Minimum wage = communism.
I find it funny that 'the land of the free' has such a thing.
I find it funny that 'the land of the free' has such a thing.
Fuck Israel
dunno if you are being a smart ass or not, but you are basically correct.Dilbert_X wrote:
Minimum wage = communism.
I find it funny that 'the land of the free' has such a thing.
To FORCE a company to pay higher wages does nothing, except have the TAXPAYERS pay higher prices. The company will not eat the cut into its profits, it will pass the extra costs to us...Another form of wealth redistribution in another hat.
Im making $14/hr at home depot. And they hired me at that. But then again thats not the minimum wage
I think minimum wage in Calgary is around $11
I think minimum wage in Calgary is around $11
When was that?mtb0minime wrote:
Back in the day, you were supposed to be able to live off minimum wage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage#Background
Wikipedia wrote:
Minimum wages were first proposed as a way to control the proliferation of sweat shops in manufacturing industries. The sweat shops employed large numbers of women and young workers, paying them what were considered to be substandard wages. The sweatshop owners were thought to have unfair bargaining power over their workers, and a minimum wage was proposed as a means to make them pay "fairly." Over time, the focus changed to helping people, especially families, become more self sufficient. Today, minimum wage laws cover workers in most low-paid fields of employment.
Here it's £5.73 (~$9.40), or £3.53 if you're under 18.
I think there should always be quite tight age restrictions on minimum wage, because teenagers working to get a bit of spending money do not need the protections of a minimum wage as a means of tackling poverty.
I think there should always be quite tight age restrictions on minimum wage, because teenagers working to get a bit of spending money do not need the protections of a minimum wage as a means of tackling poverty.
Liberals are generous with other peoples' money.Sorcerer0513 wrote:
Isn't that like, liberal? I mean, why should other people pay for someone else's education? That's like... free health care!mtb0minime wrote:
Yeah, but you can get financial aid. Go to school for free while other people pay the taxes for it.
Minimum wage should be what a person is willing to do the work for. The end
you got that right.Harmor wrote:
Liberals are generous with other peoples' money.Sorcerer0513 wrote:
Isn't that like, liberal? I mean, why should other people pay for someone else's education? That's like... free health care!mtb0minime wrote:
Yeah, but you can get financial aid. Go to school for free while other people pay the taxes for it.
Well you could read the next paragraphHarmor wrote:
When was that?mtb0minime wrote:
Back in the day, you were supposed to be able to live off minimum wage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage#BackgroundWikipedia wrote:
Minimum wages were first proposed as a way to control the proliferation of sweat shops in manufacturing industries. The sweat shops employed large numbers of women and young workers, paying them what were considered to be substandard wages. The sweatshop owners were thought to have unfair bargaining power over their workers, and a minimum wage was proposed as a means to make them pay "fairly." Over time, the focus changed to helping people, especially families, become more self sufficient. Today, minimum wage laws cover workers in most low-paid fields of employment.
I even bolded the important part.The minimum wage has a strong social appeal, rooted in concern about the ability of markets to provide income equity for the least able members of the work force. An obvious solution to this concern is to redefine the wage structure politically to achieve a socially preferable distribution of income. Thus, minimum wage laws have usually been judged against the criterion of reducing poverty
I think the minimum wage should be $14 an hour so that everyone would be considered rich in Obama's book and have to pay income tax.
If there weren't fucking Mexicans living in vans on every corner taking jobs from Americans I would agree.lowing wrote:
Minimum wage should be what a person is willing to do the work for. The end
Every time congress votes themself a raise (yea thats right they can do that, too bad we cant vote on it) America should get a minimum wage hike.
Like all the sweatshop workers in Asia and Latin America? Working 16 hours a day for 10 cents an hour. Free market is great isn't it. We might as well put our kids to work in there just like the reconstruction era!lowing wrote:
Minimum wage should be what a person is willing to do the work for. The end
Here minimum wage is really there for people just entering the job market.. teenagers, partimers, ect.DrunkFace wrote:
It's livable, but far from decent. A single bedroom apartment miles form the city would cost you about $350 a week another $50 or so on food then you'll need a car, petrol, water, electricity etc. If you're lucky you'll be able to save a few dollars every week, but you'll never get ahead, never have enough for a deposit on a house, never be able to afford any kind of holiday except maybe camping. Minimum wage is there so you can exist and thats about it.Kmarion wrote:
That's cool.. you don't really have to be good at anything in Australia to make a descent wage ... nice.DrunkFace wrote:
Whatever a 38 hour a week is to cover a basic standard of living.
