American Wages, the Minimum Wage and Income Brackets

How is being let go based on costs going to help market participation. It's already happening where high minimum wages have been implemented.

 

It's obvious why? You have a public sector and a private sector and while they depend on each other, in what possible way should the government for example be telling Apple Inc. how much to pay employees? The MW in reality has almost no purpose. 550,000 American workers earned MW out of about 150 million total workers or less than 1/3rd of one percent. Do you actually believe someone holds a gun to the heads of these 550,000 demanding that they work MW jobs? If all 550,000 are incapable of advancing and earning higher compensation, why should the government do it for them? The only policy change that should be in place is to match the MW to an inflation index each year so that minimum wage keeps up with inflation...

 

in the short run; in the long run, higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

 

if we raise the minimum wage, the cost of social services should be lower in the long run.

 

Why not just set the MW at $50/hour? If it's so arbitrary why not $50/hour?

 

Obviously there has to be a balance.

 

Yet the min wage as risen some 30 times since inception, and our economy has grown and grown and grown.

https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

 

It is not arbitrary; social services cost the equivalent to fourteen dollars an hour and is a reason for a rational opportunity cost of fifteen an hour to actually provide labor input to the economy.

maximum wages could be more arbitrary.

 

Your mind was obviously interpreting something that wasn't there.

Logical disconnect.

If someone argues something that isn't necessary in alignment with a certain belief, it doesn't necessarily mean they're against it.

Although I suppose you could be forgiven because people are so partisan around here.

 

I merely pointed out your part about the opposite effect.
Since that doesn't appear true, based on the 30 or so times min wage has increased and hasn't had the opposite effect in any of those 30 times.

 

Please explain 'balance'?

 

It is arbitrary because there's no rationale...

 

lol. economics provides a rational opportunity cost in our first world economy; any rational person knows it even if they don't understand the economics of it.

 

Try to explain the rationale behind $7.25/hour minimum wage policy?
Try to explain why there is not inflation index to increase the MW?
At the federal level, there can be no rationale for a MW...unless you can explain one?
Explain why everyone throws out MW numbers like $10/hour or $12/hour or $15/hour...why not $13.69/hour?

Because MW is arbitrary...

 

underpayment to Labor means increased profit for the Richest at the Expense of the Poorest, is one point of view.

 

All labor costs, no matter the compensation levels, are a cost of doing business, and therefore are passed onto the consumer in the pricing of goods and services. Logic dictates it makes no difference how much wages are as long as the business remains viable. There are no conspiracies...

 

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand and can better afford our first world economy.

Stagnant wages for the Poorest, seems like a conspiracy when corporations get a tax deduction for the labor cost of the Poorest.

 

Not going to respond to your conspiracies...

 

Labor should not be burdened with an Income tax if Corporations get a tax deduction for that labor cost.

 

That isn't the point at all. The point is to allow all a decent minimum salary that is above the Poverty Threshold ($24K a year for a family of four or $11 an hour). The current minimum wage of $7.25 an hour amounts to $15K a year, $9K below the Poverty Threshold!

You would condemn the unskilled to work way below the Poverty Threshold?

Moreover, doubling the present MW-rate to $15 an hour IN NO WAY affects the "distribution of wealth in America". Not by a long shot!

But taxation at 95% for all wages above $250K would indeed affect the distribution of Wealth in America. And in a damn fine way ... !

PS: From the Bureau of Labor Statistics -

That amounts to only 0.6% of the total Work Force and even they should not be working at such a miserable wage!

 

Nope!

Consider the Poverty Threshold wage (family of 4) that is at $25K a year. In dollars per hour (52 weeks, 40-hour week) that amounts to $12 an hour.

The Minimum Wage should be at $30K a year, that is $15 an hour ...

 

Why does the right wing have a problem with Minimum wages and not Maximum wages?

 

For a worker living in Mayberry RFD $15/hour would be a windfall! For a worker living in San Francisco $15/hour would be meaningless.

It makes zero sense to have a federal minimum wage.

There could be a sliding MW scale based on local cost of living indexes. There could be a federal base MW like $8/hour that is factored by the local cost of living number, so perhaps in SF the MW might be set at $25/hour but in Mayberry RFD it might be $8.50/hour. It can be adjusted every 1-2 years. Also, the federal base MW can also automatically be inflation adjusted each year. This would be fairly easy to create cost of living zones throughout the US and apply various MW's.

But I don't agree with a one-size-fits-all MW approach...

 

it makes more sense to simply cap maximum wages and excise the rest for the public Good.

 

Then you don't live below the Poverty Threshold and haven't the faintest idea of the punishment that penury it is!

Which leads directly to the fact that there is so much crime in America ...! (In fact, if the truth must be told, the US per capita crime-rate is not really that bad - see here.)

I don't either but if you let the states decide the MW, it aint gonna work. As they do now, they will all compete with one another for the lowest minimum wage in order to attract businesses.

WHICH SOLVES NOTHING as regards the nightmare of living below the Poverty Threshold where 40 million American men, women and children eke-out an existence! That solution must come from the fact that the MW must be linked to the Poverty Threshold in a state - that is, 10% total annual revenue more than the Poverty Threshold for a given family size.)