NationStates Jolt Archive

I was wondering what y'all thought of minimum laws? Are they good/bad? Why?

Minimum laws are very GOOD. Why? Because if you don't have them you will struggle to keep anyone who works from becoming in status or treatment, a slave. Even that proud bastian of heartless capitalism the USA has minimum wages. Also minimum wages help to prevent discrimination, ensure a decent standard of living, promote equality and labour rights and can assist in stopping illegal immigration. ie, if illegal aliens get paid as much as a legal citizen there is less incentive to hire 'cheap' labour.

I think this goes in "general." But after years of supporting minimum-wage laws, I've come to the conclusion that they are harmful. By raising the minimum amount someone can be paid, that creates a dis-incentive to hire people who just don't work very well. These people need to make a living too, but if they can only do a $2-an-hour job and the minimum wage is $5.50, no one will hire them.

In addition, raising the minimum wage increases inflation rates. When minimum wage goes up, "better" jobs must increase their wages to provide more incentive for workers. Higher pay for everyone increases costs of goods and services, raising price for the consumer. I've heard it said that ultimately, those on the lowest end of the economic scale--those people you'd think would benefit the most from higher minimum wage--are actually hurt the most in terms of total buying power.

Furthermore, almost every company in America pays its lowest workers at above minimum wage, implying that they have an incentive other than legal ones for paying higher wages.

I don't have all the facts, and I'm not an economics guru. I'll post a link later to a forum where some better-educated people are discussing the subject.

((Request to move posted in moderation forum))

If you raised the price of milk to an artificially high level anyone can see this would obviously mean people would buy less milk. Why do people have problems seeing the same applies to labour? Minimum wage laws cause unemployment amounst the poor (the people they're "helping"!). If they didn't we'd raise the minimum wage to £1 million and we'd all be rich. Good intentions, terrible results.

It's also an illegitimate use of violence to threaten people with jail just because they hire someone at a mutually agreeable wage that some bureaucrat disapproves of.

Minimum wage laws only increase the costs of products because no business wants to lose the profit margins that they currently have with their products - they would rather pass the costs onto consumers, which increases the rate of inflation, which places the worker back to the point they were initially in or worse. The economic circle of life. A better choice would be to decrease worker education costs so that the lower income workforce has the opportunity to earn a better wage and leave the lower income jobs to workers in transition, students, part time and temporary job seekers.

Cut your whining you cruddy neo-liberalists. Arguing against a minimum age is only one step above arguing for slave labour. The affect of a minimum age does reduce demand for labour but ensures that those who are employed are better off, however skilled labour is always going to be in a more powerful bargaining position then unskilled labour so if you’re going to listen to any of theses classicalist dolts then perhaps you should look up profit-related pay or look at setting minimum wages within the market clearing range.

I think we'd be better served to have a maximum wage law. :?

If people are willing to work for less, let them. Why set price controls on labor? If I ran a business I'd damn well want to decide for myself appropriate pay levels and not have government do it for me.

Helping against discrimination, etc. All that could be solved if only the American culture could produce better people and values. It can't. So now all minimum wage laws is ensure other types of discrimination, and also ensure that some businesses will be unable to operate because they will be forced to pay workers at some random level regardless of the businesses ability to generate that much funding.

If you need to restrict economic freedom just to prevent a cultural thing like 'discrimination' or raise the standard of living you might as well just sign yourself up for the command economy and communist party right now, since you obviously think its more efficient to make restrictive laws than to actually accomplish something socially. Plus it's easier to blame business for the fault of the culture. It's also easier to be stupid.

WA, I don't understand the difference between compelling someone to work for nothing (slave labor) and compelling someone to pay for work not done (minimum wage laws). Both are forms of theft at the hands of government. It just so happens that one is widely illegal and the other is encoded in statute. Being encoded in statute doesn't absolve minimum wage laws from being theft.

Well, it's either have minimum wage laws -- and have people who can be self-sufficient even if they don't have everything they want -- or have people working for $1 and $2 an hour and have them living off government subsidies just to buy food and clothes. Hmmm, I'd rather have self-sufficient people.

I'm not an expert on economics, but I doubt minimum wage laws fuel prices going up, etc. The reason that minimum wages go up every so often is precisely because prices have already risen to such a point that a person can no longer be self-sufficient on those wages. And minimum wage only goes up once every, what? ten years?

we need a minimum wage. without it big business would pay the low level workers the least they could get away with. if you cant pay a worker $5.50 per hour you need to rethink your business

that said, i dont think that the minimum wage should be enough for a family to live on with one worker making the minimum wage. it should be more of a starting wage for people entering the workforce who dont need to support a family.

if you want to make more than the minimum you should have to prove to your boss that you are worth more. experience, training, another line of work that doesnt involve "do you want fries with that?"

its a fine line between mandating fair treatment of workers and not overburdening business.

WA, I don't understand the difference between compelling someone to work for nothing (slave labor) and compelling someone to pay for work not done (minimum wage laws). Both are forms of theft at the hands of government. It just so happens that one is widely illegal and the other is encoded in statute. Being encoded in statute doesn't absolve minimum wage laws from being theft.

Because slavery deprives someone of their dignity and their right to liberty, freedom and equality. If you don't consider it to be a BIG difference between being in forced labour and having the availability to sack someone for not doing their job who happens to be working at or above the minimum wage, well then that's you and your people's loss.

and just what job is it that you think deserves to be paid at less than the minimum wage? none spring to my mind

If people are willing to work for less, let them. Why set price controls on labor? If I ran a business I'd damn well want to decide for myself appropriate pay levels and not have government do it for me.

Helping against discrimination, etc. All that could be solved if only the American culture could produce better people and values. It can't. So now all minimum wage laws is ensure other types of discrimination, and also ensure that some businesses will be unable to operate because they will be forced to pay workers at some random level regardless of the businesses ability to generate that much funding.

If you need to restrict economic freedom just to prevent a cultural thing like 'discrimination' or raise the standard of living you might as well just sign yourself up for the command economy and communist party right now, since you obviously think its more efficient to make restrictive laws than to actually accomplish something socially. Plus it's easier to blame business for the fault of the culture. It's also easier to be stupid.

Yes... Its the fault of culture that Mexicans can be hired to work in sweatshops fo 5cents an hour.. Learn some history man, Laizze Faire capitalism was a generally barbaric practice, which gave rishe to (commie pinko) labour unions, whihc forced companies to be humane in their treatment of workers. This thread is apalling anyone who opposes minimum wages is either making inflamatory and uninformed statements, is is leage with Satan, or is a sweatshop owner. What category to you see yourselves in?

Because slavery deprives someone of their dignity and their right to liberty, freedom and equality. If you don't consider it to be a BIG difference between being in forced labour and having the availability to sack someone for not doing their job who happens to be working at or above the minimum wage, well then that's you and your people's loss.

So you accept there is a difference between slave labor and no minum wage? What where you on about then?

They do help against the evils of capitalism and if the government is stupid enough to help us, then why not? They aren't enough though, and often suppress real change.

-----------------------------------------
"Basically, claims that the Holocaust didn't happen are as stupid as saying the Sun is made from Cheese."-English Republicans
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!
http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v193/eddy_the_great/steatopygia.jpg

If people are willing to work for less, let them. Why set price controls on labor? If I ran a business I'd damn well want to decide for myself appropriate pay levels and not have government do it for me.

