5 ms·

Minimum wage just forces some ppl to do more productive stuff. It will take away some jobs but you probably dont want such jobs in developed country. It's just

Minimum wage just forces some ppl to do more productive stuff. It will take away some jobs but you probably dont want such jobs in developed country. It's just better to allow more part-time work IMO. I would like some opinion of Dutch ppl on their part time work law, which seems interesting to me.

NortySpock 6y ago
"probably dont want such jobs in developed country" You don't want cashiers, wait staff, grocery baggers or call center staff? All of these jobs are generally minimum wage.
- machiaweliczny 6y ago
  Yeah if you arent willing to pay them living wage you probably don't. I'm fine with paying little more than handling it myself. I think amazon Go style shops will get popular. These people probably can transition to different parts of service economy well. Low skill call centers are total waste of human time, that's why most of it is outsourced. UX just can get improved instead.
  - macspoofing 6y ago
    >Yeah if you arent willing to pay them living wage you probably don't. What if they are willing to work for less because it serves their purpose (like a foot in the door in the industry, or something else that you and I can't even think of). For example, we allow unpaid internships because we see the value of it. What about an internship that pays a little? Isn't that better for all? The problem is you're taking choice away from people who may want it or need it. Why do you think you know better what's good for them than they do?
    - machiaweliczny 6y ago
      Yeah, foot in the door to work in McDonalds so you can what? Be manager one day and afford to have family? Foot in the door as cleaning lady to be hired as secretary? Maybe. Basically min wage should be defined as basic needs for individual. I don't think that many people will chose to go for lower than that for future personal gain. Anyway that's what democracy is for :)
      - splistud 6y ago
        If you're comfortable with democracy, why not also be comfortable with other people making their own employment choices, rather than assuming you know better or that they don't have a choice?
        machiaweliczny 6y ago
        Because democracy is about society and not free will (it's about deciding what's better for majority) and yes, I do belive that limiting him that choice(not really him but his employer) is beneficial for society. It similar case to giving free access to alcohol, hard drugs, junk food etc. Someone has to pay this cost of nonoptimal choices. EDIT: example: you don't provide living wage so some/more ppl will chose to steal. This might destroy their family, so social worker is needed, you also need more police, judges, prisons etc. All of them are employed, happily contributing to GDP. Success! Is it better world? I don't think so. It's much cheaper if with offering living wage. (as global optimisation, company owners and individuals do local optimisations)
    - Broken_Hippo 6y ago
      Unpaid internships are gatekeeping at its finest: Poor folks can't do them. By expecting people to have someone to support them while they take a chance to get in the door, you are saying you don't want folks that don't have that or aren't rich enough to suffer through it. Just because a few people are willing to work for less - or for free - to get in the door doesn't mean it is just to take advantage of them and pay them less than a living wage. Not everyone will be working x job for opportunity. Some folks need to eat. And yes, it is taking advantage of people - artists and musicians get offers to get paid in Exposure all the time. Which is really, "please work for free!". The only real exception to this is, perhaps, when the work is actually part of schooling, and that should be limited. Teachers, doctors, and pharmacists come to mind, though we do treat the doctor interns quite horribly. (some pharmacist interns get a bit of pay). If you want labor, pay a decent wage.
unpolloloco 6y ago
You want those jobs, but you don't want people to make careers out of those jobs. Someone in high school should be working those jobs, someone supporting a family or trying to build a career shouldn't be! Not sure how to solve this issue though... Age-based minimum wage? Something else?
- machiaweliczny 6y ago
  Isn't this basically discrimination? Job is job. Even if you are 13 years old your should be paid the same for similar results. Instead of subsiding via parents. This make it better for those unlucky youth to help themselves.
  - krupan 6y ago
    Wait, parents shouldn’t subsidize their kids?! As soon as my kid can get a part-time job as a teenager I should totally cut them off? That does sound tempting...
    - newen 6y ago
      The ones being subsidized are the kids' employers, not the kids.
      - krupan 6y ago
        I’m pretty sure I’m feeding and clothing my kids. I mean, I get what you are trying to say, but the fact is, everybody has a different price they are willing to work for based on their circumstances. Sweeping nationwide minimum wage laws are not the best solution for that.
        newen 6y ago
        Everybody has a different price they are willing to work for based on their circumstances but that doesn't mean you let them do that. Allowing people to work for low wages drives down wages for others, which is undesirable for lots of reasons including income inequality and not wanting people with families to become poor. Sweeping nationwide minimum wage laws is certainly one solution for that.
krupan 6y ago
My local school district employs 14-year olds to vacuum the floor after school each day. You really think that has no value for anyone involved? I know one of the kids and they are sad that they will lose that job if Biden’s minimum wage is passed.
- Broken_Hippo 6y ago
  They are being manipulated or are hired because they are cheaper than the staff custodians, who probably have fewer hours because of the school's practice of child labor. Even after a minimum wage increase, the school will still have to vacuum the floor. I'm guessing it'll just have the other staff do this now, who aren't children.
  - krupan 6y ago
    Why shouldn’t children do jobs that they are able to do? Do you know how awesome those kids feel when they get that paycheck?
    - Broken_Hippo 6y ago
      Because we shouldn't be dependent on child labor, especially when they should be expected to do schoolwork. We can make children feel good about a paycheck by paying them to go to school if we'd like. I can't verify they feel good about getting a paycheck. I have generally been happy to have a bit of money, but I've never cared that it came from a paycheck and realistically, despised that I had to work while going to school (mine was later, in college). I'd have went without if it were a reasonable option.
      - krupan 6y ago
        You seem very comfortable with the idea of imposing what works for you, your preferences, on others. You might want to think about that some more
        6y ago

