Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Inkdaub

Minimum Wage

36 posts in this topic

This is an issue that gets me pretty worked up...no pun intended.

The debate goes that if the minimum wage continues to rise it will effectively 'price out' small buisnesses.

Alright.

I am all for small buisness. I shop at locals when I can and often go out of my way to do so...which isn't really all that often in downtown Portland but I digress. I think small buisness is hugely important to the healthy growth of a city and a society. Go small buisness! Small buisness rulz!

Small buisness faces many challenges and most are financial in nature. Yet...here's my point finally...the answer is not to screw the employees. I cannot support that. It is simply wrong in my eyes.

If you own a buisness, employees are part of the package. If you can't afford to pay your employees then maybe you can't afford to operate a buisness.

What I find offensive about the issue is the spin that these minimum wage earners are greedy troublemakers out to destroy small buisness. That is not true...they are people who need to make a bit of money to pay their bills.

Then there are those who say that noone is forcing these people to accept the minimum wage jobs in the first place. Yes there is. It's the landlord and the electric company and the grocery store and the doctor. Who has the luxury of not accepting work when they need it?

In a perfect world...this is for the 'small government' republicans...we wouldn't need to have a minimum wage because buisnesses would pay their employees a livable wage in the first place. Unfortunately we don't live and work in a perfect world so a minimum must be set. It's sad in a way that we are so selfish as a people that we have to be regulated in this way.

Anyone else have opinions on this issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I'm torn on the issue. All my life I grew up in a very poor household, in which my parents never made much more than the minimum wage. I would have given anything to have as comfortable a life as the one I have now, but that was not going to be possible with my family living on such minimal pay. So when people complain about living on the minimum wage, I completely understand where they're coming from.

On the other hand, I can see the other side of the issue. Businesses can go under if they have to pay their employees too much and in turn take in less profit.

I believe the minimum wage should reflect the economy. If the cost of everything else (gas included) is rising, then so should the minimum wage. I also feel like people shouldn't try to raise a family on minimum wage, but there's really no real answer to that issue. Not everyone can take time off, nor gather the necessary funds, to get a technical or college education. And then things could happen like what happened with my own mother a couple of decades ago. She went back to school to get a technical education, but just before she could finish her classes, the local economy went belly-up and there were no jobs available in her field. This exact same thing happened to my best friend's mother at the time, in the same technical career choice.

Anyway, before I ramble on too much, let me just say that this issue is nothing but "grey area" for me. There is no black and white as far as this issue goes... there are just too many dynamics in place. That said, like I mentioned in the third paragraph above, I believe the minimum wage should reflect what is going on in the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wonder where the argument comes from that hardly anyone actually works at the minimum wage except the very "special" cases.

Also what I would love to see is that the feds quit with this global economy bullcrap and NAFTA etc. as well as bring back early 20th century style trade tariffs. The small business people are forced to sell their product for the same price as big businesses that have labor in China and Mexico for pennies an hour, that right there is the real culprit, from there we would have more employment at better wages because ALL suppliers (big and small companies) would have similar labor costs and would be unable to undercut each other with "slave" labor across the border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from in college, I've always made a little more than minimum and even at double it's still hard to make it. All my dreams have one by one poofed as it's hard to find better pay with benefits and with something in which you think you could do a spectacular job based on training, education, and all. Raising minimum wage would be welcomed to some people, but I sense in the future, America won't be as rich as people see it or think it is. Only a select few will have no worries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a raise in minimum wage would mostly benefit young people, part-time workers or those who can't manage to hold a job. Most employers give their workers raises after three or six months.

Here in MI minimum wage was raised from $5.15 to 6.85! That is a insanely steep increase if you ask me, and will hurt small businesses. Remember, they not only have to pay a higher wage, they also have to pay more in social security as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They do give them raises after 3 or 6 months . . . man I need to get some back pay from my college days!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minnesota took the smart approach.

THe minimum wage was raised in 2005 (by a Republican house and governor) from $5.15 to $6.15 for large businesses.. and for small businesses? Up to $5.25.

That way if you're running a small business you can afford the small increase while bigger companies have to raise up the prices. Since small businesses that would pay minimum wage tend to be in small towns where cost of living is lower anyway, it works out great.

