# The virtues of a $10/hour minimum wage **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 24, 2016, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021 "2016-04-24T20:40:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/61 "2016-04-25T16:24:18Z")
The knee-jerk conservative retort that minimum wage is to some extent counter to sound economic principles is not completely wrong. I, for one, would not argue so strongly for minimum wage hikes if a good safety-net program were in place — perhaps a negative income tax or, as I argue in the other thread, government subsidies for healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc. Will the conservatives arguing in this thread agree to push for a negative income tax, or something similar? _If so, I proudly join you._ But if the political climate in U.S. is such that negative income tax, or expensive safety net (healthcare, etc.) is NOT on the table, then minimum wage hikes are, at worst, a least of evils and I condemn those who oppose them. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/62 "2016-04-25T16:25:07Z")
> [@funky\_little\_lee](#): > > It seems you think only white-collar professionals are “worth more than that.” There are a lot of people in the skilled trades that would disagree. In a purely economic sense, he has a point. If someone has access to an oversupply of labor and an abundance of people who can do the job, then the demand for that labor goes down – again, in a purely economic sense. Management pays itself more and gets away with it because there is a limited supply of people with the ability to make the decisions that they make. The fact that this supply of managerial or executive talent is limited doesn’t guarantee that they will make good decisions, but that’s not the point. None of these economic realities address a different layer of economic realities, which is that individual interests often have a different set of needs and operate with different motives than individual laborers. Modern republicans operate with the assumption that if you address the needs of corporations and executives and just allow the market to operate on its own whims then the benefits will eventually be realized by everyone, or at least everyone who ‘deserves’ to recognize those benefits. That, of course, is economic fiction. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/63 "2016-04-25T16:32:14Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > But as a hard and fast rule with no exceptions, that is demonstrably false. Obvious counter example include things like college, Birken bags, bus travel, Hamilton tickets, etc. He’s assuming that the labor market for minimum wage labor is price-sensitive, which is probably something of a reasonable assumption. However, it also assumes there are readily available substitutes, which probably isn’t the case in the short run, so it doesn’t necessarily translate into mass layoffs, as they still need people to do the jobs they’re doing, whether they’re paid $7.25 or $10. But in the long run, raising wages from the outside probably does make substitutes like automation more attractive to businesses that have a large labor component to their costs. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/64 "2016-04-25T16:47:14Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > The knee-jerk conservative retort that minimum wage is to some extent counter to sound economic principles is not completely wrong. I, for one, would not argue so strongly for minimum wage hikes if a good safety-net program were in place — perhaps a negative income tax or, as I argue in the other thread, government subsidies for healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc. > > Will the conservatives arguing in this thread agree to push for a negative income tax, or something similar? _If so, I proudly join you._ > > But if the political climate in U.S. is such that negative income tax, or expensive safety net (healthcare, etc.) is NOT on the table, then minimum wage hikes are, at worst, a least of evils and I condemn those who oppose them. I’ll join you too. If the point is to help people living in poverty, that population doesn’t overlap much with MW earners. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/65 "2016-04-25T16:52:43Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > I’ll join you too. If the point is to help people living in poverty, that population doesn’t overlap much with MW earners. How much do people living in poverty make? ---
**Author:** ![ziper1221](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a183cd/32.png) [@ziper1221](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ziper1221)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/66 "2016-04-25T16:57:49Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > How much do people living in poverty make? According to the federal govt: $11,880 for individuals $16,020 for a family of 2 $20,160 for a family of 3 $24,300 for a family of 4 $28,440 for a family of 5 $32,580 for a family of 6 $36,730 for a family of 7 $40,890 for a family of 8 ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/67 "2016-04-25T16:59:41Z")
> [@ziper1221](#): > > According to the federal govt: > $11,880 for individuals > $16,020 for a family of 2 > $20,160 for a family of 3 > $24,300 for a family of 4 > $28,440 for a family of 5 > $32,580 for a family of 6 > $36,730 for a family of 7 > $40,890 for a family of 8 Okay, how much per hour? ---
**Author:** ![ziper1221](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a183cd/32.png) [@ziper1221](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ziper1221)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/68 "2016-04-25T17:04:53Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Okay, how much per hour? $5.71 for individuals $7.70 for a family of 2 $9.69 for a family of 3 $11.68 for a family of 4 I am too lazy to do the rest, but there is the minimum wage break point. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/69 "2016-04-25T17:12:39Z")
> [@ziper1221](#): > > $5.71 for individuals > $7.70 for a family of 2 > $9.69 for a family of 3 > $11.68 for a family of 4 > > I am too lazy to do the rest, but there is the minimum wage break point. That presumes working a forty hour week. Many minimum wage jobs are part time. At the minimum wage, the $11,880 poverty level for a single person works out to slightly less than 30 hours a week. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/70 "2016-04-25T17:13:46Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > How much do people living in poverty make? You mean what is the threshold to be considered living in poverty? I see that was answered. Or what is their average wage? Keep in mind the majority either don’t work or don’t work full time. That’s excluding disabled, students, retired. And keep in mind that most MW earners are not living in poverty. So like I said, a solution that focuses on one population doesn’t necessarily address the other. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/71 "2016-04-25T17:15:29Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > And keep in mind that most MW earners are not living in poverty. Many are, if they work 30 hours a week or less. ---
