• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

MN Governor to sign minimum wage bill

When people who work 40 hours a week need welfare, something is wrong. The problem is that if you raise the minimum wage, a lot of jobs are going to be shopped to places where $2/day is considered a king's ransom.

The world's economic system leaves a lot to be desired, that's my thought. (I'm not well enough educated in magic to come up with a solution. Maybe what we need is just a better dominant species.)
 
Rukbat said:
When people who work 40 hours a week need welfare, something is wrong
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Basically, those welfare payments are cheapskate businesses getting tax dollar subsides. If someone can't live on the full time wage you're paying, you're not paying your way. Simples.

Rukbat said:
The problem is that if you raise the minimum wage, a lot of jobs are going to be shopped to places where $2/day is considered a king's ransom
Click to expand...

Might have been true 30 years ago, but these days any minimum wage jobs that could be shipped abroad are already long gone :( The minimum wage jobs that are left are mostly service-related - waiting tables, cleaning etc - that can't move.

There's also the fact that argument about jobs going has been proved complete balloney every time any country has introduced or increased minimum wage :rolleyes:

Rukbat said:
Maybe what we need is just a better dominant species
Click to expand...

If the climate change deniers keep getting their way, we won't have long to wait :D
 
The problem i have with the whole thing is that it doesn't solve anything. Raising minimum wage will only increase the cost of living equally. When an employer is forced to raise wages on part time employees they either will raise prices on their services, or cut back hours and short shift. In both cases the consumer loses.
Also what about those who have taken the time to get a degree and got a job that requires a degree but isn't the high posting kind of job, in example: my fiancee got a job in accounting which is using her degree, it pays 10.80/ hr and the degree is a requirement to have the position. The position pays from 10.50 - 13.00 currently based on experience.
So highschoolers should make $1 less an hour than someone who has an extended education and a degree?

I just don't see this as a solution.
 
Raising minimum wage will not solve the problem of the type of job your fiance is able to get with a degree.

It is not actually supposed to because the two are not directly related.

Businesses have become unrealistic as to what the educational requirements of their employees actually needs to be.

What they want are quality people as defined by various HR departments which in my opinion tend to be high on pomp and circumstance.

What they need is someone who can and will do the job. I never needed a collage education to drive a nail, drive a forklift, or push a broom before; suddenly I do? It is all pomp and circumstance.

The willingness of a company to pay only a dollar more for someone to do a job, that is said to require a collage education, than they would someone fresh out of high school, should tell you everything you need to know about the job. Someone fresh out of high school is the actual minimum requirement for the job.

The point of raising minimum wage, is to address inflation which tends to restrain a person's ability to participate in an economic system. In time not only a few people are restrained. Those who normally have little problem paying for their day to day lives, suddenly find that they too are starting to face the need to be creative with their budget.

When the number of people being stressed by inflation grows large enough a serious drive to increase minimum wage will begin.
 
Really, the issue isn't something that can be solved by discussion of minimum wage as an isolated variable. As stated above, inflation is a factor. So are job requirements. It's not just about requiring too much- many jobs require too little and automatically exclude anyone seen as "overqualified". There's so many factors it's not even funny.
 
I believe you have taken my example out of the context that I was portraying, or perhaps I didn't describe my point of it. 10.50 an hour is not the highest income, but it is a helpful decent income. A job that pays above minimum wage pays more based on what responsibilities it has, what it requires for experience or education to complete the daily tasks, and the complexity of the task.
I'll use my first job as an example here.. When I was bagging groceries and stocking shelves I made minimum wage, because anyone can do it. When I was promoted to cashier a little more than a year later, I received a dollar raise (as a teen I was thrilled). With the promotion I received more responsibilities as well as the position became more complex, and not anyone could do it. When I was trained in to work in multiple depts I again received a raise, because my role was gaining more responsibilities as well as becoming more complex.
When you raise the minimum wage to 9.50, you take away the ability for businesses to create this step ladder affect towards better pay. You force them to pay some of their long term faithful employees the same as temporary kid in high school. When someone with no experience makes the same as you when you have a few years experience it can decrease moral anywhere.
Also too, when you raise minimum wage to the point where starting job for college grads, it makes more high-schoolers ask whats the point in obtaining a degree if they can make the same as some college grads, and wait for the next wage increase to give them they raise they think they deserve.
Now the reason the pay range in this field where my fiance works is what it is because it is a starting position in the company, you start there and work your way up into other positions, that is why they have the education requirements.

