Posted on 08/16/2019 6:30:54 AM PDT by central_va
With the “Fight for $15 External link ” making headlines, opinions abound about whether raising the federal minimum wage will have a positive or negative effect on unemployment rates. Advocates of an increase cite the impossible task of making ends meet on today’s paltry sum of $7.25 an hour and say an increase would have little effect on the overall economy. Those against such a move predict that doing so would cause employers to lay off more and hire less—raising unemployment rates as a result. As is often the case with such emotionally charged issues, especially in an election year, the broader conversation about the minimum wage tends to involve more feeling than historical fact. To balance such a dynamic, we decided to turn to the data to see what it reveals.
(Excerpt) Read more at onlinebusiness.syr.edu ...
First, if the minimum wage is the same for everybody, then it is by definition a level playing field. So, whatever you want to do with your A, is kind of beside the point.
Second, minimum wage increases usually come in stages so as not to disrupt things too much. So, if it goes to $15, it will take a few years.
Third, if you believe that the government should subsidize your Big Mac for you via food stamps and housing vouchers to McD’s employees, then that is your right. Only you have the right to say how important cheap burgers are to you! (Personally, I would rather see an honest price, but that is just me.)
But, if you do want Big Mac subsidies, it would be the right thing to do to refrain from saying bad things about the people on welfare.
You haven’t answered my question. You just keep going off on “Republicans” and various & sundry boogymen.
What gives the government (apparently at your behest) the right to force me to pay more for any product?
Because, whether you like it or not, when you look for a job you are selling your labor & skills to the employer. It’s a contractual relationship. More skills, more money.
re: “I am preparing a thread that shows no historical correlation either way( up or down ) between inflation and raising the minimum wage. It will contain facts, graphs and data so nobody will read it nor try to understand it.”
A true “chartist”; He knows not about that which he graphs ... A sort of hi-tech tea-leaf reading.
I wonder if you have looked at how raising the minimum wage has worked in the Pacific NW, Seattle in particular.
Also, Union contracts are tied to the Minimum Wage.
It is relevant but... Where in the Constitution does it say putting floor on wages is not allowed?
If you do wish to live in a society that has rules, then you are probably out of luck. You might try either Somalia, or maybe South Georgia Island.
In the meantime, here in civilization, we have all kinds of laws intended to make things better. Like what kind of electrical wire you have to use when building a house, or what size fish you got to throw back in. Like minimum dress codes, and zoning laws to keep that public housing project from going up in your neighborhood. And can you believe it? We even tell people they can not use any old drug they want, and that if they make a baby, they have to support it, and not just toss it out on the rest of us to take care of.
And hopefully one day, we will even pass a law to stop outsourcing our jobs to foreign countries. But you can avoid all those rules and things! Learn to like seal and penguin meat and head on out to South Georgia Island!
re: “What gives the government (apparently at your behest) the right to force me to pay more for any product?”
centra_va lacks any argument on this point; we reach “NPC” (blue-screen/automaton overload) territory with queries in that area of discussion.
Since the labor market in the USA has been artificially manipulated to mollify the corporate/small business class the point you are making is moot. The Constitution does not prohibit a floor on wages.
re: “And hopefully one day, we will even pass a law to stop outsourcing our jobs to foreign countries. “
Look up the term “transistor girl” (Japan) sometime and research the history behind that one ... it goes back to the 1950’s.
So if an employer and employee mutually agree on a wage that is below the minimum wage, the government will not allow it. That is dictating the wage.
Wanting something and working for it are two different things. Sure, I'd love to win the lottery, but hope is not a strategy. And the fact is, most people don't try to better themselves, so they wind up with whatever they can get, sometimes it works out, other times, not so much.
Yep. I would call you wrong. LOL
Bad trigger words. I know. Again LOL.
Instead of going all over the board, why don't you address what we are actually disputing here?
Why is the government entitled to take from me and give to you? Or put another way, why is the government entitled to tell me what I have to pay for any product?
In my business the only people who earn the minimum, currently $11 per hour,are high school students. When does a student who would like to work counted as unemployed?
That’s the point. The solution lies in improving the labor market supply-demand curve in favor of labor. There are ways to do that that do not require a minimum wage.
re: “What gives the government (apparently at your behest) the right to force me to pay more for any product?”
First, the Constitution which grants “police powers” to the states, and regulation of “interstate commerce” to itself.
Second, the laws of the state in which you live.
(Gee, I wish all questions were this simple to answer!)
The government has only the powers explicitly given it in the Constitution. That is clearly expressed in it to prevent just
such things as we are discussing.
Your argument is specious.
“why is the government entitled to tell me what I have to pay for any product?”
First, the Constitution which grants “police powers” to the states, and the regulation of “interstate commerce” to itself.
Second, the laws of the state in which you live.
So is yours. Nobody is FORCING you to buy anything or hire anyone.
Thanks for making my point.
The Constitution does not expressly give the government that authority. Thus it does not have that (legal) authority. Your Constitutional argument is backwards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.