The Intelligent & Relentless Pursuit of Muscle™
Politics and World Issues
 
US Has Lowest Minimum Wage, Most Young People Without Jobs
 

Testy1
Level 4

Join date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3905

jbpick86 wrote:
Phoenix44e wrote:
jbpick86 wrote:
Phoenix44e wrote:
countingbeans wrote:
Phoenix44e wrote:


And again, this is just for one person. So adding even 1 child to the mix, said person would barely have a chance to ever get ahead. Let alone make it out of their shitty situation.



So it is my responsibility to fix this for them? So the government should force a company to pay this person more than their work is worth? For what? What net gain does the person get, when forcing a food shop to pay people $2 more an hour forces them to increase their prices and/or reduce the people they employ?

What is the upper limit in MW in your scenario then?

Do you see how it is just another form of welfare? The increase in wages isn't "free" money.




I didn't say it was your problem. The only reason why I entered this thread was because I was curious on how minimum wage could be applied to different scenarios. Then jpc made a point that having 2 jobs would be better and you could live off of minimum wage. and I was just trying to point out that you really cant. Remember that in my break down the money spent was in best case scenario, where as the money earned is unable to be changed.


I'm not into the gov't forcing things unless they absolutely have to. It's not my fault that certain companies choose to abide by the bare minimum forced by law. If they choose to go that route than unfortunately yes, more law will be required to change it.

an extra .75 cent raise to our nh minimum wage would increase a persons salary by $1,560. Do you think that would really break a companies back?

I don't see how it would be another form of welfare...not that I'm arguing against you, but I'm just not making that correlation. Could you explain further?

If we want people to better themselves then we need to give them the ability to find a way to do so. Where the minimum wage is currently in nh, I don't see how that is possible. (I'm only speaking for my state because I don't know what the cost of living is anywhere else)




If they increase minimum wage it doesn't just effect minimum wage employees for the most part. Lets say I have a handful of people in high turnover positions that I decide to pay minimum wage. Then my next step up is a 1.50 an hour increase. When they raise the minimum wage do I leave those sitting at the subsequent levels the same, thereby devaluing their extra experience/skill or do I give them a raise to maintain the relevance of the next pay step? I don't think a lot of people think about that.


Well I said .75 not 1.50. But yes, raise their salary to .75 more per hour. You don't have to raise everyones pay. We're talking about raising the bare minimum to help people live more reasonable lives. Anything other than that then we're getting into paying people what they deserve and what their job requirements are. Which I believe should be a different discussion.


I think you misunderstood. If I have a janitor who just started out, and I pay him minimum wage at 7.25. I have another janitor who has been there a while and he makes 8.00. Then my level A office personnel make 8.75, AA make 10.00 and so on (numbers are purely speculation). If you then raise minimum wage to 8.00, will I not need to give my senior janitor a raise to indicate is higher status with the company. Then will I not need to give my different levels of office personnel raises to indicate their increase in skill above that of a janitor?? If I don't wont I create a feeling of under appreciation among my staff?


Quite often new hires make more than established workers and yes it does create problems. Earlier in my career the only way to get a raise was to move on and I often times made more than people already there doing the same work. This is not a defense of raising the minimum only putting out a reply.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

jbpick86
Level

Join date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2749

Testy1 wrote:
jbpick86 wrote:
Phoenix44e wrote:
jbpick86 wrote:
Phoenix44e wrote:
countingbeans wrote:
Phoenix44e wrote:


And again, this is just for one person. So adding even 1 child to the mix, said person would barely have a chance to ever get ahead. Let alone make it out of their shitty situation.



So it is my responsibility to fix this for them? So the government should force a company to pay this person more than their work is worth? For what? What net gain does the person get, when forcing a food shop to pay people $2 more an hour forces them to increase their prices and/or reduce the people they employ?

What is the upper limit in MW in your scenario then?

Do you see how it is just another form of welfare? The increase in wages isn't "free" money.




I didn't say it was your problem. The only reason why I entered this thread was because I was curious on how minimum wage could be applied to different scenarios. Then jpc made a point that having 2 jobs would be better and you could live off of minimum wage. and I was just trying to point out that you really cant. Remember that in my break down the money spent was in best case scenario, where as the money earned is unable to be changed.


I'm not into the gov't forcing things unless they absolutely have to. It's not my fault that certain companies choose to abide by the bare minimum forced by law. If they choose to go that route than unfortunately yes, more law will be required to change it.

an extra .75 cent raise to our nh minimum wage would increase a persons salary by $1,560. Do you think that would really break a companies back?

I don't see how it would be another form of welfare...not that I'm arguing against you, but I'm just not making that correlation. Could you explain further?

If we want people to better themselves then we need to give them the ability to find a way to do so. Where the minimum wage is currently in nh, I don't see how that is possible. (I'm only speaking for my state because I don't know what the cost of living is anywhere else)




If they increase minimum wage it doesn't just effect minimum wage employees for the most part. Lets say I have a handful of people in high turnover positions that I decide to pay minimum wage. Then my next step up is a 1.50 an hour increase. When they raise the minimum wage do I leave those sitting at the subsequent levels the same, thereby devaluing their extra experience/skill or do I give them a raise to maintain the relevance of the next pay step? I don't think a lot of people think about that.


Well I said .75 not 1.50. But yes, raise their salary to .75 more per hour. You don't have to raise everyones pay. We're talking about raising the bare minimum to help people live more reasonable lives. Anything other than that then we're getting into paying people what they deserve and what their job requirements are. Which I believe should be a different discussion.


I think you misunderstood. If I have a janitor who just started out, and I pay him minimum wage at 7.25. I have another janitor who has been there a while and he makes 8.00. Then my level A office personnel make 8.75, AA make 10.00 and so on (numbers are purely speculation). If you then raise minimum wage to 8.00, will I not need to give my senior janitor a raise to indicate is higher status with the company. Then will I not need to give my different levels of office personnel raises to indicate their increase in skill above that of a janitor?? If I don't wont I create a feeling of under appreciation among my staff?


Quite often new hires make more than established workers and yes it does create problems. Earlier in my career the only way to get a raise was to move on and I often times made more than people already there doing the same work. This is not a defense of raising the minimum only putting out a reply.


This is true. Which we have always tried to avoid this and generally only increase the hourly wage of a position when we can comparatively increase the wage of the others in that same department. Here raises of any significance merely mean that you are getting some added responsibility and moving up the chain of command.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report