Helping against discrimination, etc. All that could be solved if only the American culture could produce better people and values. It can't. So now all minimum wage laws is ensure other types of discrimination, and also ensure that some businesses will be unable to operate because they will be forced to pay workers at some random level regardless of the businesses ability to generate that much funding.

If you need to restrict economic freedom just to prevent a cultural thing like 'discrimination' or raise the standard of living you might as well just sign yourself up for the command economy and communist party right now, since you obviously think its more efficient to make restrictive laws than to actually accomplish something socially. Plus it's easier to blame business for the fault of the culture. It's also easier to be stupid.

Yes... Its the fault of culture that Mexicans can be hired to work in sweatshops fo 5cents an hour.. Learn some history man, Laizze Faire capitalism was a generally barbaric practice, which gave rishe to (commie pinko) labour unions, whihc forced companies to be humane in their treatment of workers. This thread is apalling anyone who opposes minimum wages is either making inflamatory and uninformed statements, is is leage with Satan, or is a sweatshop owner. What category to you see yourselves in?

It's the fault of culture that people like you feel the need to make sweeping generalizations like "opposing minimum wage is teh satan!!1!"

It's also the fault of culture that "discrimination" is such a big, 'evil' issue in this country when in so many countries around the world people would literally kill to make HALF our minimum wage. Americans in general like to make big issues where it isn't. Like, we make a big deal out of terrorism, which killed 3000 Americans one year, but we don't seem to mind the ten-twenty times higher body count because of poor drivers and drunk driving.

Some jobs just aren't worth minimum wage. If you think that equates with running a sweatshop in this country, I'd say you need to learn some history yourself.

If people are willing to work for less, let them. Why set price controls on labor? If I ran a business I'd damn well want to decide for myself appropriate pay levels and not have government do it for me.


I question the word, willing, because I don't think any sane person is willing to earn less. I think the word is forced, because if its lassiez faire capitalism we're talking about, its work for peanuts, or starve.

If people are willing to work for less, let them. Why set price controls on labor? If I ran a business I'd damn well want to decide for myself appropriate pay levels and not have government do it for me.


I question the word, willing, because I don't think any sane person is willing to earn less. I think the word is forced, because if its lassiez faire capitalism we're talking about, its work for peanuts, or starve.

You forget a third, better option: to accure capital and start an enterprise. Your formulation

You're talking about 18th and 19th century capitalism, complete with scientific management and usefulness of uber-cheap workers. Our economy is not the same as it was then, we're not dependent on so many unskilled work and factory/farm type employment, and business and management has progressed to the point where people - not just you, but actual business people! - understand the benefits of paying employees enough money. Happy, well-paid, well-fed, educated workers means better profits in today's economy, and that's not going to change if minimum wage was abolished. You seem to have the conception that if not for minimum wage, we'd instantly regress to the stereotypical 1850 railroad baron whipping the line workers into shape. It just isn't so.

And if people were educated enough to realize they dont have to work for 5 cents an hour, they wouldn't. Of course in your paradigm, every company in the world would reduce their worker pays to that amount so there is no choice... but your paradigm is antibusiness and unrealistic to boot.

I like to think of it this way. Let's say you want to go off and do something, but are expecting a phone call. You approach your family member or friend and offer to pay them money to sit there for an hour, and answer the phone if it rings. Are you going to pay minimum wage, twice that or more, or less than half of minimum wage?

Is sitting around for an hour answering a phone IF it rings, worth 8 dollars? Furthermore, let's say you were that someone being offered to do this job, are you going to say "I won't do it unless you pay minimum wage! My time and time alone is worth at least that and not a penny less!"?

Me, I'd do that sort of job for practically free. Except I wouldn't, since government would arrest said family member for being an evil slavemaster who is FORCING me to sit there and answer the phone and not paying a "fair" wage for that "service." Good old government, looking out for everybody... not to mention that minimum wage translates directly to a quota for income taxes, and without it the government wouldn't make as much profit for waging stupid wars. Ahem, I mean tax revenue for public services.

Some jobs just aren't worth minimum wage. If you think that equates with running a sweatshop in this country, I'd say you need to learn some history yourself.

again

just what jobs are you referring to that arent worth minimum wage?

these days even teenaged babysitters watching sleeping children while their parents go out to a movie get $5 per hour

Some jobs just aren't worth minimum wage. If you think that equates with running a sweatshop in this country, I'd say you need to learn some history yourself.

again

just what jobs are you referring to that arent worth minimum wage?

these days even teenaged babysitters watching sleeping children while their parents go out to a movie get $5 per hour

Well I'd say babysitting isn't worth minimum wage. Plus, at least over here, $5 an hour is less than minimum wage, so that basically proves my point.

Well I'd say babysitting isn't worth minimum wage. Plus, at least over here, $5 an hour is less than minimum wage, so that basically proves my point.

*gives IV the look*

no it doesnt prove your point.

you haven't answered my question, i can only assume it is because you cant think of a job that isnt worth minimum wage either.

I was wondering what y'all thought of minimum laws? Are they good/bad? Why?

It can always be better. John Kerry says he can increase the miminum wage to $7.00 an hour over a 3 year period i believe. I was surprised when he said that, because, then i'd be making the miminum wage!

I never get paid minimum wage, because I have a good resume, so, I don't know too much about how much of an effect it has on people who are trying to make end's meat... but, I think it's good that there's a minimum, or else people might get trapped into getting much less than they should for working their fair share.

We interrupt this ridiculous and mindless diatribe of neo-liberal capitalist dribble with a word from our sponsors...

(paraphrase)The function of representative government is to curb the excesses of the monied interests
The world has never had a good definition of the word liberty, and the American people, just now, are much in want of one. We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men's labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatable things, called by the same name---liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatable names---liberty and tyranny. The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as a liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act as the destroyer of liberty... Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of the word liberty; and precisely the same difference prevails to-day among us human creatures, even in the North, and all professing to love liberty. Hence we behold the processes by which thousands are daily passing from under the yoke of bondage, hailed by some as the advance of liberty, and bewailed by others as the destruction of all liberty. Recently, as it seems, the people... ...have been doing something to define liberty; and thanks to them that, in what they have done, the wolf's dictionary, has been repudiated.

A high-minimum wage creates unemployment, and a low minimum wage (a wage below what the market pays out) is useless. If the minimum wage is equal to the market payout, then it is unnecessary. Thats the short of it.

just what jobs are you referring to that arent worth minimum wage?
Any job where the employer and employee agree on a lower wage.

just what jobs are you referring to that arent worth minimum wage?
Any job where the employer and employee agree on a lower wage.

and just what job would that be? aside from teens who are not old enough for a real job babysitting for pocket money and illegal aliens too afraid to insist on minimum wage?

just what jobs are you referring to that arent worth minimum wage?
Any job where the employer and employee agree on a lower wage.
and just what job would that be? aside from teens who are not old enough for a real job babysitting for pocket money and illegal aliens too afraid to insist on minimum wage?
Drop the minimum wage and find out.