**Author:** ![ziper1221](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a183cd/32.png) [@ziper1221](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ziper1221)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/72 "2016-04-25T17:17:43Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Many are, if they work 30 hours a week or less. But that seems like a meaningless measure. I can make 50 dollars an hour and be below the poverty line if I only work 3 hours a week. ---
**Author:** ![inscrutable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a88e4f/32.png) [@inscrutable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/inscrutable)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/73 "2016-04-25T17:22:47Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Many are, if they work 30 hours a week or less. Then it would seem that their problem is hours, not wages. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/74 "2016-04-25T17:28:29Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Many are, if they work 30 hours a week or less. And when I was working 70 hours per week – totally reasonable for a healthy guy in his twenties – for seven and change an hour, I was rolling in money. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/75 "2016-04-25T17:29:30Z")
Anyone else uncomfortable with how low those poverty thresholds are? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/76 "2016-04-25T17:43:11Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > The knee-jerk conservative retort that minimum wage is to some extent counter to sound economic principles is not completely wrong. I, for one, would not argue so strongly for minimum wage hikes if a good safety-net program were in place — perhaps a negative income tax or, as I argue in the other thread, government subsidies for healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc. > > Will the conservatives arguing in this thread agree to push for a negative income tax, or something similar? _If so, I proudly join you._ > > But if the political climate in U.S. is such that negative income tax, or expensive safety net (healthcare, etc.) is NOT on the table, then minimum wage hikes are, at worst, a least of evils and I condemn those who oppose them. I would support negative income tax as long as one does not forfeit the income by working a job. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/77 "2016-04-25T18:59:56Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I think a $10/hour minimum wage would have three good things going for it: > First of all, a $15/hour minimum wage isn’t going to pass. Not enough bipartisan popular support. But a $10/hour minimum wage is much more supportable. > > Second, it’s extremely easy to calculate, mathematically. You worked five hours? You get paid $50. You work eight hours? You get paid $80. Short of a $1/hour minimum wage, it’s the easiest minimum wage to be calculated that could be implemented. > > Third, it wouldn’t drive up unemployment, or raise product prices, as much as a $15/hour minimum wage would. All of these reasons are poorly thought out. [ul] [li]$10 is good because it’s possible, but $15 is bad because it’s not. Where does that leave $9.90?[/li][li]It’s good because it makes math easier? Because people are calculating wages, taxes, withholdings, etc. with slide rule? Accommodating the technologically challenged and treating them as though they are stupid is not a good reason.[/li][li]It won’t be as bad as something else that is also bad. Lots of things aren’t as bad as really bad things - that doesn’t make them good.[/li][/ul] I’m philosophically opposed to minimum wage at all - but I do think incremental increases have diffused costs (higher prices, people unhired that otherwise would be, etc.) and concentrated benefits (higher income among minimum wage earners). If we must have it, it should be tied to inflation. And in my area, places already have $10 min wage, or close to it. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/78 "2016-04-25T19:10:52Z")
> [@bump](#): > > He’s assuming that the labor market for minimum wage labor is price-sensitive, which is probably something of a reasonable assumption. > > However, it also assumes there are readily available substitutes, which probably isn’t the case in the short run, so it doesn’t necessarily translate into mass layoffs, as they still need people to do the jobs they’re doing, whether they’re paid $7.25 or $10. > > But in the long run, raising wages from the outside probably does make substitutes like automation more attractive to businesses that have a large labor component to their costs. It also creates inflation, however slight it might be. If you put more money in people’s pockets absent of market forces, it gives people more purchase power, which isn’t a bad thing. In fact, this additional purchase power can lead to additional economic spending, which is one of the economic arguments _for_ raising the minimum wage. The counter-argument is, how long will this stimulus last, and what the rest of the economy starts catching up to this ‘shot in the arm’ and begins raising prices to keep up with an increase in demand. I think you can make the economic argument that the minimum wage could be increased to $9-10 and that not only would it boost spending (a good thing) but that the additional ‘costs’ of raising wages could be absorbed throughout most of the economy. Even so, eventually, that stimulus will wear off, and there will indeed be a greater emphasis on economic efficiency. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/79 "2016-04-25T19:25:02Z")
> [@bump](#): > > He’s assuming… Which was his/her problem. Obviously if you make specific, general assumptions that don’t always exist in the real world, you can empirically verify a whole host of generally unsupportable sweeping statements. > [@bump](#): > > But in the long run, raising wages from the outside probably does make substitutes like automation more attractive to businesses that have a large labor component to their costs. Lowering your costs via automation is always attractive regardless of the origin of the financial pressure. The issue is if the proposed cost increases via a higher minimum wage are enough of an incentive to automate in ways a given business wouldn’t otherwise. I don’t think there is clear cut evidence either way at $10/hour. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2016, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021/80 "2016-04-25T20:27:53Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Let’s not. Those examples are not applicable to the larger market on the mainland (or even Hawai’i for that matter) because the population is too small for accurate comparison. The labor pool is small, as well as the demand in the market. Any change to market is going to be magnified immensely, in a way that just doesn’t occur in a mainland market. The small population means that the results are more clear. The US is so big that any one policy could be washed away by other events. The South Pacific is a good test of the basic economics and the results are exactly what Econ 101 predicts. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-virtues-of-a-10-hour-minimum-wage/753021.md?page=5)