff meet, and at some point, your productivity and profitability decline when there aren't enough people to run the place. In that respect, raising the minimum wage won't effect jobs, for the most part. Sure, some mom and pop shops that hire family friends and stuff just to give them a job might have to stop doing that, but the potential benefit out weighs the potential consequences. Personally, I see no problem with raising the national minimum wage. Everything has been going up in price except for the minimum wage anyways, so why not at least meet the cost of inflation? The minimum wage here in NM is $7.50 an hour. That's $1,200 a month, pre-tax, if you're working 40 hours per week. Can anyone here live on $1,200 a month, before taxes? No one can, yet it's expected that others should? At what point does it become exploitation to work these people 40 hours per week, and pay them so little that they can barely feed their families? It might be the humanitarian in me, but I simply don't understand why anyone would be against mandating these fortune 500 companies to pay their employees a fair living wage...

CedarPhin
07-10-2012, 05:04 PM
Most places that pay minimum wage give out a set number of "hours" to get things done with, and it usually depends on how well the particular store is performing. If sales go down, hours go down, if sales are up, more hours are put in place in order to help deal with the rise in demand.

Dolphins9954
07-10-2012, 05:04 PM
No dude, you explicitly said that "In the case of San Francisco, prices went WAY UP", and attributed it to this high minimum wage. When you get called on it, you just re-set up your whole argument. You're spinning worse than nyjunc. Like I said, things really don't cost more there than most other places. I know, because that's my home turf.

Obviously, you've never been there, yet you feel comfortable enough to comment on something you know absolutely nothing about, except for the black and white of stats and charts. You don't take into effect that rents are high because of the premium on buildable land in the city. Gas is expensive, given that you can only get into SF via two bridges or via a clogged freeway. Are there expensive restaurants? Absolutley, but it's a rich city, not like Brownsville, TX or Knoxville (not really sure why you're focused on them only, of course things are going to be markedly different between the places).

Let's face it, you have zero idea what you're talking about when it comes to SF's minimum wage, and would rather just throw a bunch of stats and garbage nominal economics statements on how things should be. Unless you have ever been here, you have zero room to stand on and pontificate about how expensive things are. It'd be like me giving commentary on the effects of a minimum wage in Vietnam.

Keep it up, scarecrow.


I posted a link of the cost of living in San Fran six months before the min wage took effect.

http://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/cities-with-most-expensive-cost-of-living-2011/4.html

I said PRICES went up. I wasn't refering to overall cost of living in San Fran. And I didn't blame the min wage on the high cost of living. If that's what you think I said then you misread what I wrote.

Now let's talk about Strawman when you said this comment.


Ya, but according to you, businesses should be flocking out of The City right now, which is hardly the case. At the very least, they shouldn't be hiring.

Practice what you preach.

My arguement still stands and is quite sound.

Dolphins9954
07-10-2012, 05:07 PM
Companies hire the bare minimum they need to in order to get the job done as is. Raising the minimum wage won't change that. There is a "sweet spot" where productive and work staff meet, and at some point, your productivity and profitability decline when there aren't enough people to run the place. In that respect, raising the minimum wage won't effect jobs, for the most part. Sure, some mom and pop shops that hire family friends and stuff just to give them a job might have to stop doing that, but the potential benefit out weighs the potential consequences. Personally, I see no problem with raising the national minimum wage. Everything has been going up in price except for the minimum wage anyways, so why not at least meet the cost of inflation? The minimum wage here in NM is $7.50 an hour. That's $1,200 a month, pre-tax, if you're working 40 hours per week. Can anyone here live on $1,200 a month, before taxes? No one can, yet it's expected that others should? At what point does it become exploitation to work these people 40 hours per week, and pay them so little that they can barely feed their families? It might be the humanitarian in me, but I simply don't understand why anyone would be against mandating these fortune 500 companies to pay their employees a fair living wage...

Min wage jobs aren't meant to support families. And most people in this country like 95% don't work for min wage.

CedarPhin
07-10-2012, 05:12 PM
I posted a link of the cost of living in San Fran six months before the min wage took effect.

http://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/cities-with-most-expensive-cost-of-living-2011/4.html

I said PRICES went up. I wasn't refering to overall cost of living in San Fran. And I didn't blame the min wage on the high cost of living. If that's what you think I said then you misread what I wrote.

Now let's talk about Strawman when you said this comment.



Practice what you preach.

My arguement still stands and is quite sound.

Gas, rents, and house prices. All because of the location of the city. Not much you can do there. Food and drink aren't that expensive in most places. Of course there's going to be expensive places, and prices may be a little higher, but you can attribute that to higher rents, not a high minimum wage.

Your argument has nothing to stand on, except a bunch of interpretations of stats. You can't have it both ways. First you say, on like page 4, that what's going to happen is more places would stop hiring or cut people because of the rise in labor prices. Understandable, so then SF as the $10/hour minimum wage is brought up, so I say to you "Ya, but according to you, businesses should be flocking out of The City, or at the very least stop hiring."