Minimum wage laws are good but they could be improved. Here's how:

Tie the salery scale of all public employees to the minimum wage. Any time congress votes themself a raise they raise the pay of every federal employee and they raise the minimum wage. The saleries of non-elected officials may be adjusted relative to the scale by individual laws, but the saleries of congress, etc., will be set in stone in terms of their proportion to the minimum wage and all other federal saleries.

so i take it to mean that you cant think of any job not worthy of the minimum wage.
id have to agree

A high-minimum wage creates unemployment, and a low minimum wage (a wage below what the market pays out) is useless. If the minimum wage is equal to the market payout, then it is unnecessary. Thats the short of it.
Bull. A minimum wage which at least meets basic necessities would have many, many positive effects. Three biggies I can think of off the top of my head:

1. It would end the conditions that force the poor to work multiple jobs, a change which itself would have several effects: (a) would create more job openings as fewer workers would work multiple jobs; (b) would allow the poor time to pursue education and training to rise in the economic structure; (c) would give poor parents more time with their children thereby reducing crime, teen pregnancy, and decreasing the chances that their children will drop out of school.

2. It would greatly reduce problems of illegal immigration. The current minimum wage is so out-of-step with the actual income needed to meet basic needs that the only workers who will take minimum-wage jobs are the desperately poor, foreign migrant workers, and illegal immigrants. With a higher minimum wage, more domestic workers would be willing to work in the service and agriculture industries thereby reducing the demand for the import of cheap foreign labor (the primary purpose of which has been and continues to be to pressure wages downward).

3. It would allow poor families better access to preventative medicine and better nutrition and reduce the strain on a myriad of social services (which, when you think about it, are essentially a government subsidy to businesses who are unwilling or unable to pay their employees enough to meet their basic needs - how's that for a new spin on anti-poor neo-liberal economic propaganda? :wink: ).

It's also an illegitimate use of violence to threaten people with jail just because they hire someone at a mutually agreeable wage that some bureaucrat disapproves of.
First, the rich rarely go to jail they just pay (either a fine to the government or fees to a good lawyer).

Second, you greatly misstate what a minimum wage law is, at least in Western democracies. It's not a government bureaucrat's disapproval of poverty. It's the government's response to the demand of the people that the weakest among their number not be at such a disadvantage in the marketplace that they starve and/or have no hope of a better life and the public's desire to protect itself from the possibility of economic and political manipulation to drive down wages across the board. Setting a minimum wage to maintain the health of the labor market is no more a violent, illegitimate use of violence than the Federal Reserve setting interest rates to maintain the health of the financial markets is.

I think we'd be better served to have a maximum wage law. :?
Now there's a smart man! I don't hear anyone bemoaning the inflationary pressures brought by the 81% increase between 1979 and 2001 in inflation-adjusted income enjoyed by the wealthiest 5% of families in the US (compared to the 3% increase in inflation-adjusted income to the bottom quintile). [See http://www.inequality.org/facts_b.html for complete figures]

i think there should be a maximum wage law as well.

Maybe there should be a maximum limit to how much one person can own.

Ashmoria, I did answer your question, in fact in your last reply to me, you quoted me answering. Apparently you missed that. Babysitting is not worth minimum wage! There are plenty of other jobs not worth that much, too.

Of course your next step was to denounce babysitting as not a "real" job. Cute trick. Does that mean we can avoid minimum wage laws applying to babysitting, what with it not being a real job and all? :twisted:

End point. Minimum wage doesn't serve whatever needs it's supposed to. What, supposed to spread wealth more equally? You'd be better off going totally communist to do that. Supposed to keep the poor from starving? face it, the poor are poor and will starve if they can't get by. Making a law somewhere forcing companies to pay certain amounts of money in all situations is a cheap, easy, stupid and as I said, ineffective solution.

Basically, people who support minimum wage don't know all that, and/or like the concept of Big Brother telling evil, stupid business owners how to run their jobs. And what's with all this "poor illegal immigrant" crap I'm hearing? Oh, I feel so sorry for what are by definition criminals who ARE willing to work for low wages!

See, this is kinda a democracy, which means that there is a thing called economic freedom - despite what you antibusiness, pro-big brother types say - which means you have a CHOICE. Don't like working for 5 cents an hour? Look for another job. It's a tough world, stop relying on government to solve all your problems.

You can't legislate your way to utopia, and definitely not by restricting freedom. Unless your concept of utopia is a communist paradise. Unfortunately for you then, since that only works in NS and not the real world.

Any job where the employer and employee agree on a lower wage.

Perhaps you haven't worked alot in retail or fast food. There is no "negotiation". You either take what they offer you, or they will hire one of the other 50 people applying for that job. And if they are desperate enough, or in a market with few other job choices, they will take whatever the employer offers.

Let me ask this... without a minimum wage, what do you think a fast food worker would get paid in... say.... St. Louis?

Now, what do you think they would be paid in a small town, where there is plenty of labor but few employers?

Ashmoria, I did answer your question, in fact in your last reply to me, you quoted me answering. Apparently you missed that. Babysitting is not worth minimum wage! There are plenty of other jobs not worth that much, too.


no IV i expect YOU to come up with a real life job that adults hold that is not worth the minimum wage.

if there are so many of them you should be able to provide me with a list so long that i wont bother to read to the end of it.

baby sitting is worth its weight in gold. in many places parents of small children cant find anyone to babysit and jealously guard the names of those they do find.

Perhaps you haven't worked alot in retail or fast food. There is no "negotiation". You either take what they offer you, or they will hire one of the other 50 people applying for that job. And if they are desperate enough, or in a market with few other job choices, they will take whatever the employer offers.
$1 an hour? $2? Do you really think that: number of applicants/number of jobs = 50? Do you think that people will take a $4 an hour job at McDonald's when Wendy's is offering $5? And do you think that McDonald's would then sit around with no employees, or will they offer $5.50, and so on, until profits would decline from any further wage increase (ie: the market price is reached)?
Let me ask this... without a minimum wage, what do you think a fast food worker would get paid in... say.... St. Louis?
The market price.
Now, what do you think they would be paid in a small town, where there is plenty of labor but few employers?
The market price.

its a darn good thing the we do have a minimum wage and that the only quesiton is how much will it be raised by (both candidates favor a higher minimum wage)

And what's with all this "poor illegal immigrant" crap I'm hearing? Oh, I feel so sorry for what are by definition criminals who ARE willing to work for low wages!
Who is the bigger criminal? A person who breaks the law by crossing a border to keep their family from starving or the company which breaks multiple laws by hiring that person (creating the job market that drew them in the first place) at a morally abominable (and illegal) wage in an effort to drive down the wages of everyone in the country?

See, this is kinda a democracy, which means that there is a thing called economic freedom - despite what you antibusiness, pro-big brother types say - which means you have a CHOICE. Don't like working for 5 cents an hour? Look for another job. It's a tough world, stop relying on government to solve all your problems.
Democracy and economic freedom do not go hand-in-hand. Democracy means simply "the rule of the people". In theory, you could have an agrarian democracy, socialist democracy, even communist, anarchist, or fascist democracy. Democracy also comes with a little thing that neo-liberal propagandists have recently taken to calling Big Brother but is really called the social contract (agreement among the people in a society to give up part of their freedom to a government in return for protection of their natural rights). An employer may find a person desperate enough to agree to work for a wage of 5 cents an hour but the vast majority of the members of society recognize that it is not in the common good for such a situation to exist. Therefore, the social contract bars the employer from doing so. Check the Lincoln quote I posted above. It's a very good illustration of what I mean.