I hope I was able to better portray my point
 
dibblebill said:
Really, the issue isn't something that can be solved by discussion of minimum wage as an isolated variable. As stated above, inflation is a factor. So are job requirements. It's not just about requiring too much- many jobs require too little and automatically exclude anyone seen as "overqualified". There's so many factors it's not even funny.
Click to expand...

Let's say an actuary applies for a job as a casher in a department store, or a person with nothing but sales or management experience suddenly wants to flip burgers. They may actually have a real need but the ones hiring also have a real need, and their question is going to be do we want to hire and train someone who isn't going to be happy, and will leave at their first opportunity.

The are a lot of signs that there is something wrong with the economy. The need to raise minimum wage is one of them. This need only arises when businesses refuse to address the issues.

The economy is like a living entity so when something is wrong with it we tend to treat it like it is sick. Take the analogy and compare it with how our nation deals with health care. No one wants to do anything. It's too scary. So, when something is done, it is to little, to late, and not necessarily the fix that is needed.

I don't think that one would be wrong to say that if there was no need to to raise minimum wage the discussion of what minimum wage should or should not be, wouldn't even be an issue. Politicians are usually the first to say that something needs to be done, and the last to specify exactly what needs to be done. They do always have a plan. Of course the plan is always complicated.

The one thing that out government has proven is that governing our country is an issue that is too complicated for them to do. Everything is always too big an issue. It's complicated. They can't solve it by doing this, or doing that. They need to talk about it some more, and talk about it some more, and talk about it some more.

People are getting fed up. Does it really matter if it is not going to solve the issue, does any one actually know what the issue is anymore. As a nation we are dying here. We can't pay our bills. Our jobs are like shooting stars here one second and gone the next. Do business really think that by threatening to punish our country by doing away with even more jobs if minimum wage is raised is actually going to be viewed as a great concern to those whose senses have already been stunned?

We have lost jobs, and had to take different jobs at lower pay and or lower hours. We have had to accept that our health insurance is affordable, yet possibly no longer adequate. We have lost our homes because we could no longer pay the mortgage, or rent. This recession hurt, and it is still hurting.

When a governing body actually decides that minimum wage should be raised even in the face of threats by businesses to cut jobs, then someone says, I don't think it will solve the issue plus it's not fair that someone with a collage education will only be getting a dollar more than a kid fresh out of highschool. Well, my first question is; What?

I have to ask. Why would anyone who has been through what we have been through these past years see anything wrong with someone else getting a pay raise? The only problem I have with that issue is that I don't live there.
 
pbf98 said:
I believe you have taken my example out of the context that I was portraying, or perhaps I didn't describe my point of it. 10.50 an hour is not the highest income, but it is a helpful decent income. A job that pays above minimum wage pays more based on what responsibilities it has, what it requires for experience or education to complete the daily tasks, and the complexity of the task.
I'll use my first job as an example here.. When I was bagging groceries and stocking shelves I made minimum wage, because anyone can do it. When I was promoted to cashier a little more than a year later, I received a dollar raise (as a teen I was thrilled). With the promotion I received more responsibilities as well as the position became more complex, and not anyone could do it. When I was trained in to work in multiple depts I again received a raise, because my role was gaining more responsibilities as well as becoming more complex.
When you raise the minimum wage to 9.50, you take away the ability for businesses to create this step ladder affect towards better pay. You force them to pay some of their long term faithful employees the same as temporary kid in high school. When someone with no experience makes the same as you when you have a few years experience it can decrease moral anywhere.
Also too, when you raise minimum wage to the point where starting job for college grads, it makes more high-schoolers ask whats the point in obtaining a degree if they can make the same as some college grads, and wait for the next wage increase to give them they raise they think they deserve.
Now the reason the pay range in this field where my fiance works is what it is because it is a starting position in the company, you start there and work your way up into other positions, that is why they have the education requirements.

I hope I was able to better portray my point
Click to expand...

I didn't get a chance to read this before I made my last post. I believe I have a better understanding of what you are saying now.

It doesn't seem that your issue is minimum wage so much as it is the way some businesses rate their pay scale. Businesses do what the market allows.

