# Obama plans to raise the min. wage to $9 an hour. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 15, 2013, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366 "2013-02-15T03:33:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/281 "2013-02-27T22:47:07Z")
Roger: Just to be clear, and this is probably mostly my fault, I’m arguing two different positions here. 1. Given where we are now, I would not lower the MW. I would index it to inflation. I think it’s too firmly built into our system. 2. If we were starting from scratch, I’d prefer an EITC rather than a MW. I would rather we didn’t build a MW into our system, but looked at ways to offer assistance at whatever level a person was employed at, if they needed it. If they are someone else’s dependent or they are part of a household that doesn’t need assistance, then no, they don’t get any government assistance. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/282 "2013-02-27T22:48:55Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > So, these low paying jobs either would be taken or they wouldn’t. You seem to agree that they, in fact, would be taken. That means that someone feels it’s in his best interest to work for that particular wage. Right? So I’m not seeing the problem. I believe you aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/283 "2013-02-27T22:50:03Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Roger: > > Just to be clear, and this is probably mostly my fault, I’m arguing two different positions here. > > 1. Given where we are now, I would not lower the MW. I would index it to inflation. I think it’s too firmly built into our system. > > 2. If we were starting from scratch, I’d prefer an EITC rather than a MW. I would rather we didn’t build a MW into our system, but looked at ways to offer assistance at whatever level a person was employed at, if they needed it. If they are someone else’s dependent or they are part of a household that doesn’t need assistance, then no, they don’t get any government assistance. Oh. Then I apologize because I misunderstood what you have been trying to say then. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/284 "2013-02-27T22:53:52Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Protections like minimum wages? Some countries that do not have government-set minimum wage: Sweden, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/285 "2013-02-27T22:55:32Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Some countries that do not have government-set minimum wage: Sweden, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, Which by an amazing coincidence is also a list of countries that have labor unions so strong that they can dictate wages to companies. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/286 "2013-02-27T22:59:41Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Some countries that do not have government-set minimum wage: Sweden, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, Let me help you with a list of countries where neither the government nor labor unions set minimum wages: Somalia, Ethopia, Tonga, Quatar, UAE. Doh! Almost forgot Workers Paradise of North Korea! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/287 "2013-02-27T23:05:33Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > I believe you aren’t. That’s where you were supposed to respond with a “Well, the problem is \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_”. Now if you can’t formulate an intelligent rebuttal or if you feel you’ve been boxed in a corner with your own words and are flummoxed as to how to respond, I can definitely see how that would be a problem, one that might cause you to offer the non-point you typed above. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/288 "2013-02-27T23:51:21Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That’s where you were supposed to respond with a “Well, the problem is \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_”. Now if you can’t formulate an intelligent rebuttal or if you feel you’ve been boxed in a corner with your own words and are flummoxed as to how to respond, I can definitely see how that would be a problem, one that might cause you to offer the non-point you typed above. I’m not boxed into any corners, or flumoxed. You said: > [@magellan01](#): > > So, these low paying jobs either would be taken or they wouldn’t. You seem to agree that they, in fact, would be taken. That means that someone feels it’s in his best interest to work for that particular wage. Right? So I’m not seeing the problem. Your opinion is that people society shouldn’t guarantee even a bare minimum of dignity and compensation for workers, mine is different and we won’t see eye to eye so there isn’t a point in discussion. I wasn’t being snarky, you LITERALLY don’t see a problem with slave wages in the USA in 2013. Curious though would YOU want to live in a neighborhood of only people getting paid $4/hr? Or is it only okay when it’s other people’s ghetto slums with slave wages? Because I bet you it would be none too safe to walk around at night in one, desperate times call for desperate measures and all. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/289 "2013-02-28T00:06:37Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > So you don’t die? And can live another day and figure out how to get someone to pay you more than a pittance? And then get a little better job, and a little better one after that?Seems pretty easy to answer, actually. Yes, I get it. Corporations exist to make money. They do a pretty damn good job at it too. However, I’m not a CEO, and I doubt I ever will be. I’m like most Americans – struggling to get by. I look at CEO’s who have more money than they could ever spend. I see this trend continuing. You don’t seem to understand the danger in it. Look at it this way. What is the better option for the company and society in general? Option 1: pay your lowest workers a decent wage. Invest in them. Support further education and benefits. Yes, it cuts into profits at the top, but CEO’s will still be fabulously wealthy. At the end of the day we are all better for it. Option 2: The current choice. Pay your workers as little as possible. Give them no benefits or help with education. Lobby to have their social services cut. Impoverish a huge part of the population. Become SUPER fabulously wealthy. Why is this so hard to understand? Are you a CEO or are you apart of the middle class? I’m going to bet your with the middle class. Why are you fighting against your own best interest? These corporations have ENOUGH. It’s not even a fucking opinion as people like to say. They do not need your help with this bullshit Libertarian ideology. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/290 "2013-02-28T00:09:21Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > I’m not boxed into any corners, or flumoxed. Apparently not, as is revealed by this post. Surely you could see how I thought you might be. > [@rogerbox](#): > > Your opinion is that people society shouldn’t guarantee even a bare minimum of dignity and compensation for workers, _My opinion_ is that you show _more_ dignity for workers by not dictating a minimum wage at all. By not having one you’re sating to a man that he’s free to place his own value on his time and sweat, and that whatever wage he actually winds up receiving he is fully entitled to. > [@rogerbox](#): > > mine is different and we won’t see eye to eye so there isn’t a point in discussion. I wasn’t being snarky, you LITERALLY don’t see a problem with slave wages in the USA in 2013. People through around “slave wage” as if no on will notice the sleight of hand. The fact is that most slaves received no wage, and those who did certainly had no say in whether they would accept it or not. This sort of dishonesty and appeal to emotion is why these discussions are so frustrating. I suggest you read up on chattel slavery in the U.S. Also, no snark intended. > [@rogerbox](#): > > Curious though would YOU want to live in a neighborhood of only people getting paid $4/hr? Or is it only okay when it’s other people’s ghetto slums with slave wages? Because I bet you it would be none too safe to walk around at night in one, desperate times call for desperate measures and all. The emotional, incorrect and fallacious “slave wage aside”, I would probably avoid those neighborhoods they way I tend to avoid the poorest neighborhoods now. But you know what, someone who chooses to accept a $4 job probably won’t be a problem. Why? Because he’s busy working. I think on main point of departure for us is the notion that a MW should be a living wage. I think that’s counterproductive in the extreme. The message that our policies should send is that you get paid what you work is worth. No more, no less. If you have zero skills you’ll need to accept the lowest wage—that day. But as you acquire skills and offer value as simple as always showing up on time, you will be able to make more. And more again. Why anyone would want to divorce people from that concept is quite bizarre to me. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/291 "2013-02-28T00:14:27Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > I’m not boxed into any corners, or flumoxed. You said: > Your opinion is that people society shouldn’t guarantee even a bare minimum of dignity and compensation for workers, mine is different and we won’t see eye to eye so there isn’t a point in discussion. I wasn’t being snarky, you LITERALLY don’t see a problem with slave wages in the USA in 2013. > > Curious though would YOU want to live in a neighborhood of only people getting paid $4/hr? Or is it only okay when it’s other people’s ghetto slums with slave wages? Because I bet you it would be none too safe to walk around at night in one, desperate times call for desperate measures and all. Yeah they don’t seem to get this. This is why I keep pointing out how dangerous this point of view is. These people seem to think that no minimum wage, unions, social programs, and low taxes will somehow make everything better. When in actuality, it will just result in anarchy. More often than not people are going to fail. So when they don’t have money, food, shelter, or anything, then what? Well, I’ll bet they’ll come rob your ass. So you’ll either get jacked, get killed or injured in the process, or defend yourself which just lands them in prison with you and I footing the bill with our taxpayer dollars. BUT, the corporations will make more money. Great idea let me tell ya. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/292 "2013-02-28T00:22:05Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > But you know what, someone who chooses to accept a $4 job probably won’t be a problem. Why? Because he’s busy working. > > I think on main point of departure for us is the notion that a MW should be a living wage. I think that’s counterproductive in the extreme. The message that our policies should send is that you get paid what you work is worth. No more, no less. If you have zero skills you’ll need to accept the lowest wage—that day. But as you acquire skills and offer value as simple as always showing up on time, you will be able to make more. And more again. Why anyone would want to divorce people from that concept is quite bizarre to me. What happens when that $4 hr job doesn’t pay enough to live? (which it won’t) Then what? How do you get skills? Answer: Education. How do you get an education? Answer: Money. So, please elaborate on how a $4 hour job, or possibly less, is going to wind up with all of these educated and skilled workers? Please, keep in mind these same corporations that you are supporting are the ones trying to cut education. So, that is not an option. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/293 "2013-02-28T01:05:00Z")
> [@panaccione](#): > > What happens when that $4 hr job doesn’t pay enough to live? (which it won’t) Then what? Government assistance. You seem to want to paint virtually everyone who disagrees with you as being against government programs in toto. That notion is incorrect. But government assistance should be more like a safety net. Even better yet, a pair of crutches you use for a short time, not a prosthetic you live with. > [@panaccione](#): > > How do you get skills? Answer: Education. How do you get an education? Answer: Money. Formal education is only one way to get skills. And I’d say, not even the best way. Have you really never heard of learning something _on the job_? Have you not learned things on the job? I certainly have. And that includes even MW jobs I’ve had, including being a parking lot attendant or doing the nasty job of cleaning toilets at an amusement park. > [@panaccione](#): > > So, please elaborate on how a $4 hour job, or possibly less, is going to wind up with all of these educated and skilled workers? Please, keep in mind these same corporations that you are supporting are the ones trying to cut education. So, that is not an option. You take the best job you can get. Then you pay attention and see what is valued and work hard at providing _that_ to the employer. As I’ve said numerous times, in some MW jobs that can be as easy as being known as the guy who is always there, the guy who doesn’t complain, the guy that is always pleasant, the guy who is always five minutes early, etc. Serious question, do you really not know these things. I learned them when I was washing dishes and then cleaning bathrooms when I was in high school. Junior high for the dish washing job. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/294 "2013-02-28T01:08:48Z")
> [@panaccione](#): > > Yeah they don’t seem to get this. This is why I keep pointing out how dangerous this point of view is. These people seem to think that no minimum wage, unions, social programs, and low taxes will somehow make everything better. When in actuality, it will just result in anarchy. More often than not people are going to fail. So when they don’t have money, food, shelter, or anything, then what? Well, I’ll bet they’ll come rob your ass. So you’ll either get jacked, get killed or injured in the process, or defend yourself which just lands them in prison with you and I footing the bill with our taxpayer dollars. The topic is the minimum wage. And as has already been pointed out in a recent post, there are plenty of countries that liberals profess to admire that have neither a MW nor anarchy: [QUOTE=Terr] Some countries that do not have government-set minimum wage: Sweden, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, [/QUOTE] Also, can you point out who in this thread has argued for zero social programs? If you can’t, maybe you could dispense with the straw. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/295 "2013-02-28T01:17:50Z")
Fair enough. Honestly, if you support social programs, I can be more lenient with the idea of no minimum wages. I think that’s how it should work. First, we build our foundation by creating a **strong** safety net. We work to make access to food, housing, education, justice, and a number of other programs as abundant as possible. Once we do this, then we can free business up to do as they please. But, not the other way around. All I can say is that when you espouse ideas like no minimum wage, without being forthcoming about the need for social programs, people are going to assume you are Conservative. Conservatives share this idea, but at the same time do not support social programs. Like it or not, there are two main parties - Democrats and Republicans. I’m sure you can tell that I vote Democrat. Yes, of course I’ve heard about learning on the job. However, in a technological world, we need more scientists, engineers, doctors, and the like. That takes formal education. More engineers = less Walmart workers. Also, I have a good work ethic. I don’t know what would make you think I don’t. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/296 "2013-02-28T01:43:09Z")
> [@panaccione](#): > > Fair enough. Honestly, if you support social programs, I can be more lenient with the idea of no minimum wages. I think that’s how it should work. First, we build our foundation by creating a **strong** safety net. We work to make access to food, housing, education, justice, and a number of other programs as abundant as possible. Once we do this, then we can free business up to do as they please. But, not the other way around. We’d probably disagree on the levels of social programs, but agree they there should be a safety net. But I have to ask you, what do you mean by “as abundant as possible”? Should we have free groceries available in every city, every neighborhood, every block? The point is that all these things cost money. I accept that your “as possible” stipulates a level of reasonableness, but again, I’m sure that not everyone would agree with your interpretation. Nor mine. > [@panaccione](#): > > All I can say is that when you espouse ideas like no minimum wage, without being forthcoming about the need for social programs, people are going to assume you are Conservative. Conservatives share this idea, but at the same time do not support social programs. Like it or not, there are two main parties - Democrats and Republicans. I’m sure you can tell that I vote Democrat. I have to ask you, where the hell are you getting this from? I am a conservative and know quite a few conservatives, and not a one—not one—believes that the country should not have social programs. In fact, can you identify one? Even on this board? Just one? Maybe you’re conflating conservatism with libertarianism, but even so, I’m not aware of _anyone_ who advocates no social programs at all. > [@panaccione](#): > > Yes, of course I’ve heard about learning on the job. However, in a technological world, we need more scientists, engineers, doctors, and the like. That takes formal education. More engineers = less Walmart workers. Also, I have a good work ethic. I don’t know what would make you think I don’t. There’s much wrong here. First, there will always be workers at the lower end of the spectrum, because there will always be a lowest end of the spectrum. We will always need people to bus tables, wash dishes, clean bathrooms at amusement parks and sling burgers. Next, your “more engineers = [less]Walmart workers” is incorrect, I’d say. In fact, the more people who have money to spend the more Walmart workers that will be needed. Unless you think that, given the choice, people prefer to pay more for paper towels and the like than they have to. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/297 "2013-02-28T02:03:56Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > We’d probably disagree on the levels of social programs, but agree they there should be a safety net. But I have to ask you, what do you mean by “as abundant as possible”? Should we have free groceries available in every city, every neighborhood, every block? The point is that all these things cost money. I accept that your “as possible” stipulates a level of reasonableness, but again, I’m sure that not everyone would agree with your interpretation. Nor mine. As possible is exactly what it means. If we can create abundant food that’s free to everyone, then let’s do it. Yes, I understand these things cost money and at this point, it’s not feasible. But, the goal remains the same. > [@magellan01](#): > > I have to ask you, where the hell are you getting this from? I am a conservative and know quite a few conservatives, and not a one—not one—believes that the country should not have social programs. In fact, can you identify one? Even on this board? Just one? Maybe you’re conflating conservatism with libertarianism, but even so, I’m not aware of _anyone_ who advocates no social programs at all. Most of the politicians. They’re looking to cut Welfare, Social-Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Education, and more. That’s the point really. **You** may not share their ideas, but your views have implications. That’s why I take the stance that I do. > [@magellan01](#): > > There’s much wrong here. First, there will always be workers at the lower end of the spectrum, because there will always be a lowest end of the spectrum. We will always need people to bus tables, wash dishes, clean bathrooms at amusement parks and sling burgers. Next, your “more engineers = [less]Walmart workers” is incorrect, I’d say. In fact, the more people who have money to spend the more Walmart workers that will be needed. Unless you think that, given the choice, people prefer to pay more for paper towels and the like than they have to. No, this point stands. More engineers = less waiters, dishwashers, burger slingers, and whoever else. With technology, we can automate these simple processes. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/298 "2013-02-28T03:41:36Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > _My opinion_ is that you show _more_ dignity for workers by not dictating a minimum wage at all. By not having one you’re sating to a man that he’s free to place his own value on his time and sweat, and that whatever wage he actually winds up receiving he is fully entitled to. Yeah protections like minimum wage are SO OFFENSIVE to the poor people, I bet every dollar they make over the $4 their labor is actually worth is like so many more spits in the face. > [@](#): > > People through around “slave wage” as if no on will notice the sleight of hand. The fact is that most slaves received no wage, and those who did certainly had no say in whether they would accept it or not. This sort of dishonesty and appeal to emotion is why these discussions are so frustrating. I suggest you read up on chattel slavery in the U.S. Also, no snark intended. Would you prefer “sweatshop”, does that not offend you? [quote[The emotional, incorrect and fallacious “slave wage aside”, I would probably avoid those neighborhoods they way I tend to avoid the poorest neighborhoods now. But you know what, someone who chooses to accept a $4 job probably won’t be a problem. Why? Because he’s busy working. [/quote] Here you reveal the typical canard: That no one in poor neighborhoods works ALREADY. MOST POOR PEOPLE WORK. The only thing you are doing by lowering the minimum wage in ghettos is PAYING THEM LESS, making them WORSE. > [@](#): > > I think on main point of departure for us is the notion that a MW should be a living wage. I think that’s counterproductive in the extreme. The message that our policies should send is that you get paid what you work is worth. No more, no less. If you have zero skills you’ll need to accept the lowest wage—that day. But as you acquire skills and offer value as simple as always showing up on time, you will be able to make more. And more again. Why anyone would want to divorce people from that concept is quite bizarre to me. This is just utterly hilarious and shows how out of touch you are with minimum wage and the poor. You know what someone’s reward is for showing up on time is making moor? No, your reward is making minimum wage and not being fired, if you’re lucky. Bosses are not sitting around looking at minimum wage workers and waiting for them to show their worth and improved skillsets so they can pay them more, that is utterly laughable. Minimum wage isn’t just shitty because you get paid as little as legally possible, you also typically are treated as bad as legally possible (and sometimes illegally). There is no golden ladder to the top as long as you show up on time and do your job. You cannot leave your Burger King job and put on your resume “BK: showed up on time with good attitude, learned how to ring up a cash register and eventually learned how to order mayonaise”, no one gives a shit. There is no rich guy just waiting to see you try hard and are worth investing in at minimum wage, you are a disposeable cog in the machine and no more. Typically, in general, et al. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/299 "2013-02-28T12:51:03Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I don’t think you’ve thought this through. Corporations exist to make money for their shareholders. Large corporations like the ones cited are competing with every other corporation in existence for investments. If they decide to eat the rise in minimum wage, it eats into the return investors get, and that means they look elsewhere to invest thier money. So the benevolence of **Panaccione, Inc.** , reduces the amount of money invested in the company. And that means less growth and fewer employees hired. And that means more people without a job. I doubt the existence of the “corporations exist to make money for shareholders” rule too, at least in its current form as justification for anything that could be considered cheap. I work for a non-profit so the statement is untrue on its face - that corporations exist to make money for shareholders - although we could all probably agree that “wealth” is, in fact, “money” and save going off on a possible tangent. Investors don’t like to lose money; it defeats the purpose of investment, and it’s also true that investors do not automatically dump all shares in Acme, Inc. when the company posts a third quarter loss, because that _also_ defeats the purpose. A corporation often springs from a privately-held company that wants to expand and at the same time create for itself an identity apart from its owners as a form of protection. Then the public is invited in to become owners with the expectation of investment growth, not promises of profit on the dollar. Nothing would say “risk” quite like paying employees $4/hour, so at that point what looks to be an obvious cost savings might trigger re-evaluation by investors based on the company’s lack of ethics and/or investment in its own workforce, and a possibly damaged brand. It’s just not that easy. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366/300 "2013-02-28T13:17:48Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > MOST POOR PEOPLE WORK. Unfortunately, despite the capitals, that isn’t true, at least not in the sense of “working full time, year round”. Less than half of low-income families have a full-time, year-round worker. ([Cite](http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/411900_liwf_fact_sheet.pdf).) > [@](#): > > …the poor were primarily children and adults who had not participated in the labor force during the year. [Cite](http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswp2010.pdf). > [@](#): > > While many of the working poor were usual full-time workers, these workers only accounted for 4 percent of all workers who usually work full time. Cite.[http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/ArticleReader?itemid=00006785](http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/ArticleReader?itemid=00006785) Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-plans-to-raise-the-min-wage-to-9-an-hour/650366.md?page=16)