You can't legislate your way to utopia, and definitely not by restricting freedom. Unless your concept of utopia is a communist paradise. Unfortunately for you then, since that only works in NS and not the real world.
Again, consider your definition of freedom. Borrowing from the Lincoln quote I posted above, you're advocating the wolf's definition of liberty. Most people who would advocate for a higher minimum wage do not want a communist paradise. They just don't want to have to have both parents in a family have to work 60 hours a week just to keep them and their kids from starving.

The law is useless and should not be around. If you think your being paid an unfair wage by all means look for a new job but when you raise minimum wage everything raises with it it does not help at all. The way I look at it I should be able to pay my employees whatever I want to pay them and if they think its unfair they should look for a new job so minimum wage should be abolished.

How about this: A minimum pricing law.
Acme makes widgets. XYZ makes and sells widgets cheaper. But to make sure the owners of Acme get a living wage, minimum pricing laws are instituted, and XYZ is forced to raise their price, and destroy their competitive value.
That is exactly what minimum wage laws are. Just substitute Ms. X and Ms. Y for Acme and XYZ.

Perhaps you haven't worked alot in retail or fast food. There is no "negotiation". You either take what they offer you, or they will hire one of the other 50 people applying for that job. And if they are desperate enough, or in a market with few other job choices, they will take whatever the employer offers.

But that is exactly a negotiation. A very short negotiation, yes, but still a negotiation.
Worker: "I will sell you my labor."
McDs: "OK. We'll buy it for $X."
Worker: "Nope. Not enough."
McDs: "Ok. No deal."


Let me ask this... without a minimum wage, what do you think a fast food worker would get paid in... say.... St. Louis?

Now, what do you think they would be paid in a small town, where there is plenty of labor but few employers?

Already answered above. Market price. Don't like the market price?
Options? Accept the market price, move, start a new enterprise to take advantage of excess labor, etc.

The law is useless and should not be around. If you think your being paid an unfair wage by all means look for a new job but when you raise minimum wage everything raises with it it does not help at all. The way I look at it I should be able to pay my employees whatever I want to pay them and if they think its unfair they should look for a new job so minimum wage should be abolished.

If you are being paid an extremely small amount, you have to work many more hours just in order to make enough to survive. Generally, if you miss a day of work, you're fired. You also have to sleep (unless you wanna pass out on the job), eat (unless you want to die), and get to and from work. When do you think a worker working for wages below minimum wage would be able to look for a job? They'd have to be working 10-12 hours, 7 days a week already.

And what's with all this "poor illegal immigrant" crap I'm hearing? Oh, I feel so sorry for what are by definition criminals who ARE willing to work for low wages!
Who is the bigger criminal? A person who breaks the law by crossing a border to keep their family from starving or the company which breaks multiple laws by hiring that person (creating the job market that drew them in the first place) at a morally abominable (and illegal) wage in an effort to drive down the wages of everyone in the country?

Does it matter? My point wasn't whose criminality is bigger. (Yes, I'm Isla Vista. What's with this 'Isla de Vistas Feas' bit? I think you and a lot of people are willing to blame corporations, since they have money, than illegal immigrants, since they do not. Probably a variation on the old 'money is the root of all evil' bit, which makes beggars saints and millionnaires devils.


See, this is kinda a democracy, which means that there is a thing called economic freedom - despite what you antibusiness, pro-big brother types say - which means you have a CHOICE. Don't like working for 5 cents an hour? Look for another job. It's a tough world, stop relying on government to solve all your problems.
Democracy and economic freedom do not go hand-in-hand. Democracy means simply "the rule of the people". In theory, you could have an agrarian democracy, socialist democracy, even communist, anarchist, or fascist democracy. Democracy also comes with a little thing that neo-liberal propagandists have recently taken to calling Big Brother but is really called the social contract (agreement among the people in a society to give up part of their freedom to a government in return for protection of their natural rights). An employer may find a person desperate enough to agree to work for a wage of 5 cents an hour but the vast majority of the members of society recognize that it is not in the common good for such a situation to exist. Therefore, the social contract bars the employer from doing so. Check the Lincoln quote I posted above. It's a very good illustration of what I mean.

First of all, I'm not sure what this 'neo-liberal progadandist' thing is you're assuming I am, but me calling government big brother has more to do with the fact that force of government can and does intrude on any facet of our existence, including freedom. This is meant to sorta emphasize the point that I don't like government telling everyone what to do-- especially when the government is generally incompetent as well.

So if the social contract is in place, which I see more as market forces-- employers who offered 5 cent wages would soon go out of business, except in somewhere that the standard of living is so low that that's an improvement -- why the minimum wage law?



You can't legislate your way to utopia, and definitely not by restricting freedom. Unless your concept of utopia is a communist paradise. Unfortunately for you then, since that only works in NS and not the real world.
Again, consider your definition of freedom. Borrowing from the Lincoln quote I posted above, you're advocating the wolf's definition of liberty. Most people who would advocate for a higher minimum wage do not want a communist paradise. They just don't want to have to have both parents in a family have to work 60 hours a week just to keep them and their kids from starving.

Key phrase: they don't want to work. ;) (Cheap shot!)

Or was it the kids? It's amazing in this day and age, there is no excuse for having more kids than you can afford, since contraception is free and abstainance is a gurantee.

I'm supposed to feel sorry for people who bred and found that they were better off not having done so, and so have to work to support themselves (oddly, just like everyone else. Hours are getting longer. It's everywhere)?

I tell you, I don't have much sympathy for the average parent anywhere, who do things like raise their kids with TV sets and babysitters even if they didn't have to work constantly.

As for freedom, are you implying that my 'wolf' definition is somehow bad? Amoral? Should I be less sympathetic to business and entrepeneurs, even though they contribute most to the society? Maybe I ought to worry more for the illegal immigrants, too. For that matter, I'm sure you don't mind it when 10 homeless people break into your house and decide to stay, eh?

And what's with all this "poor illegal immigrant" crap I'm hearing? Oh, I feel so sorry for what are by definition criminals who ARE willing to work for low wages!
Who is the bigger criminal? A person who breaks the law by crossing a border to keep their family from starving or the company which breaks multiple laws by hiring that person (creating the job market that drew them in the first place) at a morally abominable (and illegal) wage in an effort to drive down the wages of everyone in the country?

Does it matter? My point wasn't whose criminality is bigger. (Yes, I'm Isla Vista. What's with this 'Isla de Vistas Feas' bit? I think you and a lot of people are willing to blame corporations, since they have money, than illegal immigrants, since they do not. Probably a variation on the old 'money is the root of all evil' bit, which makes beggars saints and millionnaires devils.


