Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
But Buck, shouldn't I feel upset that poor people with low wages are now making just as much as I am, a highly skilled worker who earned his way to a $15/hour wage?
Seattle sees fallout from $15 minimum wage, as other cities follow suit
- Thread starter TBoneJack
- Start date
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Not what I said. Understand what median wage is. Changing the the wage numbers at either end of the spectrum doesn't change the median. Now if massive numbers of low end wage earners lose their jobs because of a higher minimum wage, the median wage rises.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Supply is restricted by 200,000 LEA workers.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
You don't make anything but minimum wage, and part time, at that. You've already admitted you never made as much as $900 a month, so don't try to rewrite your resume now. That you think a highly skilled worker makes $15/hr is ample evidence you have no clue as to the pay a skilled worker makes.
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
I'll admit being accused of being "Spaced Out" at times, but never having my head in the sand.
http://www.alternet.org/economy/private-jet-security-write-10-most-insane-tax-loopholes
When education benefits the banks and not the country............
mollymcgrammar
Well-Known Member
Lots of highly skilled workers make about 15$ an hour. Maybe nit un high cost of living areas, but here in NEPA if you make 15$ an hour and working full time, your doing quite well.
Thats something that really depends on the area. I know guys with 10+ years experience in skilled labor feilds who make less than that, and like i said before thats what most of my crew makes now.
Yeah, they will probably pissed if minimum wage goes up that much and they dont get a nice raise.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
The median is defined as the point where 50% of the data points lie below (or above) .
However, in this particular case, I will concede you could be correct but by accident, only.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html
If one cranks out the hourly rate from the median annual data (using OECD stats for average hours worked), it should be found the median hourly wage hovers around $15.67 nationally.
So, while your logic is plausible it may be quite off the mark in the end as far as reality is concerned, ceteris paribus. A mixed outcome (some losses) would still bear out a higher median if the above amount is reasonably credible.
The point being, $15 WILL move the median higher, regardless, due to ripple effect at those margins.
But here's a following question, what will that ripple look like?
I suspect it will be akin to a sinc function.
The negative values being the "vacuum" created by corresponding wages shifting to the right (in turn, creating the positive values). It's a fairly common solution arising from Harmonic Oscillators in 3D, for instance. Considering the cyclic habits of humans and nature of liquid markets, it is not out of the range of plausibility; although, grasping the concept may be arguably difficult for the median, orthodox economist. That's why Social Sciences need more input from the Hard ones, if they are going to evolve, with the Mathematicians in the ether belittling us all for not crossing our t's and dotting our time-derivatives. Fallacious Neo-Classical perspectives have been withering away gradually since the GFC, but there is a void in their departure still needing to be filled, with plenty of tautologies yet to be dismantled.
mollymcgrammar
Well-Known Member
What the fuck did i just read....The median is defined as the point where 50% of the data points lie below (or above) .
However, in this particular case, I will concede you could be correct but by accident, only.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html
If one cranks out the hourly rate from the median annual data (using OECD stats for average hours worked), it should be found the median hourly wage hovers around $15.67 nationally.
So, while your logic is plausible it may be quite off the mark in the end as far as reality is concerned, ceteris paribus. A mixed outcome (some losses) would still bear out a higher median if the above amount is reasonably credible.
The point being, $15 WILL move the median higher, regardless, due to ripple effect at those margins.
But here's a following question, what will that ripple look like?
I suspect it will be akin to a sinc function.
The negative values being the "vacuum" created by corresponding wages shifting to the right (in turn, creating the positive values). It's a fairly common solution arising from Harmonic Oscillators in 3D, for instance. Considering the cyclic habits of humans and nature of liquid markets, it is not out of the range of plausibility; although, grasping the concept may be arguably difficult for the median, orthodox economist. That's why Social Sciences need more input from the Hard ones, if they are going to evolve, with the Mathematicians in the ether belittling us all for not crossing our t's and dotting our time-derivatives. Fallacious Neo-Classical perspectives have been withering away gradually since the GFC, but there is a void in their departure still needing to be filled, with plenty of tautologies yet to be dismantled.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
What you fail to understand is that money is simply a representation of wealth and the basis will adjust accordingly. Money in and of itself has no value so printing more of it creates no value, instead it creates inflation and loss of buying power.The median is defined as the point where 50% of the data points lie below (or above) .
However, in this particular case, I will concede you could be correct but by accident, only.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html
If one cranks out the hourly rate from the median annual data (using OECD stats for average hours worked), it should be found the median hourly wage hovers around $15.67 nationally.
So, while your logic is plausible it may be quite off the mark in the end as far as reality is concerned, ceteris paribus. A mixed outcome (some losses) would still bear out a higher median if the above amount is reasonably credible.
The point being, $15 WILL move the median higher, regardless, due to ripple effect at those margins.
But here's a following question, what will that ripple look like?
I suspect it will be akin to a sinc function.