Obviously, that was a fair statement made by me to draw conclusions to the nominal rhetoric you've been spouting int this thread. You got assbent and took offense to it, along with your batkid 3411. Hey, I can't help that you got pissed at my statement. You just got called on your nonsense and got a bit prickly about it.

A: If minimum wage rises, prices are going to skyrocket, employers will stop hiring, or cut people at work.
B: SF has a minimum wage, a 5% increase in job growth over the last 3 months, clearly, businesses are flocking out of the city or at least not hiring
A: YOU MISREPRESENTED MY POST YOU *******!

Now obviously, I was a bit of a dick with my statement, but I still stand by it.

The ball is in your court, maybe you and the Tin Man can go discuss strategy over a game of bowling.

Locke
07-10-2012, 05:47 PM
Min wage jobs aren't meant to support families. And most people in this country like 95% don't work for min wage.

I'm not sure if that stat is accurate or not, but if so, it would be skewed. If you paid someone one penny more than the minimum wage, then they are not included in that. Even then, jobs that pay minimum wage aren't meant to, I agree with you there, but all of us know families that are struggling to get by on them. Honestly, it's a problem that will never go away, but it would be nice to at least take steps towards correcting it...

Dolphins9954
07-10-2012, 05:56 PM
Gas, rents, and house prices. All because of the location of the city. Not much you can do there. Food and drink aren't that expensive in most places. Of course there's going to be expensive places, and prices may be a little higher, but you can attribute that to higher rents, not a high minimum wage.

Your argument has nothing to stand on, except a bunch of interpretations of stats. You can't have it both ways. First you say, on like page 4, that what's going to happen is more places would stop hiring or cut people because of the rise in labor prices. Understandable, so then SF as the $10/hour minimum wage is brought up, so I say to you "Ya, but according to you, businesses should be flocking out of The City, or at the very least stop hiring."

Obviously, that was a fair statement made by me to draw conclusions to the nominal rhetoric you've been spouting int this thread. You got assbent and took offense to it, along with your batkid 3411. Hey, I can't help that you got pissed at my statement. You just got called on your nonsense and got a bit prickly about it.

A: If minimum wage rises, prices are going to skyrocket, employers will stop hiring, or cut people at work.
B: SF has a minimum wage, a 5% increase in job growth over the last 3 months, clearly, businesses are flocking out of the city or at least not hiring
A: YOU MISREPRESENTED MY POST YOU *******!

Now obviously, I was a bit of a dick with my statement, but I still stand by it.

The ball is in your court, maybe you and the Tin Man can go discuss strategy over a game of bowling.


Here's my quote from page 4 like you stated.


Rasing min wage to 10 dollars sounds great in theory. But places like Mcdonalds and Taco Bell that employ the most people on min wage will hire less workers. If anything it will increase unemployment.

I said hire less not stop hiring like you proclaim I said. You also proclaimed I said" businesses would be running out of the city". I said no such thing. If you can't see that you manipulated and misrepresented my arguement then I really have nothing more to say to you. Unless you want a civil debate and not resort to elementary school yard tactics of name-calling then I'm done with you. I get enough of that from your "batkid" phins4ever.

Dolphins9954
07-10-2012, 06:08 PM
I'm not sure if that stat is accurate or not, but if so, it would be skewed. If you paid someone one penny more than the minimum wage, then they are not included in that. Even then, jobs that pay minimum wage aren't meant to, I agree with you there, but all of us know families that are struggling to get by on them. Honestly, it's a problem that will never go away, but it would be nice to at least take steps towards correcting it...

Here's some good numbers to look at.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm


In 2011, 73.9 million American workers age 16 and over were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.1 percent of all wage and salary workers.1 (http://www.finheaven.com/cps/minwage2011.htm#1) Among those paid by the hour, 1.7 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 2.2 million had wages below the minimum.2 (http://www.finheaven.com/cps/minwage2011.htm#2) Together, these 3.8 million workers with wages at or below the Federal minimum made up 5.2 percent of all hourly-paid workers. Tables 1 through 10 present data on a wide array of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics for hourly-paid workers earning at or below the Federal minimum wage. The following are some highlights from the 2011 data.

One thing to note is those that made less than min wage were mostly servers who make money on tips. Most of which don't claim it all.

bobw999
07-10-2012, 07:46 PM
Most of the increases in cost of living expenses is caused by the devaluation of the dollar. Return to sound money and people will have more dollars to spend.

Regarding the minimum wage:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMMN3UIQmEk

Laws like that are immoral. What right does the government have to tell a private business how much to pay a person? You voluntarily entered an agreement to sell your labor for a number dollars that both the employer and you agree upon. If you want to get paid $30 an hour flipping burgers, go ahead and try, but I'm sure McDonalds will find plenty of kids willing to do it for $6 or $7.