See, this is kinda a democracy, which means that there is a thing called economic freedom - despite what you antibusiness, pro-big brother types say - which means you have a CHOICE. Don't like working for 5 cents an hour? Look for another job. It's a tough world, stop relying on government to solve all your problems.
Democracy and economic freedom do not go hand-in-hand. Democracy means simply "the rule of the people". In theory, you could have an agrarian democracy, socialist democracy, even communist, anarchist, or fascist democracy. Democracy also comes with a little thing that neo-liberal propagandists have recently taken to calling Big Brother but is really called the social contract (agreement among the people in a society to give up part of their freedom to a government in return for protection of their natural rights). An employer may find a person desperate enough to agree to work for a wage of 5 cents an hour but the vast majority of the members of society recognize that it is not in the common good for such a situation to exist. Therefore, the social contract bars the employer from doing so. Check the Lincoln quote I posted above. It's a very good illustration of what I mean.

First of all, I'm not sure what this 'neo-liberal progadandist' thing is you're assuming I am, but me calling government big brother has more to do with the fact that force of government can and does intrude on any facet of our existence, including freedom. This is meant to sorta emphasize the point that I don't like government telling everyone what to do-- especially when the government is generally incompetent as well.

So if the social contract is in place, which I see more as market forces-- employers who offered 5 cent wages would soon go out of business, except in somewhere that the standard of living is so low that that's an improvement -- why the minimum wage law?



You can't legislate your way to utopia, and definitely not by restricting freedom. Unless your concept of utopia is a communist paradise. Unfortunately for you then, since that only works in NS and not the real world.
Again, consider your definition of freedom. Borrowing from the Lincoln quote I posted above, you're advocating the wolf's definition of liberty. Most people who would advocate for a higher minimum wage do not want a communist paradise. They just don't want to have to have both parents in a family have to work 60 hours a week just to keep them and their kids from starving.

Key phrase: they don't want to work. ;) (Cheap shot!)

Or was it the kids? It's amazing in this day and age, there is no excuse for having more kids than you can afford, since contraception is free and abstainance is a gurantee.

I'm supposed to feel sorry for people who bred and found that they were better off not having done so, and so have to work to support themselves (oddly, just like everyone else. Hours are getting longer. It's everywhere)?

I tell you, I don't have much sympathy for the average parent anywhere, who do things like raise their kids with TV sets and babysitters even if they didn't have to work constantly.

As for freedom, are you implying that my 'wolf' definition is somehow bad? Amoral? Should I be less sympathetic to business and entrepeneurs, even though they contribute most to the society? Maybe I ought to worry more for the illegal immigrants, too. For that matter, I'm sure you don't mind it when 10 homeless people break into your house and decide to stay, eh?

Oh and Ashmoria, why don't you define a "real life" job? I'm guessing, your definition goes something like "any job thats worth at least minimum wage." Therefore invalidating any attempt I might make to list 'real life' jobs that are worth less than that.

You'd just say any job I listed didn't qualify as a "real life" job. So no, I'm not gonna indulge you, especially since you've proven your basically incapable of reading anything I write.

And of course babysitting is worth its weight in gold. Always easier to pay someone else to raise your children for you! For that matter, I'm surprised no one cooks and eats their children to prevent starvation. I mean, what with that being such a problem in this country, apparently.

Oh and Ashmoria, why don't you define a "real life" job? I'm guessing, your definition goes something like "any job thats worth at least minimum wage." Therefore invalidating any attempt I might make to list 'real life' jobs that are worth less than that.

You'd just say any job I listed didn't qualify as a "real life" job. So no, I'm not gonna indulge you, especially since you've proven your basically incapable of reading anything I write.

And of course babysitting is worth its weight in gold. Always easier to pay someone else to raise your children for you! For that matter, I'm surprised no one cooks and eats their children to prevent starvation. I mean, what with that being such a problem in this country, apparently.every job in existence should pay LIVING WAGES--case closed

I say make the minimum wage equivalent to the living wage - yes I know that will cause some inflation but it would do wonders otherwise IMHO

I say make the minimum wage equivalent to the living wage - yes I know that will cause some inflation but it would do wonders otherwise IMHOtotally correct and its debateable whether itll cause inflation or not

No, MK, not case closed, as you can see not everyone here agrees with you.

Minimum wage equal to living wage would be better, sure-- except. Whats the living wage? Since the government doesn't have price controls on most things (thankfully...) the cost of living varies according to economic factors from region to region. The cost of living here in SB is for example, far higher than it is in most places. There is no reasonable way the government could assign a fixed price for minimum wage everywhere.

And even then, the price you get for services should be determined by mutual agreement of both parties of the contract. Same as any other business. Some jobs are not worth the living wage! OMG! (Ash will say such jobs are obviously, not 'real life' jobs either. Apparently a job is more than doing work and getting paid?)

We interrupt this ridiculous and mindless diatribe of [/b]neo-liberal capitalist [/b]dribble with a word from our sponsors...

<snip>
<snip>

1) Many of these "Neo-Liberal Capitalists" are libertarian, so quoting two US presidents isn't exactly going to help your case
2) ditto on non Americans

(Not everyone thinks that dead presidents speak Gospel truth)

3) Many who you call "Neo-Liberals" are Classic Liberals.

And of course babysitting is worth its weight in gold. Always easier to pay someone else to raise your children for you! For that matter, I'm surprised no one cooks and eats their children to prevent starvation. I mean, what with that being such a problem in this country, apparently.

Its not a problem as in your country there is a minimum wage.
Are you accusing every parent who's every hired a babysitter as being incompetant of raising their kids?

Oh and Ashmoria, why don't you define a "real life" job? I'm guessing, your definition goes something like "any job thats worth at least minimum wage." Therefore invalidating any attempt I might make to list 'real life' jobs that are worth less than that.

You'd just say any job I listed didn't qualify as a "real life" job. So no, I'm not gonna indulge you, especially since you've proven your basically incapable of reading anything I write.

And of course babysitting is worth its weight in gold. Always easier to pay someone else to raise your children for you! For that matter, I'm surprised no one cooks and eats their children to prevent starvation. I mean, what with that being such a problem in this country, apparently.

oh im sorry, i missed your list. please repost it so i can comment.

a real job is a job that you have to full out a W4 form to get (in the us), that you have to have a social security number to get.

so in theory that would leave out 13 year old babysitters, lawn mowers, snow shoveler, etc. even though there are adult professionals who do all those jobs and normally get more than minimum wage for doing them. the adults have to fill out the forms and pay taxes.

OK?

And of course babysitting is worth its weight in gold. Always easier to pay someone else to raise your children for you! For that matter, I'm surprised no one cooks and eats their children to prevent starvation. I mean, what with that being such a problem in this country, apparently.

Its not a problem as in your country there is a minimum wage.
Are you accusing every parent who's every hired a babysitter as being incompetant of raising their kids?

No. Nor am I suggesting babysitting is worth it's weight in gold.

LUCKILY, however, I am not in charge of Command and Controling the price of babysitting. In my opinion the exact price should be settled between babysitter and competent, loving, capable parent! You ruin that when you set random wages, like minimum wage, which, as has already been noted several times before, isn't enough to survive on anyway.

Then again babysitting isn't a "real life job" anyway, haha.