The negative values being the "vacuum" created by corresponding wages shifting to the right (in turn, creating the positive values). It's a fairly common solution arising from Harmonic Oscillators in 3D, for instance. Considering the cyclic habits of humans and nature of liquid markets, it is not out of the range of plausibility; although, grasping the concept may be arguably difficult for the median, orthodox economist. That's why Social Sciences need more input from the Hard ones, if they are going to evolve, with the Mathematicians in the ether belittling us all for not crossing our t's and dotting our time-derivatives. Fallacious Neo-Classical perspectives have been withering away gradually since the GFC, but there is a void in their departure still needing to be filled, with plenty of tautologies yet to be dismantled.
Raising the minimum wage raises costs which are factored into the costs of goods, by the time it sorts itself out the people making minimum wage are no better off. The government benefits from more tax revenue and higher taxes on goods and services created with the higher labor costs. SO, it is win win win for the government and lose lose lose for the consumer and the employee(s).
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
why do you idiots keep repeating this demonstrably false talking point?
a dozen eggs, august 1988: $0.909
a dozen eggs, august 2011: $1.711
+88%
gallon of milk, august 1995: $2.482 (restricted data set, sorry)
gallon of milk, august 2013: $3.448
+39%
bananas, june 1988: $0.501
bananas, june 2012: $0.605
+21%
coffee, march 1988: $2.634
coffee, march 2010: $3.565
+35%
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ap
all of this while the min wage went from $3.35 to $7.25, meaning it more than doubled (+116%).
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
No matter how many times you peddle this bullshit, it won't make it true
mollymcgrammar
Well-Known Member
I disagree with it benefiting our government, but it WILL cause prices to go up for most goods and services
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I don't dispute that, but the price increase will be a fraction of the wage increase, meaning wages will rise higher than prices will, meaning poor people will have more buying power. A one cent increase in a box of mac and cheese or a seventeen cent increase for a big mac does not justify keeping wages so low people require government assistance
mollymcgrammar
Well-Known Member
My only concern is the small buisness owners. I support a wage increase, but not increasing so high that it will force some companies to downsize or go under.
I spent alot of time today talking to my wife and one of my employees about how my buisness could be effected by this wage increase.
My wife is of the opinion that if i were to raise all my employees pay the same amount that the minimum wage was raised (7.25-15 would be 7.75.) that it would still give them the same amount per week more than what a minimum wage worker would make with the same hours.
Brandon (my employee and good friend) said that he thinks if he were in my position that he would do the same thing, but lay off the part time guys and just call them when i need a fill in. He said that if it were him, he would raise the wages over the course of a year or two so that it wasnt an immediate blow to the company and that i could gradually raise prices as well to make up for the labor cost, and he said he would also put out a flyer or letter to frequent customers to explain why the costs are going up and how we plan on doing it gradually. He then went on to tell me that he is pretty sure my crew would stick around even if i didnt give them an immediate raise, but even if they all left he would stay.
Someone told me Seattle has a policy to protect small buisness and make it easier for them to deal with the wage increase. Anyone care to explain?
My thought is that if the wage goes up dramatically, i will sit down with each employee and discuss what they think is fair and negotiate a new wage based off the experience and skill they posess. I may have to cut a guy or two as well, and possibly shorten some hours. Almost certainly the off season bonus would disappear.
Labor makes up about 35% of what i charge the client. (Depending on the type of job and not including material.) sometimes almost 80%. If my labor cost goes up 50% my prices clearly are going way up as well.
I wanna thank everyone so far thats posted on this thread. This discussion may actually help me out, it has me really focusing on how to prepare for the future. Eventually the minimum wage IS going up. Whether its to 15$ or 10$ i dont know, but either way i need to be ready for the way it will effect me.
Worst case scenario, ill sell my buisness and contracts to a larger outfit. I bet i could get 75,000 for just the equipment and the name. With the contracts.... Well im not sure but my inital investment was 8,000 so i win either way lol
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
are you just ignoring the empirical evidence about wage increases versus the cost of goods that i keep posting?
mollymcgrammar
Well-Known Member
The 15 an hour raise is steeper than most (if not all) increases in the past. The wage is going to more than double.
I showed you how it will effect my buisness. Show me how im supposed to not drastically raise my prices?
I dont think prices will go up high enough that the minimum wage folks will still be just as broke as before, they will be better off for sure but prices will rise somewhat.
How is it fair to the folks who currently make 15 an hour? How much should i raise their pay? How is it fair to me or other small buisness owners who already pay living wages?
Obviously location plays a big part here. I think this should be a state matter and not federal.
Milk and eggs dont require as many employees. A couple of guys can take care of cows and chickens. Coffee and banannas come from other countries.
Most minimum wage jobs anyone has ever had are filled with weed smokers.
I'm sure its just pure coincidence, though.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i showed you what happened to prices when wages went up 116%.
they've got bootstraps, don't they?
mollymcgrammar
Well-Known Member
Yeah you showed what happens when it goes up 116% over decades..... But how about when it goes up in a shorter period of time.
And the people making 7.25 have bootstraps too, doesn't mean they deserve to get shit on.
Folks making 15 an hour now either got an education or learned a trade and became skilled. (At least in my area) raising minimum wage to 15 means that the experience and education and skills they have dont mean shit. Why would someone want to learn how to pave a road if they can earn the same living stocking shelves at the dollar store?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
they'd go up less because less inflation.
how many jobs stocking shelves do you think exist?