If you were to adjust the minimum wage for inflation, the minimum wage of 1968 would have been $9.26 per hour today. It's ridiculous how much 25 years of big business control of our government has screwed us over in the name of their profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a complicated issue I know.

I think that it's fair to say that the goal should not be simply to survive on minimum wage. A certain amount of progress can be expected from a populace. I just hear too often the effects the minimum wage has on small buisness owners. I understand they might not be able to afford their buisness and that is terrible...but the employees not being able to afford their rent is far worse in an immediate sense.

PGH makes a good point but the truth is that many small buisnesses must sell their goods at higher prices than their corporate counterparts for the reasons mentioned.

Another problem is that my dog is shedding like a freak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


In a perfect world...this is for the 'small government' republicans...we wouldn't need to have a minimum wage because buisnesses would pay their employees a livable wage in the first place. Unfortunately we don't live and work in a perfect world so a minimum must be set. It's sad in a way that we are so selfish as a people that we have to be regulated in this way.

Anyone else have opinions on this issue?

McDonald's pays more than the minimum wage and if you're not doing a good enough job or not employable enough to work at McDonald's, do you really deserve any money - at all?

The minimum wage should be low so that people will know that they have to work hard and receive an education to survive. Raising the minimum wage higher will make the difference between getting say a two year degree at a community college and not graduating high school negligible - is that a good thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^good pt. but consider this, you and I pay for it anyway, society will not let them just slip through the cracks, welfare, medicaid, food stamps, lunch programs, if I had a choice for them to work and make a few extra bucks working or them just raising my taxes so they can supplement survival with handouts which would it be?

Snowguy, excellent example, very good thing they did in Minnesota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^good pt. but consider this, you and I pay for it anyway, society will not let them just slip through the cracks, welfare, medicaid, food stamps, lunch programs, if I had a choice for them to work and make a few extra bucks working or them just raising my taxes so they can supplement survival with handouts which would it be?

Snowguy, excellent example, very good thing they did in Minnesota.

We don't have to give them stamps, medicad, welfare...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no proponent of those programs, I think they're should be more stick and less carrott as well as huge overhauls in fraud prevention with them. My best solution would be to have us go back to the Red Cross, Salvation Army, and churches like it was largely before the 1930's.

You and I would still "give" though voluntarily, and the reason why even conservatives went along with those programs in the 30s and 60s was that we were in a govt. crisis. Open rebellion was taking place in the sector of the have-nots.

The test of society is how they treat there lowliest members, that's why I'd rather see a smart solution for an increase in minimum wage then more handouts. People won't starve they will kill you before they do. That's one reason Europe is much more generous with their welfare states, they had the anti-monarchy crowd followed 100 years later by the communists. People don't starve they kill and terrorize, look at South America's mess today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The test of society is how they treat there lowliest members, that's why I'd rather see a smart solution for an increase in minimum wage then more handouts.

That's just an opinion. I personally believe the test of society is how it treats its most brilliant, and successful members.

There was a line in The Fountainhead that went something like "We as a society help the pregnant peppermint but cast a blind eye to the struggling genius".

We should be incubating talent and helping people actually achieve greatness than helping the hopeless.

As for the second part, people don't kill and terrorize when they see a positive future. We shouldn't be giving people money just to calm them down. We should be encouraging positive development by allowing freedom and allowing more people to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just an opinion. I personally believe the test of society is how it treats its most brilliant, and successful members.

There was a line in The Fountainhead that went something like "We as a society help the pregnant peppermint but cast a blind eye to the struggling genius".

We should be incubating talent and helping people actually achieve greatness than helping the hopeless.

As for the second part, people don't kill and terrorize when they see a positive future. We shouldn't be giving people money just to calm them down. We should be encouraging positive development by allowing freedom and allowing more people to succeed.

I have not read Fountainhead yet. I have read Atlas Shrugged though. Rand is interesting, albeit a bit "black/white" for my tastes.

I personally would rather see the State minimum wages raised as opposed to "Living Wages" being adopted. Most of the living wage barometers puts pay for a low-skilled entry level job at the same level as the average associate degree level degree job. Why then go to a vocational school or community college to better yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just an opinion. I personally believe the test of society is how it treats its most brilliant, and successful members.

There was a line in The Fountainhead that went something like "We as a society help the pregnant peppermint but cast a blind eye to the struggling genius".