Here its $543.78 a week or $14.31 an hour.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I think minimum wage laws actually increase poverty and reliance on government programs. See watch:DrunkFace wrote:
Well you could read the next paragraphI even bolded the important part.The minimum wage has a strong social appeal, rooted in concern about the ability of markets to provide income equity for the least able members of the work force. An obvious solution to this concern is to redefine the wage structure politically to achieve a socially preferable distribution of income. Thus, minimum wage laws have usually been judged against the criterion of reducing poverty
A person has no skills. They look for a job. If the minimum wage is set too high they can't find a job and will make $0 and rely on the government safety net.
If it is set low they will find a job they are willing to work for (if employer A is paying more for an unskilled job than employer B then they will work for employer A).
Illegals though complete for the same jobs unfortunately keeping the wage for unskilled labor low.
The last I looked (too lazy right now), only 4% of the workforce make the minimum wage for more than 6 months. And typically these are jobs where they get tips (i.e. waittress, bus boy, velet, etc...), so they are actually making more than the minimum wage.
The problem is that Democratic leaders use the minimum wage as a wedge issue. I'm surprised they are bringing it up now...usually this is an election year issue to garner more votes from the poor.
Oh one additional point, many unions like the increase in the minimum wage because their wages are based on a multiple of the minimum wage.
Now I agree that the minimum wage is there to stop sweat shop workers, but if we have an economy where workers are not forced to stay with any one employer - a work at will system - then we shouldn't have a minimum wage at all.
Who in my opinion shouldn't be entitled to a minimum wage - or only a substantially reduced one. Teenagers with jobs are typically not supporting themselves and so don't need a minimum wage.Kmarion wrote:
Here minimum wage is really there for people just entering the job market.. teenagers, partimers, ect.DrunkFace wrote:
It's livable, but far from decent. A single bedroom apartment miles form the city would cost you about $350 a week another $50 or so on food then you'll need a car, petrol, water, electricity etc. If you're lucky you'll be able to save a few dollars every week, but you'll never get ahead, never have enough for a deposit on a house, never be able to afford any kind of holiday except maybe camping. Minimum wage is there so you can exist and thats about it.Kmarion wrote:
That's cool.. you don't really have to be good at anything in Australia to make a descent wage ... nice.
I agree.Bertster7 wrote:
Who in my opinion shouldn't be entitled to a minimum wage - or only a substantially reduced one. Teenagers with jobs are typically not supporting themselves and so don't need a minimum wage.
They are reduced.Bertster7 wrote:
Who in my opinion shouldn't be entitled to a minimum wage - or only a substantially reduced one. Teenagers with jobs are typically not supporting themselves and so don't need a minimum wage.Kmarion wrote:
Here minimum wage is really there for people just entering the job market.. teenagers, partimers, ect.DrunkFace wrote:
It's livable, but far from decent. A single bedroom apartment miles form the city would cost you about $350 a week another $50 or so on food then you'll need a car, petrol, water, electricity etc. If you're lucky you'll be able to save a few dollars every week, but you'll never get ahead, never have enough for a deposit on a house, never be able to afford any kind of holiday except maybe camping. Minimum wage is there so you can exist and thats about it.
Age
21+ get 100% $14.31
20 get 90% $12.88
19 get 80% $11.45
18 get 70% $10.02
17 get 60% $ 8.59
<16 get 50% $ 7.16
Last edited by DrunkFace (2009-07-25 09:53:33)
Makes sense.DrunkFace wrote:
They are reduced.Bertster7 wrote:
Who in my opinion shouldn't be entitled to a minimum wage - or only a substantially reduced one. Teenagers with jobs are typically not supporting themselves and so don't need a minimum wage.Kmarion wrote:
Here minimum wage is really there for people just entering the job market.. teenagers, partimers, ect.
Age
21+ get 100% $14.31
20 get 90% $12.88
19 get 80% $11.45
18 get 70% $10.02
17 get 60% $ 8.59
<16 get 50% $ 7.16
$14.31 is minimum wage? Seems quite high....
