Poll: Minimum Wage

[Eukaryote]

I think minimum wage should always be enough to buy a place to live, cheap food, cheap clothes, utilites, persciption drugs, and diapers, but it should not be enough to live comfotably on.

And FYI, thousands of people in the developed world have jobs but no home. Next time you're about to say "go get a job" to a guy asking you for money, reconsider.

Another FYI, in the U.S. the minimum wage is $5 an hour, too low I think. Remember a U.S. doller is worth less than a euro.

 

[tomsnowman123]

We need a livng wage, that way, people can actually live if they are stuggling in life, and are given a chance to live and be successful.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

We need a livng wage, that way, people can actually live if they are stuggling in life, and are given a chance to live and be successful.

What about the people who are out of work because employeers can't afford to hire them? A low wage is still much better than no wage at all.

 

[tomsnowman123]

What about the people who are out of work because employeers can't afford to hire them? A low wage is still much better than no wage at all.

A living wage is not going to cause an unemployment crisis. Business adjusts and move forward, I just ask that they are fair.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

A living wage is not going to cause an unemployment crisis. Business adjusts and move forward, I just ask that they are fair.

It won't cause a widespread unemployment crisis, granted. However, it will cause an unemployment problem in the lowest ranks of society, the very people this legislation is aimed at helping.

 

[tomsnowman123]

It won't cause a widespread unemployment crisis, granted. However, it will cause an unemployment problem in the lowest ranks of society, the very people this legislation is aimed at helping.

I think they would be extra motivated to work, and business' could hire them.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

I think they would be extra motivated to work, and business' could hire them.

I personally think people appreciate what they have more when they earn it and its not given to them. I think if people earn the wage they are working at its a much better feeling than Congress giving them a higher wage. People take for granted what they are just handed.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Keep the minimum wage; I don't trust companies not to abuse the help without it.

 

[ainwood]

To be clear, minimum wage goes to people doing what exactly? It goes to the girl working the cash at the dollar store, the guy spinning pizzas over his head, the waitress taking food orders, the guy picking up blueberries for me and other low-paid jobs like these. Nobody's competing for these persons. No great performances to achieve there.

The work is still being done - so there must be someone competing to do it.

Secondly - performance is important, even in low-wage jobs. Why pay the guy who picks one bucket of blueberries an hour the same pay as the guy who does three? Why pay the girl in the dollar store who is surley to customers the same as the one who is friendly & helpful? Do you tip more to a good waitress, or a hopeless one who gets your order wrong?

Under minimum wage, often people are paid more than their actual worth - and there's no incentive for them to perform better.

 

[Nobody]

A minimum wage will act just like any other minimum price,

If its over the equilbrium it will cause a surplus in supply of labour so increase unemployment.

If the pc is below the equlibrium it will have no affect, as employee will be getting paid above the minimum wage anyway.

In New Zealand we have a minimum wage and it just went up, also we have the lowest unemployment rate in the oecd. So that makes me think that our minimum wage must be set below the equlibrium (what avaerage employers will pay a avaerage employee).

If it is already set below the equlibrium getting rid of it won't decrease wages, so it wont decrease cost of production or prices overall.

So if it isnt keeping wages up then whats the point in it at all? Sure some people will lose out, some bosses will cut people at the minimum wage. If you don't want what their willing to pay quit work. Obivously if the employer isnt willing to pay you want you need to work then they dont really need you anyway.

Maybe, but you are telling that group of people that they can never be employed, ever. You are dooming them to perpetual unemployment , which is the grossest of injustices.

Who ever said that everyone needs a job? there is such thing as over employment. Putting useless people who can't do the job well into a industry will just decrease productivity and hurt the economy. Better they stay at home and collect a benefit or if you arn't blessed with a nation that will pay you a benefit you can always starve. So that your useless genes will not be passed on to another unproductive generation.

 

[RameNoodle]

Another FYI, in the U.S. the minimum wage is $5 an hour, too low I think. Remember a U.S. doller is worth less than a euro.

For us, in Illinois, its $6.50 an hour. Thank you Rod Blagojevich.

 

[Godwynn]

For us, in Illinois, its $6.50 an hour. Thank you Rod Blagojevich.

Agreed, nice to see the price of a double cheeseburger skyrocket at McDonalds here in the south.

 

[JerichoHill]

I think they would be extra motivated to work, and business' could hire them.

tom,

Sorry, but economics does not work this way.


nice post nobody. You're entirely right, of course, and on the market with your analysis using the minimum wage as a price floor

 

[Paradigne]

Minimum wage should be twice what you can make on Welfare.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Secondly - performance is important, even in low-wage jobs. Why pay the guy who picks one bucket of blueberries an hour the same pay as the guy who does three? Why pay the girl in the dollar store who is surley to customers the same as the one who is friendly & helpful? Do you tip more to a good waitress, or a hopeless one who gets your order wrong?