There was a time and still might be in some states where you would not get minimum wage for bagging groceries. People who worked in that business also didn't always get overtime. It depended on what their job classification was.

There is a book called The Jungle by Upton Sinclair Jr. It is a story about how life was when business had a free hand. It's a story about real life. It's a story that I think our country wants to relive because we have forgotten to know any better. It is in my opinion one of our countries best history books because it actually told people what they really didn't want to hear, and the book itself actually was a cause for change.

In today's world we are the immigrants moving into a new America, and no it's not as bad as it was when Sinclair wrote the book, but it is an example of how bad business will allow things to be so long as it serves their interest.

You should read the book then decide if that is the world you want your children to grow up in.

The unions that everyone so happily have seen denigrated are not the worst things that have existed in our past.
 
I'm not denying that a wage raise would help many because of inflation. What I'm saying is that it alone won't solve anything- which we seem to agree on. We also seem to agree on Washington's inability to solve these issues, as it spends most of its time blowing hot air. I believe that was the entire reason for the tenth amendment in the first place.

That being said (and setting my personal philosophies aside), raising minimum wage is only a small bandage on a MUCH larger issue- it'll help... For a short time. Then we need it again, and again. Meanwhile, prices will keep climbing and climbing, and smaller businesses will begin closing their doors. It's at best, a stopgap measure. There needs to be a HUGE discussion on our monetary system and how we are managing it.
 
Well I live in mn and I cannot make it on minimum wage.. I'll be honest I'm a penniless chump ha.. I'm not going to get into weather is good or bad that the minimum wage is going up.. I like it but refuse to explain why cuz there are holes for both sides and I'll just leave it at its the best option I could personally think of right now...
 
well since nobody else has asked it I might as well be the one...

why such an arbitrary number?

if the point of raising the min wage is to give people more money

why not make min wage $100/hr? or even better $100,000,000,000/hr?

then nobody will be "poor" anymore

your answer to those questions is the exact same answer as to why having any other arbitrary number such as $9.50/hr is a bad idea
 
copestag said:
well since nobody else has asked it I might as well be the one...

why such an arbitrary number?

if the point of raising the min wage is to give people more money

why not make min wage $100/hr? or even better $100,000,000,000/hr?

then nobody will be "poor" anymore

your answer to those questions is the exact same answer as to why having any other arbitrary number such as $9.50/hr is a bad idea
Click to expand...

The very first post shows that the $9.50/hr is conditional. To me this would imply some thought went into the process.

Perhaps you have insite that shows you're proposition that $9.50/hr is an arbitrary number?
 
if by conditional youre referring to the $500K gross line........ that simply makes it even more arbitrary

so what youre train of thought on this has to be is that a guy working for company A that does $500K deserves $9.50 while his neighbor who does the exact same job for company B that only does $450K deserves a lesser amount?
 
copestag said:
if by conditional youre referring to the $500K gross line........ that simply makes it even more arbitrary

so what youre train of thought on this has to be is that a guy working for company A that does $500K deserves $9.50 while his neighbor who does the exact same job for company B that only does $450K deserves a lesser amount?
Click to expand...

I never suggested that the condition justified the $9.50. I said that it implied to me that thought had been given to the number.

The fact that you don't feel that the number is just doesn't make either of the the numbers arbitrary.

You have simply stated your opinion which you have a right to do, but you haven't shown that either number is arbitrary.

I do slightly object to your telling me what my train of thought has to be, but I am enjoying the conversation.

The next three days will be very busy, so I may not be able to address any other statements you might have as to what my thoughts might be until Monday, but I should be able to enjoy reading them.

Have a good night.
 
its not a suggestion as to your train of thought....... its the only possible conclusion as to your belief if you believe "~$9.50/hr is conditional. To me this would imply some thought went into the process."

and the number is quite arbitrary as I have pointed out to you already

the very fact that they chose $500K as the difference between big business and small business without differentiating business types makes it arbitrary

however back to the $9.50 figure....... I dont need opinion to make it so......