AUDBertster7 wrote:
Makes sense.DrunkFace wrote:
They are reduced.Bertster7 wrote:
Who in my opinion shouldn't be entitled to a minimum wage - or only a substantially reduced one. Teenagers with jobs are typically not supporting themselves and so don't need a minimum wage.
Age
21+ get 100% $14.31
20 get 90% $12.88
19 get 80% $11.45
18 get 70% $10.02
17 get 60% $ 8.59
<16 get 50% $ 7.16
$14.31 is minimum wage? Seems quite high....
works out as 27p.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Ah, so not real dollars....FatherTed wrote:
AUDBertster7 wrote:
Makes sense.DrunkFace wrote:
They are reduced.
Age
21+ get 100% $14.31
20 get 90% $12.88
19 get 80% $11.45
18 get 70% $10.02
17 get 60% $ 8.59
<16 get 50% $ 7.16
$14.31 is minimum wage? Seems quite high....
works out as 27p.
(still works out as substantially more than the UK minimum, way more than the US minimum)
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-07-25 10:05:25)
yup. i agree with your thoughts on minimum wage in the UK for <18, there shouldnt be one. I've been workin since i was about 13 lol, for like £3 an hour at times. really makes you value what you earnt.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
There have been conclusive studies where increases in minimum wages have had negligible negative effects on employment. Why?Harmor wrote:
I think minimum wage laws actually increase poverty and reliance on government programs. See watch:DrunkFace wrote:
Well you could read the next paragraphI even bolded the important part.The minimum wage has a strong social appeal, rooted in concern about the ability of markets to provide income equity for the least able members of the work force. An obvious solution to this concern is to redefine the wage structure politically to achieve a socially preferable distribution of income. Thus, minimum wage laws have usually been judged against the criterion of reducing poverty
A person has no skills. They look for a job. If the minimum wage is set too high they can't find a job and will make $0 and rely on the government safety net.
If it is set low they will find a job they are willing to work for (if employer A is paying more for an unskilled job than employer B then they will work for employer A).
Illegals though complete for the same jobs unfortunately keeping the wage for unskilled labor low.
The last I looked (too lazy right now), only 4% of the workforce make the minimum wage for more than 6 months. And typically these are jobs where they get tips (i.e. waittress, bus boy, velet, etc...), so they are actually making more than the minimum wage.
The problem is that Democratic leaders use the minimum wage as a wedge issue. I'm surprised they are bringing it up now...usually this is an election year issue to garner more votes from the poor.
Oh one additional point, many unions like the increase in the minimum wage because their wages are based on a multiple of the minimum wage.
Now I agree that the minimum wage is there to stop sweat shop workers, but if we have an economy where workers are not forced to stay with any one employer - a work at will system - then we shouldn't have a minimum wage at all.
Businesses always need workers and the demand for labour is inelastic.
If there are 1000 people looking for a job and the equilibrium point is $10 but the poverty point is $14 then all 1000 people are in technical poverty. Now if you implement a minimum wage of $14 then with an demand elasticity of 1 would see 714 people with jobs and out of poverty and 286 jobless. But because demand is inelastic companies will hire more like 950 reducing poverty for more people. Yes prices will rise but not by nearly as much as the pay increase that most minimum wage recipients would receive.
Considering how expensive Australia is, that's actually not much.Kmarion wrote:
That's cool.. you don't really have to be good at anything in Australia to make a descent wage ... nice.DrunkFace wrote:
Whatever a 38 hour a week is to cover a basic standard of living.
Here its $543.78 a week or $14.31 an hour.
Because it forces would be employees to discriminate against teens... Of course it also discriminates against the unskilled laborer.Bertster7 wrote:
Who in my opinion shouldn't be entitled to a minimum wage - or only a substantially reduced one. Teenagers with jobs are typically not supporting themselves and so don't need a minimum wage.Kmarion wrote:
Here minimum wage is really there for people just entering the job market.. teenagers, partimers, ect.DrunkFace wrote:
It's livable, but far from decent. A single bedroom apartment miles form the city would cost you about $350 a week another $50 or so on food then you'll need a car, petrol, water, electricity etc. If you're lucky you'll be able to save a few dollars every week, but you'll never get ahead, never have enough for a deposit on a house, never be able to afford any kind of holiday except maybe camping. Minimum wage is there so you can exist and thats about it.
Time for a classic..
Xbone Stormsurgezz