We should be incubating talent and helping people actually achieve greatness than helping the hopeless.

As for the second part, people don't kill and terrorize when they see a positive future. We shouldn't be giving people money just to calm them down. We should be encouraging positive development by allowing freedom and allowing more people to succeed.

Skewing conservative and almost libertarian in many of my views though disenfrancised with the GOP leadership I can see where you are coming from moon. The problem with your analysis though is that there isn't preg peppermint handouts and NONE for struggling artists or geniuses etc. If you need help despite what or who you are you can get it, compare that to some 3rd world nations and the question becomes does the lack of governmental and private charities contribute to the violence and class warfare even more?

Oh and by the way how many geniuses were the sons and daughters of poor "sluts", I shudder to think how culturally, academically, medically and innovatively poor the world would be if we went Darwin on the poor or uneducated. I agree THEY must make things happen and are responsible for becoming productive members of society, but just as we don't choose to be born to the Rockefellers we don't choose to be born to a poor "peppermint".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


THEY must make things happen and are responsible for becoming productive members of society

That is the crux of my argument. Everyone has control of their destiny, and should pursue becoming productive members of society. The talentless career welfare recipient should not receive any special treatment over the hardworking talented individual - this is way things work now. So, we must not encourage less than the best by creating an environment where a grocery bagger makes as much as someone who has worked to get to the position they are in. Raising the minimum wage makes its more acceptable for an adult to hold such a position.

The quote may have been a little too much for my point and this issue, as it exemplifies a much deeper societal problem that is beyond this scope of this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is the crux of my argument. Everyone has control of their destiny, and should pursue becoming productive members of society. The talentless career welfare recipient should not receive any special treatment over the hardworking talented individual - this is way things work now. So, we must not encourage less than the best by creating an environment where a grocery bagger makes as much as someone who has worked to get to the position they are in. Raising the minimum wage makes its more acceptable for an adult to hold such a position.

The quote may have been a little too much for my point and this issue, as it exemplifies a much deeper societal problem that is beyond this scope of this discussion.

Then why not make minimum wage $2 and let them work up? Forget that... make them volunteer, then decide to hire them at 50 cents. Heck a lot of companies these days don't believe in raises. Before the job I had from 2003 to last year closed, we were only getting 15 cent raises a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any career welfare recepients left? I thought that the GOP congress and Clinton put an end to that, more stick less carrott type things.

I agree that sometimes the most pathetic among us get too much praise and applause, but you can't legislate popularity, educate against vanity maybe but I see where you are coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any career welfare recepients left? I thought that the GOP congress and Clinton put an end to that, more stick less carrott type things.

I agree that sometimes the most pathetic among us get too much praise and applause, but you can't legislate popularity, educate against vanity maybe but I see where you are coming from.

I just read in the news that a woman had been in public housing for something like 54 years and still is. She looked able bodied and could form a sentance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The country is going poor anyway. I hate people who make a way of life out of welfare and public housing. Let's just get rid of all support and make them suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

moonshield, public housing is subsidized not 100% in most cases I believe. Also it wasn't part of the overhaul in social services in the mid-90s from what I remember. Public housing is no joy, and depending on where she was (Applachia, rustbelt, etc.) sometimes there are just no jobs.

Codeho, you can't be serious?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have said send them to Haiti.

But since everyone supposedly makes their own destiny (something ai half disagree with), let them truly struggle than abuse the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

moonshield, public housing is subsidized not 100% in most cases I believe. Also it wasn't part of the overhaul in social services in the mid-90s from what I remember. Public housing is no joy, and depending on where she was (Applachia, rustbelt, etc.) sometimes there are just no jobs.

Codeho, you can't be serious?

True. There was an overhaul but those under the line still get tax credits and what not - it's welfare under a different name. Social spending under Bush is higher than it has ever been underone else.

I must say that I'm probably biased because of where I live and am in life, and the playing field is probably different elsewhere, but still the principles remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True. There was an overhaul but those under the line still get tax credits and what not - it's welfare under a different name. Social spending under Bush is higher than it has ever been underone else.

Which proves a myriad of political theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have said send them to Haiti.

But since everyone supposedly makes their own destiny (something ai half disagree with), let them truly struggle than abuse the system.

The Welfare to Work program does exactly that, albeit a bit more "compassionately". :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.