3 ms·

Probably because those are strawman arguments that nobody makes. How about > I don't think teenagers, people with employed spouses, people with investments or

by imgabe 5y ago

Probably because those are strawman arguments that nobody makes. How about > I don't think teenagers, people with employed spouses, people with investments or social security or other sources of income should ever be able to take a job for less than what a person could completely support themselves on. Minimum wage jobs are a small portion of all available jobs. There are many jobs, even so-called "unskilled" ones that pay more than minimum wage. As a free adult, it is your responsibility to figure out how to make enough money to live in a way in which you're comfortable.

batiudrami 5y ago
Why would anyone work those jobs then if objectively better ones are available to them and they are capable of performing them?
- imgabe 5y ago
  For many people they are part-time jobs and the minimum wage job is not a primary source of income. For the rest, maybe instead of asking "How can we distort the market to force employers to pay more for labor than the value it produces?" we should be asking "How can we make more higher value jobs available to more people?".
ashtonkem 5y ago
It’s funny how it’s always the people’s responsibility to get a better job, not the company’s responsibility to find a way to be profitable with reasonable wages.
- imgabe 5y ago
  When you go to the store do you offer to pay extra money for groceries so the store can make more money? Why not? Why don’t you find a way to be more profitable so you can pay reasonable prices? People buy things, including labor, at the price others are willing to sell them.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    There is a wee bit of a difference between a corporation making more money, and a human being being able to afford rent and food. That’s why I point out how fucked up it is that we are harsh towards people and treat corporations with kid gloves. That’s why they’re not equivalent; if the store can’t charge more money (up until a point) it cuts into their profits. If a human can’t make enough money with their labor, they starve. Hopefully you can understand why these are morally dissimilar.
    - imgabe 5y ago
      If the store is a small business, the profits are what the owner uses to afford rent and food. So, how is that morally dissimilar? "Corporations" are just groups of people. They are not some amorphous, abstract thing that just preys on helpless humans. > If a human can’t make enough money with their labor, they starve. There is absolutely no reason a normal, healthy adult offering 40 hours per week of effort should not be able to produce far more than minimum wage levels of value. If there are not opportunities for them to do that, we should investigate why that is, and provide opportunities for them to create that value. That is better for everyone because there is more valuable work being done. Pretending that a job that only creates $7 per hour of value actually creates $15 or more is just a lie. It's spending a dime to get a nickel and it's ultimately unsustainable. If there's an abundance of jobs paying well above minimum wage, then it doesn't matter what the minimum wage is because people will have better options and the market will determine what price people are willing to accept to do what work. We're already seeing this as people have better options and are refusing to do lower paid work.
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        > If the store is a small business, the profits are what the owner uses to afford rent and food. So, how is that morally dissimilar? The store owner is hoping to turn the labor of their employees into profits for themselves, not mere subsistence. When they pay their employees less than a livable wage, they are in effect demanding that the state subsidize their business in the form of food stamps for their employees. If a company cannot afford to break even while paying livable wages for their employees, then it isn’t a sustainable model and I would like to see it go out of business and have the owners get new jobs themselves; jobs that I would advocate for paying a living wage for. > There is absolutely no reason a normal, healthy adult offering 40 hours per week of effort should not be able to produce far more than minimum wage levels of value. If we agree that an adult should be able to easily make more than that, why would you allow businesses to pay less? > If there's an abundance of jobs paying well above minimum wage, then it doesn't matter what the minimum wage is because people will have better options and the market will determine what price people are willing to accept to do what work. We're already seeing this as people have better options and are refusing to do lower paid work. Your position is incoherent. Raising the minimum wage would hurt workers by taking away jobs, while at the same time nobody is paid the minimum wage because labor is demanding better pay. Which is it?

by imgabe 5y ago

batiudrami 5y ago

Why would anyone work those jobs then if objectively better ones are available to them and they are capable of performing them?

imgabe 5y ago
For many people they are part-time jobs and the minimum wage job is not a primary source of income. For the rest, maybe instead of asking "How can we distort the market to force employers to pay more for labor than the value it produces?" we should be asking "How can we make more higher value jobs available to more people?".

ashtonkem 5y ago

It’s funny how it’s always the people’s responsibility to get a better job, not the company’s responsibility to find a way to be profitable with reasonable wages.

imgabe 5y ago
When you go to the store do you offer to pay extra money for groceries so the store can make more money? Why not? Why don’t you find a way to be more profitable so you can pay reasonable prices? People buy things, including labor, at the price others are willing to sell them.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  There is a wee bit of a difference between a corporation making more money, and a human being being able to afford rent and food. That’s why I point out how fucked up it is that we are harsh towards people and treat corporations with kid gloves. That’s why they’re not equivalent; if the store can’t charge more money (up until a point) it cuts into their profits. If a human can’t make enough money with their labor, they starve. Hopefully you can understand why these are morally dissimilar.
  - imgabe 5y ago
    If the store is a small business, the profits are what the owner uses to afford rent and food. So, how is that morally dissimilar? "Corporations" are just groups of people. They are not some amorphous, abstract thing that just preys on helpless humans. > If a human can’t make enough money with their labor, they starve. There is absolutely no reason a normal, healthy adult offering 40 hours per week of effort should not be able to produce far more than minimum wage levels of value. If there are not opportunities for them to do that, we should investigate why that is, and provide opportunities for them to create that value. That is better for everyone because there is more valuable work being done. Pretending that a job that only creates $7 per hour of value actually creates $15 or more is just a lie. It's spending a dime to get a nickel and it's ultimately unsustainable. If there's an abundance of jobs paying well above minimum wage, then it doesn't matter what the minimum wage is because people will have better options and the market will determine what price people are willing to accept to do what work. We're already seeing this as people have better options and are refusing to do lower paid work.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      > If the store is a small business, the profits are what the owner uses to afford rent and food. So, how is that morally dissimilar? The store owner is hoping to turn the labor of their employees into profits for themselves, not mere subsistence. When they pay their employees less than a livable wage, they are in effect demanding that the state subsidize their business in the form of food stamps for their employees. If a company cannot afford to break even while paying livable wages for their employees, then it isn’t a sustainable model and I would like to see it go out of business and have the owners get new jobs themselves; jobs that I would advocate for paying a living wage for. > There is absolutely no reason a normal, healthy adult offering 40 hours per week of effort should not be able to produce far more than minimum wage levels of value. If we agree that an adult should be able to easily make more than that, why would you allow businesses to pay less? > If there's an abundance of jobs paying well above minimum wage, then it doesn't matter what the minimum wage is because people will have better options and the market will determine what price people are willing to accept to do what work. We're already seeing this as people have better options and are refusing to do lower paid work. Your position is incoherent. Raising the minimum wage would hurt workers by taking away jobs, while at the same time nobody is paid the minimum wage because labor is demanding better pay. Which is it?