5 ms·

Yeah I have no idea why the government is this spineless that they cannot raise the minimum wage. Income gap is so disgusting, I'm tired of dealing with the rea

by warent 5y ago

Yeah I have no idea why the government is this spineless that they cannot raise the minimum wage. Income gap is so disgusting, I'm tired of dealing with the reality that most people I meet are basically living in poverty and have very little freedom. Great, I'm comparatively rich, and this aspect of it is awful. I can barely connect with the average person because businesses are allowed to engorge their monstrous bellies on greed while paying peanuts.

maerF0x0 5y ago
I believe it's a mix of trying to curb inflation (if everyone makes more they will bid up the things they buy) and the broken incentives of free money[1] . It's tough on consumers too because we're used to a certain level of customer service, so we get frustrated when that's not what we receive for the same/more money than pre-pandemic -- perfectly human responses in the circumstances. Of course it's not on the actual workers, they're exhausted and giving all they have -- perfectly human responses in the circumstances. These are just symptoms of a more broken systemic environment. [1]:imo there should be employment assurance, not insurance-- that is if you cannot find a job we'll give you one. instead of if you dont have money will give you some. Part of why I hold this idea is that if you have more money chasing the same goods you get inflation. At least if someone is working there is a chance they'll contribute to the collection of goods produced after which money will follow.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  > if everyone makes more they will bid up the things they buy Raising the minimum wage is unlikely to have much of that kind of effect, since most people make more than minimum wage. What it does do is reduce the buying power of people making $30/hour because they now have to compete more often for things with someone making $15 instead of $10/hour. But even then, that isn't enough to put pressure on cars, houses, or even rent. But what raising the minimum wage really does is put people at the bottom on a more equal footing with people not at the bottom. The people on the bottom can buy more, the people not at the bottom can buy a bit less.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    That is why the solution is to raise the wage per hour by greatly increasing the salary at which an employer can not pay overtime. All there hotels and restaurants and service sector businesses used to paying bottom tier wages to desperate workers are now relying on their “managers” to fill in the gaps, and the pay their “managers” $36k per year to work more than 40 hours per week. People accept it because it is a more reliable wage than hourly which can go up and down, but it usually means you are working 50, 60, 70 hours a week for extremely low pay. If you bump that exempt min wage to $100k or $200k per year, then the employer is forced to hire more people and reduce reliance on these desperate “managers”.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >But what raising the minimum wage really does is put people at the bottom on a more equal footing with people not at the bottom Unless those people's jobs evaporate because they become uneconomical for the employer. The janitor in an NYC suburb who was formerly making say $14/hr will benefit from a $15/hr minimum wage. The guy who pushes a broom and delivers parts for $12/hr at a tractor dealership in the middle of nowhere will be in the unemployment line. Minimum wage is a cudgel. It should be set at the city or county level (for a variety of reasons, the above being one), not the state or federal level.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      Yes, both employers and employees have to increase their productivity when the minimum wage is increased. It makes many jobs (like elevator operator) obsolete, those people have to skill up or take jobs that require them to do more. There could also become a point where skilling up/working harder is no longer feasible. In that case, a basic income starts to look a lot more appealing. Minimum wage is set at the state and city levels. The federal minimum wage is probably obsolete in about 90% of the country right now, perhaps close to 100% now.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> Yeah I have no idea why the government is this spineless that they cannot raise the minimum wage. That’s a separate issue. Minimum wage increases won’t fix businesses that pay less than competitors while demanding more from employees. If minimum wage is raised to $15, the better competitors will simply raise their wages to $18-20. This won’t come free, though, as prices will increase somewhat to compensate. Maybe not 1:1 with wage increases, but the second-order effects can’t be ignored. Minimum wage isn’t really the issue (in this article). These people aren’t choosing to quit so they can sit home for $0/hour instead of $11/hour. They’re leaving for other jobs that already pay $15/hour. I think we need to get more comfortable with the idea of market rate in action. It’s a good thing if employees are leaving underpaid, overworked jobs for better jobs. That’s the market in action, and the employees are winning. I don’t think government intervention would help, other than to maybe re-trap people into bad jobs if the bad jobs and good jobs are forced to pay the same and the market rate incentive for switching jobs is eroded away.
- toss1 5y ago
  >>Maybe not 1:1 with wage increases, but the second-order effects can’t be ignored. It depends on the scale of the 2nd order effects, and which 2nd order effects we look at. Here these 2nd order effects are far lower than the effects of massive segments of the population living in poverty working full time jobs. The proportion of the pie going to labor vs capital has never been lower. Push that ratio back to rates more resembling the postwar multi-decade boom, and we'll see similar effects. IOW, the inflation resulting from forcing non-poverty wages will still keep the market intact, good employers will still offer more and employees will move, but employees will also have funds to buy stuff and generate demand, which has been lacking.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    > but employees will also have funds to buy stuff and generate demand, which has been lacking. Employees in the 1st to 3rd decile will have funds to buy stuff and generate demand. The 4th to 6th decile of income will have to cut consumption, however. The deciles are of course made up, but my point is someone will have to cut down on consumption if others that were not getting a piece of the pie start getting it (unless the size of the pie gets larger at the same rate, but it will not in this case due to demographic reasons and the type of work not being able to be automated).
s1artibartfast 5y ago
I think the answer is pretty simple. Minimum wages are a huge hammer with lots of unintended consequences that can hurt low wage workers as well.
robertlagrant 5y ago
I think the problem is that a federal minimum wage needs to be the minimum for the cheapest cost of living state, or it causes massive problems in that state. Having state-level minimum wages allows them to be tailored to cost of living in that state.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  What does need to change federally is the min wage for workers exempt from overtime pay. At $36k, it is far too low for even the cheapest states. I think it should be at least $100k if not far more, since a lot of employers rely on a couple of $36k to $50k employees who do not have better options in life to work 60 to 80 hours per week and on call to fill in the gaps caused by having a rotating, underpaid staff. They are “managers” only in the sense that they are on call and liable for jumping into work for whatever position is missing. They do not actually manage anything.
bee_rider 5y ago
Minimum wage works well for a bit, but eventually inflation wipes it out, right? I think what is more likely here is that businesses are betting that people will eventually burn through their savings and pandemic money and come back. It is a competition to see who remains solvent longer. If the people and government really wanted to play hardball, we'd do something like a basic income. Then businesses would have to provide a working environment that people are actually willing to voluntarily show up to.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- makapuf 5y ago
  Index minimum wages on inflation? The minimum wage in France by example is indexed on inflation (in fact half the increase of an average worker increase) https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaire_minimum_interprofessionnel_de_croissance https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaire_minimum_interprofess... (sorry french, no EN translation)
  - bee_rider 5y ago
    I prefer a basic income indexed to inflation. It seems like if people are financially safe, they'll be able to implement their own personal ideas about what the minimum wage should be.
    - malux85 5y ago
      This is the solution - the negotiating power dynamic is too much in favour of the employer when the alternate choice for the employee is (another equally exploitative job|destitution)
captainredbeard 5y ago
> I can barely connect with the average person This is more a reflection of the growing class-based conflict in the United States and less a reflection of how income is distributed. The reality is that many people - especially tech workers - have insanely large impact compared to someone working a simple, local job. Pay will reflect this.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  I assume class reflects income (or wealth). More specifically, income per hour normalized to quality of life at work.
- warent 5y ago
  This is not how the market works. If the market is completely saturated with skilled tech workers, their compensation will be low regardless of having a large impact. It's nothing more than a supply and demand issue, right now it happens to be that demand is high and supply is low.

by warent 5y ago

maerF0x0 5y ago

I believe it's a mix of trying to curb inflation (if everyone makes more they will bid up the things they buy) and the broken incentives of free money[1] . It's tough on consumers too because we're used to a certain level of customer service, so we get frustrated when that's not what we receive for the same/more money than pre-pandemic -- perfectly human responses in the circumstances. Of course it's not on the actual workers, they're exhausted and giving all they have -- perfectly human responses in the circumstances. These are just symptoms of a more broken systemic environment. [1]:imo there should be employment assurance, not insurance-- that is if you cannot find a job we'll give you one. instead of if you dont have money will give you some. Part of why I hold this idea is that if you have more money chasing the same goods you get inflation. At least if someone is working there is a chance they'll contribute to the collection of goods produced after which money will follow.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
> if everyone makes more they will bid up the things they buy Raising the minimum wage is unlikely to have much of that kind of effect, since most people make more than minimum wage. What it does do is reduce the buying power of people making $30/hour because they now have to compete more often for things with someone making $15 instead of $10/hour. But even then, that isn't enough to put pressure on cars, houses, or even rent. But what raising the minimum wage really does is put people at the bottom on a more equal footing with people not at the bottom. The people on the bottom can buy more, the people not at the bottom can buy a bit less.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  That is why the solution is to raise the wage per hour by greatly increasing the salary at which an employer can not pay overtime. All there hotels and restaurants and service sector businesses used to paying bottom tier wages to desperate workers are now relying on their “managers” to fill in the gaps, and the pay their “managers” $36k per year to work more than 40 hours per week. People accept it because it is a more reliable wage than hourly which can go up and down, but it usually means you are working 50, 60, 70 hours a week for extremely low pay. If you bump that exempt min wage to $100k or $200k per year, then the employer is forced to hire more people and reduce reliance on these desperate “managers”.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >But what raising the minimum wage really does is put people at the bottom on a more equal footing with people not at the bottom Unless those people's jobs evaporate because they become uneconomical for the employer. The janitor in an NYC suburb who was formerly making say $14/hr will benefit from a $15/hr minimum wage. The guy who pushes a broom and delivers parts for $12/hr at a tractor dealership in the middle of nowhere will be in the unemployment line. Minimum wage is a cudgel. It should be set at the city or county level (for a variety of reasons, the above being one), not the state or federal level.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    Yes, both employers and employees have to increase their productivity when the minimum wage is increased. It makes many jobs (like elevator operator) obsolete, those people have to skill up or take jobs that require them to do more. There could also become a point where skilling up/working harder is no longer feasible. In that case, a basic income starts to look a lot more appealing. Minimum wage is set at the state and city levels. The federal minimum wage is probably obsolete in about 90% of the country right now, perhaps close to 100% now.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> Yeah I have no idea why the government is this spineless that they cannot raise the minimum wage. That’s a separate issue. Minimum wage increases won’t fix businesses that pay less than competitors while demanding more from employees. If minimum wage is raised to $15, the better competitors will simply raise their wages to $18-20. This won’t come free, though, as prices will increase somewhat to compensate. Maybe not 1:1 with wage increases, but the second-order effects can’t be ignored. Minimum wage isn’t really the issue (in this article). These people aren’t choosing to quit so they can sit home for $0/hour instead of $11/hour. They’re leaving for other jobs that already pay $15/hour. I think we need to get more comfortable with the idea of market rate in action. It’s a good thing if employees are leaving underpaid, overworked jobs for better jobs. That’s the market in action, and the employees are winning. I don’t think government intervention would help, other than to maybe re-trap people into bad jobs if the bad jobs and good jobs are forced to pay the same and the market rate incentive for switching jobs is eroded away.

toss1 5y ago
>>Maybe not 1:1 with wage increases, but the second-order effects can’t be ignored. It depends on the scale of the 2nd order effects, and which 2nd order effects we look at. Here these 2nd order effects are far lower than the effects of massive segments of the population living in poverty working full time jobs. The proportion of the pie going to labor vs capital has never been lower. Push that ratio back to rates more resembling the postwar multi-decade boom, and we'll see similar effects. IOW, the inflation resulting from forcing non-poverty wages will still keep the market intact, good employers will still offer more and employees will move, but employees will also have funds to buy stuff and generate demand, which has been lacking.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  > but employees will also have funds to buy stuff and generate demand, which has been lacking. Employees in the 1st to 3rd decile will have funds to buy stuff and generate demand. The 4th to 6th decile of income will have to cut consumption, however. The deciles are of course made up, but my point is someone will have to cut down on consumption if others that were not getting a piece of the pie start getting it (unless the size of the pie gets larger at the same rate, but it will not in this case due to demographic reasons and the type of work not being able to be automated).

s1artibartfast 5y ago

I think the answer is pretty simple. Minimum wages are a huge hammer with lots of unintended consequences that can hurt low wage workers as well.

robertlagrant 5y ago

I think the problem is that a federal minimum wage needs to be the minimum for the cheapest cost of living state, or it causes massive problems in that state. Having state-level minimum wages allows them to be tailored to cost of living in that state.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
What does need to change federally is the min wage for workers exempt from overtime pay. At $36k, it is far too low for even the cheapest states. I think it should be at least $100k if not far more, since a lot of employers rely on a couple of $36k to $50k employees who do not have better options in life to work 60 to 80 hours per week and on call to fill in the gaps caused by having a rotating, underpaid staff. They are “managers” only in the sense that they are on call and liable for jumping into work for whatever position is missing. They do not actually manage anything.

bee_rider 5y ago

Minimum wage works well for a bit, but eventually inflation wipes it out, right? I think what is more likely here is that businesses are betting that people will eventually burn through their savings and pandemic money and come back. It is a competition to see who remains solvent longer. If the people and government really wanted to play hardball, we'd do something like a basic income. Then businesses would have to provide a working environment that people are actually willing to voluntarily show up to.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
makapuf 5y ago
Index minimum wages on inflation? The minimum wage in France by example is indexed on inflation (in fact half the increase of an average worker increase) https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaire_minimum_interprofessionnel_de_croissance https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaire_minimum_interprofess... (sorry french, no EN translation)
- bee_rider 5y ago
  I prefer a basic income indexed to inflation. It seems like if people are financially safe, they'll be able to implement their own personal ideas about what the minimum wage should be.
  - malux85 5y ago
    This is the solution - the negotiating power dynamic is too much in favour of the employer when the alternate choice for the employee is (another equally exploitative job|destitution)

captainredbeard 5y ago

> I can barely connect with the average person This is more a reflection of the growing class-based conflict in the United States and less a reflection of how income is distributed. The reality is that many people - especially tech workers - have insanely large impact compared to someone working a simple, local job. Pay will reflect this.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
I assume class reflects income (or wealth). More specifically, income per hour normalized to quality of life at work.
warent 5y ago
This is not how the market works. If the market is completely saturated with skilled tech workers, their compensation will be low regardless of having a large impact. It's nothing more than a supply and demand issue, right now it happens to be that demand is high and supply is low.