*gives SB the look*

no one supports themselves babysitting for 3 hours on a saturday night while a couple goes out to a movie.

that is what babysitting is

its not daycare where you watch other peoples children for 40 hours a week

If you raised the price of milk to an artificially high level anyone can see this would obviously mean people would buy less milk. Why do people have problems seeing the same applies to labour? Minimum wage laws cause unemployment amounst the poor (the people they're "helping"!). If they didn't we'd raise the minimum wage to £1 million and we'd all be rich. Good intentions, terrible results.Yes, I agree with you, the minimum wage should be somewhere between nothing and a million pounds an hour. But don't you think that maybe a good level for the minimum wage would be to have it so that if you work a fairly large amount of hours (say, 60-70) per week, that you're then put above the poverty line?

the government needs to make sure industry practices fairly. It also needs to not hurt the economy. this means the minimum wage should exist but should not be high.

*gives SB the look*

no one supports themselves babysitting for 3 hours on a saturday night while a couple goes out to a movie.

that is what babysitting is

its not daycare where you watch other peoples children for 40 hours a week

In that case, you would agree with me that babysitting is worth less than other jobs, such as daycare? Does it not also make sense that, in a similar way, other jobs are worth more or less --depending on such things as how desperately the parents want out, or the market prices and inflation rates, etc? And thus, that some jobs may be worth less than minimum wage?

im still waiting for the list

as far as i can see, im the only one who has mentioned a job that pays less than minimum wage

what does paying a 13 year old for babysitting have to do with adult jobs?

1) why would a liberal argue against minimum wage? thats a ludicrous idea, minimum wage would be a liberal idea if you think about it

2) why would ANYONE argue against a minimum wage, i can only say what has been said, removing minimum wage is going to end up with people working gfor even elss money, i know thats a hardcore dose of obvious, but think about it. The minimum wage as it stands in this country is not a livable wage, and yes people have to live off minimum wage. And if your argue for removing it and it being bad is that companies would lose money by icnreasing it or leaving it, here's a brilliant idea for you, CAP AND DECREASE CEO/COMPANY EXECUTIVE'S SALARIES, you have any idea how much some of these people are paid?

and they get that money whether or not they do right by the company they head!

sometimes they all but drive it into bankruptcy and STILL get millions in compensation

Ceo and Executives have worked hard to get where they are and should be paid alot and should not have to pay minimum wage to people they do not feel are worthy.

Ceo and Executives have worked hard to get where they are and should be paid alot and should not have to pay minimum wage to people they do not feel are worthy.Translation: Ceo and Executives are gods-on-earth and GOP donators and shouldn't have to abide by the laws of the land or natural laws in the process of Getting Whatever They Want.

Ceo and Executives have worked hard to get where they are and should be paid alot and should not have to pay minimum wage to people they do not feel are worthy.

not worthy of what? surviving? its not like you can LIVE on the minimum wage.

2) why would ANYONE argue against a minimum wage, i can only say what has been said, removing minimum wage is going to end up with people working gfor even elss money, i know thats a hardcore dose of obvious, but think about it. The minimum wage as it stands in this country is not a livable wage, and yes people have to live off minimum wage. And if your argue for removing it and it being bad is that companies would lose money by icnreasing it or leaving it, here's a brilliant idea for you, CAP AND DECREASE CEO/COMPANY EXECUTIVE'S SALARIES, you have any idea how much some of these people are paid?Excellent, thank you, the voice of reason. The CEO's have developed an emperor's new clothes thing in convincing companies that they have to be paid a vast amount of money in order for a profit to be turned, and its time for someone to stand up and say "That fat cat is naked!"

Cut your whining you cruddy neo-liberalists. Arguing against a minimum age is only one step above arguing for slave labour.

Ad hom fallacy, and simply wrong.

I suggest you pick up a real book on economics, such as Mises' Human Action. That will set you straight.

Cut your whining you cruddy neo-liberalists. Arguing against a minimum age is only one step above arguing for slave labour.

Ad hom fallacy, and simply wrong.

I suggest you pick up a real book on economics, such as Mises' Human Action. That will set you straight.How about a book on ethics? Or a history book, that shows the categorical failure of trickle down economics.

now i know y'all arent still on, but i am still waiting for that list of jobs that arent worth minimum wage. im very curious to know just what job is so unimportant that it isnt worth paying people pin money to do.

im still waiting for the list

as far as i can see, im the only one who has mentioned a job that pays less than minimum wage

what does paying a 13 year old for babysitting have to do with adult jobs?

I already said I'm not getting you a list. Look, it's THIS simple:

A job is worth less than minimum wage if the employer and employee agree that it is so. Same way a product is worth what it is because the producer and retailers agree that it is so. Now, since I don't happen to have a list of all possible agreements between all possible employers and all possible employees, I cannot oblige you, nor do I think it would make a spot of difference as you keep missing my points anyway.

And who says babysitters are all 13 years old? You constantly go on about "real life jobs" and "adult jobs." Well, add another kind of job to your vocabulary: "jobs not worth 8 dollars an hour."

Speaking of vocabulary...

job (job) -n 1. a piece of work, esp. a specific task done as part of the routine of one's occupation or for an agreed price.

Note the phrase... "agreed price." Note that the definition doesn't say anything like "except if the task is accomplished by a 13 year old, in which case it's not a job anymore" either. You keep arguing strawman and just demanding that I provide you with a list. When you know damn well that the list includes, by definition, any job that pays for less than minimum wage!

Because there is no objective defined value to everything! Things are worth what they're priced and what people pay, what the agreement is. Mutual consent.

Minimum wage laws are a great promoter of capitalism, making sure that, no matter what one works as, they can be a consumer or investor in society, and thus enrichen a society. I think they need to change for conditions like hyperinflation, or depression. However, they are mostly good.
At the moment, the federal minimum wage in the US is a bit low. It should be raised to $5.50, or even $6. However, I'd prefer it if states set their own minimum wage. After all, some states cost more to live in than others.

Minimum wage laws are a great promoter of capitalism, making sure that, no matter what one works as, they can be a consumer or investor in society, and thus enrichen a society. I think they need to change for conditions like hyperinflation, or depression. However, they are mostly good.
At the moment, the federal minimum wage in the US is a bit low. It should be raised to $5.50, or even $6. However, I'd prefer it if states set their own minimum wage. After all, some states cost more to live in than others.

it needs to be raised to probably 6.15, a whole dollar

Minimum wage laws are a great promoter of capitalism, making sure that, no matter what one works as, they can be a consumer or investor in society, and thus enrichen a society. I think they need to change for conditions like hyperinflation, or depression. However, they are mostly good.
At the moment, the federal minimum wage in the US is a bit low. It should be raised to $5.50, or even $6. However, I'd prefer it if states set their own minimum wage. After all, some states cost more to live in than others.

it needs to be raised to probably 6.15, a whole dollar

*puts on his supply-sider hat*

What are you talking about??? the minimum wage needs to be lowered! It's the only way that we'll be able to get rid of this chronic unemployment problem we have going on in the United States today. The reason is simple, labor costs too much! Capitalists like me can't afford to hire more than a couple thousand employees to do my work for me. Now if i could hire 2 times the amount of people for the same price. I could lower prices, be more productive and everyone would be better off!

Unemployment is simply this, a sign that the supply of labor is too high for the price that I have to pay, either lower the supply of labor, or lower the price of labor, that's the only way the market can work and maintain equilibrium!

it needs to be raised to probably 6.15, a whole dollar
What are you, a corporate fascist? We should raise the minimum wage to $10! No... $20! No one should ever have to worry about paying their rent or putting food on the table!

I support the idea of a minimum wage because I see it as little more than a reasonable guarantee that a person will receive a fair and equitable payment for their services provided, particularly when there is often no working alternative for that person.

im still waiting for the list

as far as i can see, im the only one who has mentioned a job that pays less than minimum wage

what does paying a 13 year old for babysitting have to do with adult jobs?

I already said I'm not getting you a list. Look, it's THIS simple:

A job is worth less than minimum wage if the employer and employee agree that it is so. Same way a product is worth what it is because the producer and retailers agree that it is so. Now, since I don't happen to have a list of all possible agreements between all possible employers and all possible employees, I cannot oblige you, nor do I think it would make a spot of difference as you keep missing my points anyway.

And who says babysitters are all 13 years old? You constantly go on about "real life jobs" and "adult jobs." Well, add another kind of job to your vocabulary: "jobs not worth 8 dollars an hour."

Speaking of vocabulary...

job (job) -n 1. a piece of work, esp. a specific task done as part of the routine of one's occupation or for an agreed price.

Note the phrase... "agreed price." Note that the definition doesn't say anything like "except if the task is accomplished by a 13 year old, in which case it's not a job anymore" either. You keep arguing strawman and just demanding that I provide you with a list. When you know damn well that the list includes, by definition, any job that pays for less than minimum wage!

Because there is no objective defined value to everything! Things are worth what they're priced and what people pay, what the agreement is. Mutual consent.

fine

that means to me that you know there are NO jobs that don't merit the minimum wage. you can suppose all you want. if you can't come up with one, you who are so sure that it makes economic sense to pay people wages so low that they cant survive on them without government help, then they dont exist. except for people too young or too illegal to work within the system so employers are free to exploit their labor.

i dont remember now if it was you who said there are such jobs or not. someone did and that is the person i asked for a list. i also gave a definition of a job as being one that you have to fill out a W4 form to get. in my opinion all such jobs deserve the minimum wage or more. luckily the rest of the western world agrees with me, its part of the engine that has given us our prosperity.

MY point is that if no jobs exist that arent worth the minimum wage, then then why are you so against it?

paying less than the minimum wage would be a form of business welfare since that means the government has to support those who cant possibly live on what they are being paid.

oh and the federal minimum wage of the US isnt $8/hour its..... $5.50 maybe?

I don't think I know anyone who can "live" on $5.50 per hour. I'd like to see the minimum wage raised to $9 per hour, at least.

Of course, I'd also like to see teachers paid as much as doctors, or even more, because I think their contribution to society is at least as important...but I'm a dreamer, ain't I?

Minimum wage laws are NONSENSE from an economic point of view.
Either the minimum wage is too high: the consequence is that many jobs disappear from the legal market because there is no demand for them if the price is too high. Minimum wage laws therefore cause higher unemployment. Secondly they can lead to a black-labour market were people work illegaly.

If the minimum wage however is lower than the market price for labour it doesn´t make any difference.

Therefore minimum wage laws are NONSENSE. They either are causing unemployment and create a market for illegal work or (in the positive case) they have NO EFFECT on the market.

Therefore minimum wage laws don´t make sense.

Minimum wage laws are NONSENSE from an economic point of view.
Either the minimum wage is too high: the consequence is that many jobs disappear from the legal market because there is no demand for them if the price is too high. Minimum wage laws therefore cause higher unemployment. Secondly they can lead to a black-labour market were people work illegaly.

If the minimum wage however is lower than the market price for labour it doesn´t make any difference.

Therefore minimum wage laws are NONSENSE. They either are causing unemployment and create a market for illegal work or (in the positive case) they have NO EFFECT on the market.

Therefore minimum wage laws don´t make sense.

that is blithering gibberish, minimum wage is already far lower than the cost of living and inflation, your idea that it should be lowered or nonexistant is going to lead to rampant unemployment and poverty

it needs to be raised to probably 6.15, a whole dollar
What are you, a corporate fascist? We should raise the minimum wage to $10! No... $20! No one should ever have to worry about paying their rent or putting food on the table!

what are you, a unrealistic left wing nut? you and i both know that corporate run america is not going to raise the minimum wage to living wages for years or more than likely never, as big business becomes bigger there is going to be less increase in the requires minimum wagte and further increase inflation and top corporate executives pocket books

Chess Squares,

relax and present arguments instead of insults. In my country we don´t have general minimum wage laws. And there is nobody starving.
If the income is lower than social welfare nobody is going to work for that anyway. Therefore minimum wage laws are unnecessary.
However: that creates another problem: people taking welfare and working illegaly. One solution would be to decrease welfare and allow the people to work without on a minimum wage job without reducing welfare.

this is the general forum in the off topic section, i am referencing the real world, your reference to the game proves nothing but you have no idea whats going on

"If the income is lower than social welfare nobody is going to work for that anyway. Therefore minimum wage laws are unnecessary. "

which of course proves what i said about rampant poverty and unemployment and your suggestion is unworkable

$25/hour!! YYYEEEAAARRRRGGGGHHH!

Chess Squares,

I´m also referring to the real world. But the real world is not the US only. There are many other countries: EVER HEARD OF THAT :evil: :evil:
Believe it or not: Germany doesn´t have general minimum wage laws.
And there is no rampant poverty.
You are only proving your ignorance to the facts of the real world.

well i dont live in germany, and knowing here any drop in minimum wage is going to lead to even further poverty

17.7 What is the minimum wage in Germany ?
There is no such thing as an overall minimum wage defined by law. There are special regulations and agreements with certain sectors, i.e., construction companies are obliged to pay their workers a minimum hourly wage per an agreement between unions and employers.

The position of trade unions is stronger than in most other countries. Every industrial sector has its wage agreements and most companies pay accordingly. Wages for certain kind of work are described with much detail, this involves of course a minimum for the wage.

Although there are no state-mandated minimum wages one can say that something similar exists. Everyone has a right to Sozialhilfe (social welfare) which is defined very well. No matter whether you are employed or not, you always have the right to a (very limited) income. If you work for less, you will get the rest from the local Sozialamt, the social welfare administration, run by the city or county government.

Sozialhilfe for a family of four is rumored to be a little less than 2000 DM per month, excluding rent. The rent for a reasonable (and often subsidized) apartment is payed by the government on top of this.

@Ashmoria,

"Everyone has a right to Sozialhilfe (social welfare) which is defined very well" - I said that in my comment.

"i.e., construction companies are obliged to pay their workers a minimum hourly wage per an agreement between unions and employers."
This regulation ONLY applys to FOREIGNERS but not to german workers.

"The position of trade unions is stronger than in most other countries. Every industrial sector has its wage agreements and most companies pay accordingly. Wages for certain kind of work are described with much detail, this involves of course a minimum for the wage."
In East Germany only 25% of workers work in companies to which the general tariffs of unions and employee asociation does apply.
The situation changes. The union are loosing relevance.

"Sozialhilfe for a family of four is rumored to be a little less than 2000 DM per month" - which is too much. A person who works should get more than those who don´t work.
And after all: many people get the welfare and are working black.
The german social state is given the wrong incentives: it is the incentive not to work on the legal market in a medium or low-paid job.
There needs to be changes. Some are done (e.g. Arbeitslosenhilfe auf Sozialhilfe gekürzt ab 2005). However it is not enough.
More cuts are necessary.
If we have a "regime change" in Germany in 2006 those cuts are going to happen.

Minimum wage laws are a great promoter of capitalism, making sure that, no matter what one works as, they can be a consumer or investor in society, and thus enrichen a society. I think they need to change for conditions like hyperinflation, or depression. However, they are mostly good.
At the moment, the federal minimum wage in the US is a bit low. It should be raised to $5.50, or even $6. However, I'd prefer it if states set their own minimum wage. After all, some states cost more to live in than others.

it needs to be raised to probably 6.15, a whole dollar

*puts on his supply-sider hat*

What are you talking about??? the minimum wage needs to be lowered! It's the only way that we'll be able to get rid of this chronic unemployment problem we have going on in the United States today. The reason is simple, labor costs too much! Capitalists like me can't afford to hire more than a couple thousand employees to do my work for me. Now if i could hire 2 times the amount of people for the same price. I could lower prices, be more productive and everyone would be better off!

Unemployment is simply this, a sign that the supply of labor is too high for the price that I have to pay, either lower the supply of labor, or lower the price of labor, that's the only way the market can work and maintain equilibrium!
Addressing your supply side personality, I personally think that labor is a bargain. The future with labor markets in the US is with higher skilled workers, anyhow, and no one argues against paying them more than unskilled industrial workers. That's the only place to find cheap labor, and that's why there's a major move to Mexico, China, and other places. Minimum wages, in this sense, force work forces to compete with other work forces, and I feel that is very healthy for everyone involved.

Chess Squares,

I´m also referring to the real world. But the real world is not the US only. There are many other countries: EVER HEARD OF THAT :evil: :evil:
Believe it or not: Germany doesn´t have general minimum wage laws.
And there is no rampant poverty.
You are only proving your ignorance to the facts of the real world.

http://www.fedee.com/minwage.html

"Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy and Sweden do not operate statutory minimum rates, but nevertheless have binding sectoral collective agreements that jointly cover a high proportion of the working population."

Goodness.

After a little mental arithmetic (or perhaps an online currency converter) I have realised I get paid around $7.90 an hour. And I'm 17, still in full time education, and work on a till in a department store at the weekend. This is only a starting wage (ie. before the probationary period is up) and will go up again when I turn 18. I know people my age who earn plenty more, too.

I can't imagine how anyone could live on a wage that is equivalent to £2.81 an hour. I don't know how much tax is paid in the USA, or whether the amount is on a sliding scale, set % or what, but I would think that anyone earning even up to twice that would be unable to afford it.

I suddenly feel so very lucky.

Goodness.

After a little mental arithmetic (or perhaps an online currency converter) I have realised I get paid around $7.90 an hour. And I'm 17, still in full time education, and work on a till in a department store at the weekend. This is only a starting wage (ie. before the probationary period is up) and will go up again when I turn 18. I know people my age who earn plenty more, too.

I can't imagine how anyone could live on a wage that is equivalent to £2.81 an hour. I don't know how much tax is paid in the USA, or whether the amount is on a sliding scale, set % or what, but I would think that anyone earning even up to twice that would be unable to afford it.

I suddenly feel so very lucky.

i hate ytou, i get paid minimum wage to do maintenance work o na stupid water plant, i should quit

Na, you should move countries.

As I said, my wage is nothing out of the ordinary here for the type of work or the age/experience (none) of the employee.

Goodness.

After a little mental arithmetic (or perhaps an online currency converter) I have realised I get paid around $7.90 an hour. And I'm 17, still in full time education, and work on a till in a department store at the weekend. This is only a starting wage (ie. before the probationary period is up) and will go up again when I turn 18. I know people my age who earn plenty more, too.

I can't imagine how anyone could live on a wage that is equivalent to £2.81 an hour. I don't know how much tax is paid in the USA, or whether the amount is on a sliding scale, set % or what, but I would think that anyone earning even up to twice that would be unable to afford it.

I suddenly feel so very lucky.

Lucky sod, I only got £4.20 an hour ($7.70). Still I wouldn't like to have done some of my ten hour shifts and only have earned £28.10. Our (UK) mininmum wage is set to go up to £4,85 ($8.86) come October.

When I worked part-time when I was school student I got 6 Euro per hour. Given the exchange rate of that time that was a bit less than 6 US$.
An that was an ordinary pay for office work.
Many people get much less in Germany.
And that´s ok. Without a low-wage sector the unemployment rate in Germany would be much higher and the illegal work much higher as well.
There needs to be more flexiblity and not less.
Fortunately the unions are loosing relevance and the new low-wague laws (of 2003) have lead to a strong increase in that sector.

Does that apply to all legal adults, or just over 21s?

Cos conveniently, my 18th is also in October :D

Does that apply to all legal adults, or just over 21s?

Cos conveniently, my 18th is also in October :D

Under the new deal 18-21 year olds get £4.20 as a minimum, 22 n over get the full £4.85.

Darn.

Still basking in that 'thank goodness I'm not American' feeling, though.

Addressing your supply side personality, I personally think that labor is a bargain. The future with labor markets in the US is with higher skilled workers, anyhow, and no one argues against paying them more than unskilled industrial workers. That's the only place to find cheap labor, and that's why there's a major move to Mexico, China, and other places. Minimum wages, in this sense, force work forces to compete with other work forces, and I feel that is very healthy for everyone involved.

"The Race to the Bottom" -- Many articles are written about this, so if my explanation doesn't suffice, then listen to this. Labor in the U.S. costs an arm and a leg. Mostly because of the fact that workplaces have to be clean, safe, and liveable. The wages cost a pretty penny, but the janitors that have to keep the offices clean of rats, human feces, carrion, etc. Now if we were to remove labor laws, unions, and workers compensation, then yeah, our country would be able to compete with a place like China, Thailand, or Mexico... So explain to me this, how would this be better for everybody?

Addressing your supply side personality, I personally think that labor is a bargain. The future with labor markets in the US is with higher skilled workers, anyhow, and no one argues against paying them more than unskilled industrial workers. That's the only place to find cheap labor, and that's why there's a major move to Mexico, China, and other places. Minimum wages, in this sense, force work forces to compete with other work forces, and I feel that is very healthy for everyone involved.

"The Race to the Bottom" -- Many articles are written about this, so if my explanation doesn't suffice, then listen to this. Labor in the U.S. costs an arm and a leg. Mostly because of the fact that workplaces have to be clean, safe, and liveable. The wages cost a pretty penny, but the janitors that have to keep the offices clean of rats, human feces, carrion, etc. Now if we were to remove labor laws, unions, and workers compensation, then yeah, our country would be able to compete with a place like China, Thailand, or Mexico... So explain to me this, how would this be better for everybody?
No, not that part. The part about manufacturing jobs going overseas. Besides, I think that in areas like China, workplace conditions could improve, but there isn't a direct correlation to higher wages.

No, not that part. The part about manufacturing jobs going overseas. Besides, I think that in areas like China, workplace conditions could improve, but there isn't a direct correlation to higher wages.

What are you talking about then? When globalization comes full circle, and all laboreres regardless of location and government ordinance are foreced to compete with each other, we will most likely be reduced to indentured servitude, and this is better/