Note that even if minimum wage rises to maintain constant-dollar parity, minimum wage earners will still be getting an ever-shrinking share of the economic pie because the real constant-dollar economy grows faster than population. If this graph is correct, any wage would have had to have tripled, even in constant-dollars, to represent the same “share of the pie” as it was 50 years ago. (I’m not claiming that such steep hikes would be appropriate, just pointing out that “maintaining constant-dollar wage” is very far from a cure for America’s rising inequality.
Anecdotes do not equal data. If McDonald’s could stay in business by paying $10/hr that doesn’t mean that Joe’s Hardware can.
And this wage would certainly create a market inefficiency. What if NO hardware store in a small town could survive by paying this wage? What if it was a job that could and should be done by a 16 year old kid? Why does Joe have to pay him a wage that gives him internet (which his parents are paying for) and tuition money for college (that he isn’t old enough to attend)?
You realize that young kids work at these places. Why do you demand a wage that will support a person when a lot of these workers are doing it part time for beer money?
You have provided a lot of links proving something I already agree with (and supported by the link I provided). The minimum wage is unquestionably significantly lower than 40 - 50 years ago. I objected that to the statement that it is the lowest for 50 years. It is not. It is amongst the highest in the last 30 years, but significantly lower than 40 -50 years ago.
According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the median age of a fast-food worker today is 29 years old. Do you consider a 29-year-old to be a ‘young kid’? And of course since that is the median age, there are a lot of older people working those jobs too. Not only that, but fast-food is not the only job out there that pays minimum wage; and a lot of those jobs (for example, the majority of workers at the local Home Depot) are older.
We’re not talking about ‘beer money’ in the majority of cases, as much as conservatives want people to believe it. We’re talking about adults that need enough income to live on, or else use public assistance. And I’m only talking about the minimum wage for a single person. A lot of these workers have to support families.
So you’ll stop opposing attempts to increase revenues through taxes, right? :dubious:
I won’t. We spend too much on things that are far less important than ameliorating poverty. We can find the money elsewhere, and we can start by eliminating Social Security for well off retirees.
We conservatives may rail at the welfare state and federal spending in general, but I think we can compromise. A safety net that focuses on the poor while spending the same amount of money or a little less is preferable to universal entitlements.
If I come to your house and offer to keep the lawn mowed and the weeds trimmed, if you accept should it be your legal obligation to pay me enough to buy internet and tuition for community college? That’s the fundamental disagreement we have. Not all jobs are worth a full time livable wage.
But you would at least refund the 15% tax on the first ~$100k of wages that they paid for there entire lives, right? Right? 
Social security was supposed to be a “pay as you go” program and not a government teat suckler.
If you say all jobs are not worth a living wage, then you are saying that not all people deserve to live.
.
That all depends on how we went about reform and what else was being done as part of the process. You’re right that taken on its own it seems unfair, but if the alternative is raising taxes, it probably makes those same well off retirees better off.
Not at all. There are other factors to consider. First, the economy needs entry level jobs for people with no work experience. Second, the economy needs jobs for people who are supplementing household income, rather than being primary breadwinners. Third, a job is worth what it produces, not what the employee needs. Would we say that if you have a person performing a service for you, such as cleaning your house, that you owe them a living wage? And if you believed you did, at what point would you just rather do it yourself?
And that’s the crux of the issue, the last point. There are already automated order taking machines available for fast food restaurants. At a certain point, it will just become more attractive to use them more widely.
If wages were tied as close as you say to productivity, the minimum wage would be $21.72 per hour (in 2012).
A business is not the overall economy. Has productivity increased that much in retail and fast food? I doubt it.
One thing I have noticed though, and you can check this yourself, is that the most profitable businesses in terms of margins are the best paying, while businesses with slim margins tend to rely more on low wage labor. Microsoft, high margin, high wages. Wal-mart, low margins, low wages. Feel free to find contradicting examples. I’ve tried, and it’s not easy. Maybe Coca-Cola counts, but I don’t know what they make in bottling plants.
If I’m 16 years old and offer to mow the neighbors’ grass, should he be required as a matter of federal law, to pay me a wage that gives me home internet and tuition for school? You seem to be saying “yes” but as others have pointed out, not all jobs are worth that. Second incomes and young kids working have a place in the economy.
Not to mention, are people who sell their labor to an organization entitled to special considerations, as opposed to people who sell other things or people who sell their labor to individuals?
Shouldn’t a pizza restaurant owner be entitled to a living wage? If he’s not making enough, is it because his customers are too stingy? Or is he simply not a very good pizza restaurant owner? We tend to be a lot more cold blooded and rational about these things when it’s not labor, and I think it’s because most of us sell our labor. Thus we consider it special and more worthy of consideration than one who sells widgets.
Why do you insist on implying that most minimum wage workers are teenagers, when it’s been pointed out that, for example, the median age of a fast-food worker is 29?
Maybe we should Askthepizzaguy:
If your pizza isn’t worth an extra 27¢, then you’re probably not a very good pizza restaurant owner. If 27¢ is going to cost you your business, then you’re probably not a very good pizza restaurant owner.
If your estate is large enough to require 40 hours a week of lawn care, damn straight I should get paid at least that much.
But if I can pay a 16 year old kid less than you demand, are you saying that the feds should legally price him out of the market? Make our contract illegal?
Why? It is an honest question. What if I just like cutting lawns and want to make some spare change and get some exercise while helping the neighborhood look better for a reasonable price? Let’s say I am a retired multi-millionaire who really likes landscaping the same way others like golf. Should that be illegal and should that activity always be delegated to authorized employers who charge $30 an hour or more (after all overhead, taxes, benefits and wages are included). It sounds like everyone would be losing if that rule was enforced.
I don’t believe consensual financial translations between adults are anyone else’s business and that does not change due to personal circumstances no matter how good or bad.
Yes. And if you can pay an illegal alien less than a sixteen year old, the government should be able to make that contract illegal. Oh, wait, they already do.
People keep trumping out the teenager doing odd jobs, but this is a red herring. And everyone knows it.
But I’ll play.
Let’s say it will take Neighbor Kid an hour to mow your grass and trim your bushes. It’s 99 degrees outside.
Are you really going to pay the kid just $7.25? Wouldn’t most folk hand him a ten dollar bill, at the very least?
If you found out that your son had worked out in 99 degree heat for $7.25, how would you feel towards the neighbor who had hired him? Especially if the guy had the biggest, fanciest house on the block. Would you think he was a decent person? Or a stingy dick?
When I was moved into my old apartment, I had a few pieces of heavy furniture that needed to be brought in. I waved down a neighbor kid and had him help me carry them in. And as cheap as I am, I gave the kid $20 bucks for his trouble…and for saving my back. I didn’t ask the kid if he was saving up for college. He could have been raising a child for all I know, but I didn’t ask. He helped me do something I didn’t want to do, and I paid him for his ten minutes of time. His age, his family life, and his aspirations didn’t even figure into it.
Maybe if we treated 16-year-old kids like their labor was just as meaningful as any grown person’s, you’d see more of them embracing the work ethic and less of them being mopey and cynical.