NortySpock 6y ago

"probably dont want such jobs in developed country" You don't want cashiers, wait staff, grocery baggers or call center staff? All of these jobs are generally minimum wage.

machiaweliczny 6y ago
Yeah if you arent willing to pay them living wage you probably don't. I'm fine with paying little more than handling it myself. I think amazon Go style shops will get popular. These people probably can transition to different parts of service economy well. Low skill call centers are total waste of human time, that's why most of it is outsourced. UX just can get improved instead.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  >Yeah if you arent willing to pay them living wage you probably don't. What if they are willing to work for less because it serves their purpose (like a foot in the door in the industry, or something else that you and I can't even think of). For example, we allow unpaid internships because we see the value of it. What about an internship that pays a little? Isn't that better for all? The problem is you're taking choice away from people who may want it or need it. Why do you think you know better what's good for them than they do?
  - machiaweliczny 6y ago
    Yeah, foot in the door to work in McDonalds so you can what? Be manager one day and afford to have family? Foot in the door as cleaning lady to be hired as secretary? Maybe. Basically min wage should be defined as basic needs for individual. I don't think that many people will chose to go for lower than that for future personal gain. Anyway that's what democracy is for :)
    - splistud 6y ago
      If you're comfortable with democracy, why not also be comfortable with other people making their own employment choices, rather than assuming you know better or that they don't have a choice?
      - machiaweliczny 6y ago
        Because democracy is about society and not free will (it's about deciding what's better for majority) and yes, I do belive that limiting him that choice(not really him but his employer) is beneficial for society. It similar case to giving free access to alcohol, hard drugs, junk food etc. Someone has to pay this cost of nonoptimal choices. EDIT: example: you don't provide living wage so some/more ppl will chose to steal. This might destroy their family, so social worker is needed, you also need more police, judges, prisons etc. All of them are employed, happily contributing to GDP. Success! Is it better world? I don't think so. It's much cheaper if with offering living wage. (as global optimisation, company owners and individuals do local optimisations)
  - Broken_Hippo 6y ago
    Unpaid internships are gatekeeping at its finest: Poor folks can't do them. By expecting people to have someone to support them while they take a chance to get in the door, you are saying you don't want folks that don't have that or aren't rich enough to suffer through it. Just because a few people are willing to work for less - or for free - to get in the door doesn't mean it is just to take advantage of them and pay them less than a living wage. Not everyone will be working x job for opportunity. Some folks need to eat. And yes, it is taking advantage of people - artists and musicians get offers to get paid in Exposure all the time. Which is really, "please work for free!". The only real exception to this is, perhaps, when the work is actually part of schooling, and that should be limited. Teachers, doctors, and pharmacists come to mind, though we do treat the doctor interns quite horribly. (some pharmacist interns get a bit of pay). If you want labor, pay a decent wage.

unpolloloco 6y ago

You want those jobs, but you don't want people to make careers out of those jobs. Someone in high school should be working those jobs, someone supporting a family or trying to build a career shouldn't be! Not sure how to solve this issue though... Age-based minimum wage? Something else?

machiaweliczny 6y ago
Isn't this basically discrimination? Job is job. Even if you are 13 years old your should be paid the same for similar results. Instead of subsiding via parents. This make it better for those unlucky youth to help themselves.
- krupan 6y ago
  Wait, parents shouldn’t subsidize their kids?! As soon as my kid can get a part-time job as a teenager I should totally cut them off? That does sound tempting...
  - newen 6y ago
    The ones being subsidized are the kids' employers, not the kids.
    - krupan 6y ago
      I’m pretty sure I’m feeding and clothing my kids. I mean, I get what you are trying to say, but the fact is, everybody has a different price they are willing to work for based on their circumstances. Sweeping nationwide minimum wage laws are not the best solution for that.
      - newen 6y ago
        Everybody has a different price they are willing to work for based on their circumstances but that doesn't mean you let them do that. Allowing people to work for low wages drives down wages for others, which is undesirable for lots of reasons including income inequality and not wanting people with families to become poor. Sweeping nationwide minimum wage laws is certainly one solution for that.

krupan 6y ago

My local school district employs 14-year olds to vacuum the floor after school each day. You really think that has no value for anyone involved? I know one of the kids and they are sad that they will lose that job if Biden’s minimum wage is passed.

Broken_Hippo 6y ago
They are being manipulated or are hired because they are cheaper than the staff custodians, who probably have fewer hours because of the school's practice of child labor. Even after a minimum wage increase, the school will still have to vacuum the floor. I'm guessing it'll just have the other staff do this now, who aren't children.
- krupan 6y ago
  Why shouldn’t children do jobs that they are able to do? Do you know how awesome those kids feel when they get that paycheck?
  - Broken_Hippo 6y ago
    Because we shouldn't be dependent on child labor, especially when they should be expected to do schoolwork. We can make children feel good about a paycheck by paying them to go to school if we'd like. I can't verify they feel good about getting a paycheck. I have generally been happy to have a bit of money, but I've never cared that it came from a paycheck and realistically, despised that I had to work while going to school (mine was later, in college). I'd have went without if it were a reasonable option.
    - krupan 6y ago
      You seem very comfortable with the idea of imposing what works for you, your preferences, on others. You might want to think about that some more
      - 6y ago