Im going to guess (yep that much is opinion) that you havent followed this or even done any background research to support your discussion on the matter

did you know they initially wanted a much higher figure as well as included indexing........ the $9.50 number was only reached after backroom negotiation......... negotiation makes it arbitrary........ and even then the senate still argued for a different number.... but the house passed the negotiated $9.50....... so after more negotiation in the senate they agreed they could live with $9.50

does that sound like much thought went into the process of why $9.50?

why not $50.00?

because they couldnt negotiate that

its all quite arbitrary.... much like the arbitrary definition of "lower class" or "poor"....... the poorest person in Minnesota would live like a king in most of the world...... very arbitrary
 
My understanding is that the actual number that defines what they call big business as opposed to small business in mn is 625k.

The fact that there was a discussion implied to me that some thought went into to discussion.

The only conclusion I can actually come to when you keep insisting that the whole process was arbitrary is that you are implying that the one's having had the discussion are incapable of thought.

If that is what you mean it is still an opinion which to me seems baseless. For even when I look for arbitrary synonyms the only one having to do with government does not seem to fit because it deals with self government.

If you could enlighten me without thought perhaps I could understand your meaning? I apologize, but I an simply clueless...
 
ahh so its the definition of arbitrary that youre having trouble with.... I see

its a random number without specific meaning....... just as the 500K

if as you say their definition of big business is 625K then what does 500K as opposed to 400K or 600K.... theres no specific reason other than thats the number at which both sides could agree - arbitrary

the same with the min wage..... one side wanted a higher number (one that also had no specific meaning).... the other side wanted no change at all...... they compromised at $9.50... a random number they both could agree on

it would be different if say they made it $11.46/hr... which is the imaginary (arbitrary) poverty line threshold for a family of 4......... or they made it $5.61/hr ... which is the imaginary (arbitrary) poverty line threshold for a single person

those numbers would have a meaning... a reason for being used...... $9.50 has no reason for being the number other than they couldnt agree on $9.60 or $9.40

hence arbitrary.... Let me google that for you
 
It seems too me that what they finally agreed upon is to make a helpless gesture.

It must feel good to be able too help someone while getting paid well to do so.
 
Very good pint from dibble, its a temporary fix, and they will just need to do it time and time again, eventually pushing small businesses out the door.. Even if they aren't forced to raise their minimum wage they are faced with losing employees to places that are forced to.

And i believe my point again was misconstrued.. When i use someone with college education as an example that's just one of many. The grocery store i worked at, 9.50 /hr was pretty high pay there, to get that you have to be a manager, or have worked there for write a few years, now in 2016 the owner will be forced to raise all his part time high school employees to 9.50, while everyone at that point is going to stay where they're at. Which leaves you with people that have no experience making what someone who has plenty experience. At that point there is no room for growth. Now at the grocery store in my context, the highest wage is not 9.50, but it is one of the higher ones.

I'm not coming at this from a "what's fair" stand, I'm coming at this from a consumer stand point, it's only going to hurt us more than the temporary relief that is achieved.
 
Also minimum wage is not intended to support a family, it's there for those with lack of experience, more or less intended for kids still in school or living with parents
 
I personally love the concept of pinning min wage to inflation

the single biggest driver of inflation is wage hikes

this makes it a perpetual machine

everytime min wage increases...... inflation increases..... whichs mean min wage increases again...... which means inflation increases again.... which means... well you get the point

before long these low education, low skill, low ambition, employees are making more than the CEO
 
copestag said:
the single biggest driver of inflation is wage hikes
Click to expand...

There may have been some truth in that back in the 70s however, over the last 20 years it has been minimal or negative, given that incomes for 99% of the population have stagnated (at best) in real terms.

The biggest influences - both upward and downward - on inflation have probably been a mix of cyclical, population growth and improved living standards in developing countries.

Upward pressure on prices - i.e. demand exceeding supply - was partly driven by the bubble increasing economic activity and partly because of competition for resources (think commodities like oil, food, metals etc) due to factors like increased global population and increased living standards across the developing world - think China, India and quite a few countries across Asia, South America and Africa.

Recent downward pressure - supply exceeding demand - has been the crash reducing overall economic activity. Prior to that though, downward pressure on prices came primarily from increased supply of manufactured goods from places like China. Due to the way inflation is measured, this did a great job of masking inflation during the bubble - think how house, gas and food prices sky rocketed but the inflation figures barely moved.

Wages are obviously a factor, but rather a small one in our current, globalised economies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom