$15 Florida minimum wage on 2020 ballot

[orange87]

On the November 2020 ballot there will be a vote to raise the minimum wage by 2026. It will need 60% of the vote to pass. Do you support this?

The measure would increase the minimum wage from $8.56 (2020) to the following:

$10.00 on September 30, 2021 

$11.00 on September 30, 2022 

$12.00 on September 30, 2023 

$13.00 on September 30, 2024 

$14.00 on September 30, 2025 and 

$15.00 on September 30, 2026

Once it reaches $15/hour, the wage would increase or decrease each year based on changes in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W).

[HankStrong]

14 hours ago, orange87 said:

the wage would increase or decrease each year based on changes in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W).

If wages were legitimately tied to something like this, although I don't think decreasing it is a good idea and it should just hold, it would be a strong improvement.

I think the whole $15/hour thing is actually going to lead to more automation and fewer minimum wage jobs.  However, I also know that someone making less than $9/hour cannot actually live without help either.  It's a lose/lose situation in many ways.  I think the real impact is on the people that currently make between $15-20/hour.  Will they be bumped accordingly or just sit there in a new position much closer to making minimum wage?

If someone makes $15/hour today, they are nearly double minimum wage at just over $6/hour more.  There is almost no chance they suddenly make $30/hour (double) in 6 years at the same job and it's not even likely they will be making $21/hour ($6/hour more), but how far from minimum wage will they actually be?

[nite owℓ]

11 minutes ago, HankStrong said:

If wages were legitimately tied to something like this, although I don't think decreasing it is a good idea and it should just hold, it would be a strong improvement.

I think the whole $15/hour thing is actually going to lead to more automation and fewer minimum wage jobs.  However, I also know that someone making less than $9/hour cannot actually live without help either.  It's a lose/lose situation in many ways.  I think the real impact is on the people that currently make between $15-20/hour.  Will they be bumped accordingly or just sit there in a new position much closer to making minimum wage?

If someone makes $15/hour today, they are nearly double minimum wage at just over $6/hour more.  There is almost no chance they suddenly make $30/hour (double) in 6 years at the same job and it's not even likely they will be making $21/hour ($6/hour more), but how far from minimum wage will they actually be?

Agreed. Some people actually go to college to make $20+/hr... (e.g. RNs typically start out around $22 base pay). Should the rest of us expect to see a bump too??

On the other hand, Politifact highlights this inconvenient truth: "Back in 1968, the minimum wage was set at $1.60. That is equivalent to $11.76 in today’s dollars, which is well above today’s minimum wage level and an all-time high when adjusted for inflation."

An increase in minimum wage is needed, but exactly how much remains to be seen IMO.

 

 

[popsiclebrandon]

Wage inequality overall is a big issue and min wage is just one factor in it.  In 2026 its not hard to imagine $15 an hour won't get you very far.

[dcluley98]

The main problem is they never indexed it to inflation in the first place. Business owners talk all the time about how it will hurt small business and destroy more jobs than it helps people, but of course they are going to say that.  There is some truth in those statements, but it is clearly in capital's best interest to keep labor costs down. 

The question is will the higher minimum create a higher velocity of money  through increased spending power of low wage earners, or will prices just rise to negate that and jobs be lost due to increased labor cost? 
Indexing to the CPI would seem to prevent the problem of price increases, but then the Fed would have to get creative to prevent hyper-inflation like that seen in Venezuela.  Of course, they could just raise interest rates considerably to encourage saving instead of spending, but this also has other drastic consequences on the economy and the capital markets, such as more expensive mortgages, reduction in capital expenditures by corporations investing in their business, and effects on the stock market. 
 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/velocity.asp

We have never really seen a full impact of these decisions on a large scale, so the benefits/detriments to such a wage increase are largely unkown. 

I am of the opinion that  any job deserves a "living wage" but am unsure of the side effects of such policy. 

[orange87]

The only thing I would change about this is to make businesses with 25 or fewer employees exempt from the $15+/hour minimum wage. Other than that, I support this. Florida is already so business friendly with low taxes etc. and has such a strong economy that I think it's possible for it to work here.

[aent]

17 hours ago, HankStrong said:

If wages were legitimately tied to something like this, although I don't think decreasing it is a good idea and it should just hold, it would be a strong improvement.

 

Florida wages have been tied to the CPI-W for the past 15 years. It actually works exactly as you said, they do not go down if the CPI-W drops, it just holds. However, the next increase, when it occurs, is supposed to take what the decrease should have been into account. So if, say, in 2021 the CPI says wages should drop 10 cents per hour, then in 2022 should go up 15 cents per hour vs 2021, the increase would only be 5 cents per hour in 2022, so it would be correct still 2020 vs 2022. Florida's minimum wage goes up in January 1st, 2020 (4 days from now) by 10 cents per hour to $8.56 based on the CPI-W. 

Remember, the top supporters of minimum wage increases are the likes of Walmart. Walmart loves minimum wage increases because it pushes the middle class closer to the lower class, which is their perfect clientelle for their stores. And they aren't effected by the minimum wage increase as much: Walmart is already working to have each cashier operate 6-10 registers at a time, and is deploying robots to do the inventory control in the stores, so they'll be able to cut employee hours by whatever percentage wages increase by without issue. We see Amazon entering markets with their stores with no cashiers at all in markets with the high minimum wage. Those making minimum wage won't actually be helped, as we've seen in other cities and areas that have implemented the higher minimum wage, hours get cut and they get fired so they don't do any better. And even if they do a little bit better, it will end up going to Walmart and McDonalds as they likely will raise prices to maintain their profit margin.

 And those who are currently doing alright making $15 or $20/hour will not get similar wage increases, and now will become the minimum wage or near-minimum wage workers.

We've already been having huge issues having starter jobs for our young generation because of our current policies making it more expensive to hire the inexperienced and allowing them to become experienced. The solution isn't to do more of that, and to hurt the lower class and middle class with this completely asanine policy. People need to look at how its worked in areas that went to that wage. California has record homelessness, 

16 hours ago, nite owℓ said:

On the other hand, Politifact highlights this inconvenient truth: "Back in 1968, the minimum wage was set at $1.60. That is equivalent to $11.76 in today’s dollars, which is well above today’s minimum wage level and an all-time high when adjusted for inflation."

Yup, and when the first federal minimum wage (as a flat rate) was first established in 1938, it was set to $0.25, which in today's dollars is less then $5 per hour.  The only reason people like to quote that 1968 number is because, when adjusted for inflation, thats literally the highest it ever was. Here's a nice graph that shows the history of the US federal minimum wage... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:History_of_US_federal_minimum_wage_increases.svg#/media/File:History_of_US_federal_minimum_wage_increases.svg

 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2019 by aent

[gibby]

8 hours ago, aent said:

People need to look at how its worked in areas that went to that wage. California has record homelessness, 

Wait, you're saying that California has a terrible economy and that it started to be terrible after minimum wage laws took effect?

[jack]

57 minutes ago, gibby said:

Wait, you're saying that California has a terrible economy and that it started to be terrible after minimum wage laws took effect?

I think he is saying that these types of laws have unintended consequences. A better example to look at is Seattle since they upped theirs a few years ago and look at what is happening at Target and Wal Mart. Those two examples are companies voluntarily upping their minimums but the results are the same. 

[gibby]

The Seattle area has an unemployment rate of 3.3%.  It's down about 1-1.5% since the wage laws were passed.  California has an unemployment rate of 3.9%.

[Uncommon]

A low unemployment rate and record homelessness are not mutually exclusive. I think the larger reason why Seattle and California are experiencing homeless crises is due to immensely unaffordable housing. Doesn’t mean the economy isn’t great. California’s economy is actually pretty decent and raising minimum wage in no way has hurt it. Some of the homeless people are probably employed but simply can’t afford housing; most of the homeless people would be poor and on the streets regardless of how high or low wages are. That said, I would NEVER want Florida to be like California or Seattle because both places are literal cesspools unless you’re mega-rich, but I also don’t want to pretend like raising wages is ever a bad thing or should serve as a cautionary tale.

Edited December 27, 2019 by Uncommon

[dcluley98]

There are unintended consequences to much of the  proposals to increase minimum wages and assistance programs.  Not many people have factored in geographical cost of living either. Just basing it on CPI is not really enough, hence things like Uncommon  mentions about housing being unaffordable in  many large cities with the higher paying jobs.  

For many reasons, this is why I believe a UBI policy is better than the band-aid type "fixes" of increasing minimum wage, welfare, medicare, and other programs. UBI is simple, universal, portable, and flexible.  