Locke
07-10-2012, 08:04 PM
Most of the increases in cost of living expenses is caused by the devaluation of the dollar. Return to sound money and people will have more dollars to spend.

Regarding the minimum wage:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMMN3UIQmEk

Laws like that are immoral. What right does the government have to tell a private business how much to pay a person? You voluntarily entered an agreement to sell your labor for a number dollars that both the employer and you agree upon. If you want to get paid $30 an hour flipping burgers, go ahead and try, but I'm sure McDonalds will find plenty of kids willing to do it for $6 or $7.

Or illegals. Hell, they'd probably do your job for 5 bucks an hour if the government told them they could. Would it be so immoral then...?

bobw999
07-10-2012, 08:12 PM
Or illegals. Hell, they'd probably do your job for 5 bucks an hour if the government told them they could. Would it be so immoral then...?

Not sure how you define an illegal. The only border I know is the one that separates my property from my neighbor's property.

If someone is voluntarily willing to do a job for $5 an hour, more power to him. He's filling a need at a cost agreed between him and the employer. What is immoral is the government telling him how much his labor is actually worth. I don't see what the problem is if wages are a voluntary agreement.

JamesBW43
07-10-2012, 08:17 PM
Most of the increases in cost of living expenses is caused by the devaluation of the dollar. Return to sound money and people will have more dollars to spend.

Regarding the minimum wage:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMMN3UIQmEk

Laws like that are immoral. What right does the government have to tell a private business how much to pay a person? You voluntarily entered an agreement to sell your labor for a number dollars that both the employer and you agree upon. If you want to get paid $30 an hour flipping burgers, go ahead and try, but I'm sure McDonalds will find plenty of kids willing to do it for $6 or $7.

Didn't watch the video yet, but iirc, average wages have been mostly stagnant for a while now while profits have been soaring.

Locke
07-10-2012, 08:50 PM
Not sure how you define an illegal. The only border I know is the one that separates my property from my neighbor's property.

If someone is voluntarily willing to do a job for $5 an hour, more power to him. He's filling a need at a cost agreed between him and the employer. What is immoral is the government telling him how much his labor is actually worth. I don't see what the problem is if wages are a voluntary agreement.

Illegal as in undocumented worker. The problem with your theory is that no one would get a decent paying job, ever, if your theory was in place. Why hire anyone but the 15 year old kids and the undocumented workers when they will work for 5 bucks an hour and everyone else wants a fair wage. It would bring the entire workforce's mean salary down. An argument could be made for the fact that at some point, even the kids and illegals will stop working for a low enough amount, but even then, that number is going to be so low, no one will be able to pay their mortgages or rent payments since no one is making more than 5-6 bucks an hour.

Ideologically, your theory holds water. In a true capitalistic economy, supply and demand would keep that pay at or near the living wage. Sadly, we live in a corporatistic economy, not a capitalistic one. Supply and demand don't work like they are supposed to anymore, especially since most jobs get shipped overseas now anyways. Like it or not, we need a federal minimum wage, barring some drastic change in economics...

Dolphins9954
07-10-2012, 09:04 PM
Didn't watch the video yet, but iirc, average wages have been mostly stagnant for a while now while profits have been soaring.

Hell if the government handed me trillions then my profits would be NICE too.

I agree that CEO's, Wall Street and Banks took us all for ride with the government along with them. This debate is really about economics and the differences between local and state markets. If you really want to help people economically then support policies that strengthen the dollar. Instead of the current devaluing and inflation of it. Inflation is really the biggest culprit here. It hurts the poor more than anything. No matter what the Federal Reserve says. Inflation is a lot worse than they say it is. Sound money and fiscal policies.

bobw999
07-10-2012, 09:37 PM
Illegal as in undocumented worker. The problem with your theory is that no one would get a decent paying job, ever, if your theory was in place. Why hire anyone but the 15 year old kids and the undocumented workers when they will work for 5 bucks an hour and everyone else wants a fair wage. It would bring the entire workforce's mean salary down. An argument could be made for the fact that at some point, even the kids and illegals will stop working for a low enough amount, but even then, that number is going to be so low, no one will be able to pay their mortgages or rent payments since no one is making more than 5-6 bucks an hour.

Ideologically, your theory holds water. In a true capitalistic economy, supply and demand would keep that pay at or near the living wage. Sadly, we live in a corporatistic economy, not a capitalistic one. Supply and demand don't work like they are supposed to anymore, especially since most jobs get shipped overseas now anyways. Like it or not, we need a federal minimum wage, barring some drastic change in economics...

If the 15 year old and "illegal" are the most efficient and cheapest, I don't see any thing wrong with that. If one is just going to screw around and not do their job properly, then they won't last long at that job. I doubt most professions pay minimum wage anyway. Doctors, just one example, certainly don't make minimum wage.

Of course we live in a corporatist economy, but it's due to excessive government regulations. Sure McDonalds and Walmart are able to adapt since they are multibillion dollar corporations, but it's always the small businesses that suffer.