If the company isn't smart enough to increase the pay of the workers who are doing the good work, then they deserve to lose the good workers who will easily leave that job for another job that pays the same (and/or has a better chance of seeing a pay raise). If a worker isn't doing a good enough job that they deserve earning the minimum pay they shouldn't have the job at all. I wouldn't pay a rude waitress anything and instead hire someone else or make the nice waitress work more tables (and pay her more to compensate before she turns into a rude waitress because I'm working her too hard).

I like the idea of minimum wages, but think they should be more dependant on locale. $6/hour will get you farther in Alabama than it will in California. As it will in some small rural town than it will in New York City.

Not every big business wants to stop a federal minimum wage increase. Wal-Mart Stores (nyse: WMT - news - people ) Chief Executive H. Lee Scott has called on Congress to raise the federal wage, noting that it would put more spending money in the pockets of Wal-Mart's customers. Most Wal-Mart stores already pay above the minimum wage. That puts the retail giant in a rare position--on the side of Democrats.

http://www.forbes.com/work/2006/05/31/minimum-wage-labor-cz_gr_0531beltway.html

Minimum wage should be twice what you can make on Welfare.

Anybody got any figures for what welfare pays?

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Minimum wage should be twice what you can make on Welfare.

I agree as long as welfare is $0.

 

[ainwood]

If the company isn't smart enough to increase the pay of the workers who are doing the good work, then they deserve to lose the good workers who will easily leave that job for another job that pays the same (and/or has a better chance of seeing a pay raise). If a worker isn't doing a good enough job that they deserve earning the minimum pay they shouldn't have the job at all.

Consider the hypothetical case where there are two workers - one good, one hopeless, and an employer who can only afford a wage bill of $12 an hour. Ideally, the employer would be able to pay the good one (say) $8 an hour, and the crappy one $4 an hour (based on their actual productivity). But because of minimum-wage, he/she must pay the crap one $6 an hour, meaning that the good one is also stuck on $6 an hour.

But you're right - the good one then leaves. And the employer is then left with only one employee, and a useless one at that.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Consider the hypothetical case where there are two workers - one good, one hopeless, and an employer who can only afford a wage bill of $12 an hour. Ideally, the employer would be able to pay the good one (say) $8 an hour, and the crappy one $4 an hour (based on their actual productivity). But because of minimum-wage, he/she must pay the crap one $6 an hour, meaning that the good one is also stuck on $6 an hour.

But you're right - the good one then leaves. And the employer is then left with only one employee, and a useless one at that.

Great example ainwood.

 

[downtown]

Keep it. There's really no point in working for under 5 bucks an hour, unless you can depend on tips. We work so we can take care of our basic needs....only people who are so young that their only needs = spending money ( 14 year olds) would be able to sustain their needs by 5 bucks an hour.

Min wage in Ohio is 5 and change...and if thats all I got paid, no matter what, I wouldn't work. I'd drum full time, and look for better work. 6.50 an hour is the LOWEST I'd take...and Im stuck with that (nd I'm skilled labor!), only because our job market is crap where I live...at least for those headed back to school in the fall.

We've been talking about rasing the min. wage in Ohio for some time, since its so low compared to other states, and I think we ought to do it. I can only imagine a few industries being hurt by the move (food service), since basically everybody else pays a little more than that.

We've been talking about this a lot at my work. I work for a small bussiness...we make trophies, photo awards, plaques, etc. I figure our gross income is between 5,000000 and a million, and we have 8 employees. Recently, we fired one, because we've been able to get more of our manufacturing done in China, so there wasnt enough for him to do. Suddenly, we had around 1,000 more a month, that we saved on labor. We have a few options

1) Pass the savings on to our customers, by lowering prices
2) give the rest of the employees a raise
3) re-invenst in the company, and upgrade computers
4) give the money to raises in mangement.

We did 3 and 4. There wasnt a point in lowering prices...because people who make min. wage can't afford to buy our products anyways (nobody making 7 bucks an hour has disposible income for a trophy)...our competitors werent, and if people were buying all of our stuff at 20 bucks a plaque...why ask for less?

I am not convinced that getting rid of the min. wage will make products cost less. If a job isnt worth paying somebody more than 5.15 an hour, its just not worth doing. You arent keeping people unemployed, because a wage below that is the same thing as being unemployed. Hiring 3 employees and 7 an hour is better for the average guy than 7 guys making 3 an hour. What good is three bucks? Its only nice if the cost of living crashes.

Min. Wage shouldnt be a living wage...that will cost jobs and hurt growth. In some areas (washington DC comes to mind), the min. wage is too high. In other areas, like Ohio, we could raise it, without too much trouble

 

[Godwynn]

So if you make $6.50 per hour, and Ohio raises the minimum wage up to $6.50, what keeps you or your fellow employees at that job now?