[aent]

3 hours ago, gibby said:

Wait, you're saying that California has a terrible economy and that it started to be terrible after minimum wage laws took effect?

Yeah, I didn't say any of that. I said that the minimum wage laws help the upper class and giant megacorporations like Walmart and Amazon who can compete on price better then anybody else, and generally make no difference or hurt the lower class, and generally hurt the middle, especially the lower-middle class the most by far.

Obviously these minimum wage increases have occurred during a huge economic boom that we've been having the past few years, which should give them the best chance of working and least chance of negative effects. We're also at a time where the number of people making minimum wage is at record lows... its really, really hard to find unemployed people willing to work at minimum wage these days who aren't convicted felons or mentally insufficient for even basic jobs. Thats why all these companies have set their "internal minimum wage" well above minimum wage, many going to $15/hr: thats what it takes to get someone who is actually willing and able to do some form of work these days

So how did the minimum wage increases work in Seattle? In spite of the boom and difficulty in finding labor, hours in the low and minimum wage job went down by 6-7 percent, but wages on average only went up by 3 percent... so the poor lost money overall. Very few had actual earnings go up... very few made more money, most either lost money, or most commonly, made the same and maybe had to work a few less hours. Less job growth among that class.

The major economic study released showed not so pretty results all around compared to the counties surrounding Seattle. They were pushed very hard to revise it and find the positives, and their new conclusion was:

“Seattle’s minimum wage ordinance appears to have delivered higher pay to experienced workers at the cost of reduced opportunity for the inexperienced.” 

Nobody seems to be able to point to any data where the young and inexperienced and the worst of our workers actually ended up taking home more money in real buying power. Its always been less or at best the same.

47 minutes ago, dcluley98 said:

For many reasons, this is why I believe a UBI policy is better than the band-aid type "fixes" of increasing minimum wage, welfare, medicare, and other programs. UBI is simple, universal, portable, and flexible.  

Yup, I definitely agree with this. I think Yang's proposal is really thought out, with UBI being designed to replace our welfare programs in a simple, universal, and effective way. But the key to me supporting that is that it does replace them, as Yang proposed (minus healthcare for his proposal), not supplementing them, as everyone else in his party seems to want to do.

[prahaboheme]

California's homelessness crisis is an easy target for almost any argument against progressive policies.

CA seems to endure, in spite of.

[dcluley98]

It's the coffee house, right? So I hope I am not offending anybody with my political post, I normally don't comment on politics, but:

Oh Shoot, he damn-straight just said it. 

Speaking Troof! 

Edited December 28, 2019 by dcluley98

[Dale]

The Miserabilists are going to hate this, but low earning Americans are enjoying their greatest wage gains in a decade.

[orange87]

3 hours ago, Dale said:

The Miserabilists are going to hate this, but low earning Americans are enjoying their greatest wage gains in a decade.

I'm not tired of winning! 

[dcluley98]

This is a popular "truthy" talking point that  people like to use, but the reality is that it is average, where the top .1% -1% skew the income  compared to the lower 90%, and well, of course, inflation.

 

Edited December 28, 2019 by dcluley98

[AmIReal]

On 12/28/2019 at 9:56 AM, Dale said:

low earning Americans are enjoying their greatest wage gains in a decade.

Yes, maybe... its actually more complex than that. One would always expect wages would increase over any given decade. Except in very rare cases that has always been true. Since President Trump said while here in Orlando “wages are rising at the fastest rate in a decade.” (he also has said "many decades) I'm going to assume what you are intending to imply is the wage gains during this administration (3 years) are better than the wage gains of the previous administration. Actually during Trump's administration,  wages for production and non-supervisory personnel have risen 2.4% and under Obama's final 4 years they increased 4.9%.

Again, this is not to say wages have not improved under this admin, but I'm not sure that is the question of this topic of $15 per hour. If wages have increased or not, the real question is have they increased enough and is it sufficient to support oneself and if not, what can or should be done about it.

Real wages have outpaced inflation over the past 40 years so much of the country has stayed apace. However, despite wages continuously growing, buying power has not increased. So people are not better off despite making more money.

And, yes those in the lower income brackets are seeing gains in their income (as is everyone), but as @dcluley98 indicated the gains are better the higher up the chain you go. See chart.

And someone mentioned regionality should be considered... see the following Pew article https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/10/the-real-value-of-a-15-minimum-wage-depends-on-where-you-live/