I just don't see this fast food worker being worth $15/hr(non-Vegas)

It's simple mathematics. If you have a significant increase in wages and you want to keep the same profit margin you must:

1. Raise the price of your product
2. Reduce labor costs by laying people off
3. Have the owner take a direct hit

Now you may want to go pay 25 to 30 percent more for your meal because you are helping the workers, but many people can't afford that kind of a bump.
Minimum wage is not intended to be a "living wage".

Minimum wage provides wages to unskilled persons, often teens, often part timers, for jobs requiring no skill, to earn a bit of money for gas, maybe car insurance, school books, any number of expenses to build for the eventuality of life as a productive human being with a true living wage.

Major fast food compaines have advancement programs, if one is inclined to demonstrate initiative and desire to advance. A minimum wage floor sweeper/bathroom cleaner can potentially take advantage of such a program and earn more as an educated/skilled professional.
Ref. Websters

living wage noun
: an amount of money you are paid for a job that is large enough to provide you with the basic things (such as food and shelter) needed to live an acceptable life

minimum wage noun
: an amount of money that is the least amount of money per hour that workers must be paid according to the law

There is a difference, you are correct.

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
One would need to know the context of what jobs are being created. If the jobs are in engineering, then the increase in the minimum wage is irrelevant


The argument from the right was increasing minimum wage would have a net decrease on jobs. That has never proved to be true throughout history ...and its not proving true now.

Its one thing to have an ideological viewpoint about minimum wage. We can agree to disagree. ...its something else when you ignore history, statistics, and facts. Its not worthwhile debating people who base their position on the Loch Ness Monster.



PJ. It's one thing to have an opinion on this topic. It's entirely another to state your opinion is proven fact. What you are stating is patently false. If you're really interested in the truth, there is no consensus among economists on the impact of minimum wage on employment.

Here is a link to a 2007 study on the literature:

https://www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf

Abstract:

"We review the burgeoning literature on the employment effects of minimum wages - in the United
States and other countries - that was spurred by the new minimum wage research beginning in the
early 1990s. Our review indicates that there is a wide range of existing estimates and, accordingly,
a lack of consensus about the overall effects on low-wage employment of an increase in the minimum
wage. However, the oft-stated assertion that recent research fails to support the traditional view that
the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-wage workers is clearly incorrect.


A sizable majority of the studies surveyed in this monograph give a relatively consistent
(although not always statistically significant) indication of negative employment effects of minimum wages. In addition, among the
papers we view as providing the most credible evidence, almost all point to negative employment
effects, both for the United States as well as for many other countries."

Minimum Wages and Employment: A Review of Evidence from the New Minimum Wage Research
David Neumark, William Wascher
NBER Working Paper No. 12663

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
One would need to know the context of what jobs are being created. If the jobs are in engineering, then the increase in the minimum wage is irrelevant


The argument from the right was increasing minimum wage would have a net decrease on jobs. That has never proved to be true throughout history ...and its not proving true now.

Its one thing to have an ideological viewpoint about minimum wage. We can agree to disagree. ...its something else when you ignore history, statistics, and facts. Its not worthwhile debating people who base their position on the Loch Ness Monster.
...If you're really interested in the truth, there is no consensus among economists on the impact of minimum wage on employment...
Okay, I'll buy that.

But I remember a previous thread on the subject where someone claimed there was, in fact, a cause and effect relationship between higher minimum wages and lowered employment. That person was you, alanleroy. Now aren't you a little embarrassed?
An economist position on minimum wage.
Politics and Minimum Wage

Make of it what you wish.
Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
One would need to know the context of what jobs are being created. If the jobs are in engineering, then the increase in the minimum wage is irrelevant


The argument from the right was increasing minimum wage would have a net decrease on jobs. That has never proved to be true throughout history ...and its not proving true now.

Its one thing to have an ideological viewpoint about minimum wage. We can agree to disagree. ...its something else when you ignore history, statistics, and facts. Its not worthwhile debating people who base their position on the Loch Ness Monster.
...If you're really interested in the truth, there is no consensus among economists on the impact of minimum wage on employment...
Okay, I'll buy that.

But I remember a previous thread on the subject where someone claimed there was, in fact, a cause and effect relationship between higher minimum wages and lowered employment. That person was you, alanleroy. Now aren't you a little embarrassed?


You mean the January thread where I said this:

"Economists disagree on the impact of the minimum wage on employment. There are hundreds of papers and studies on both sides of this issue. Some believe it reduces the pay of slightly higher paid workers. Others show it reduces benefits or hours or training. Still others claim businesses simply live with lower profits or raise prices.

Unfortunately ALL of these studies are comparing a minimum wage with a slightly higher minimum wage. I suggested there should be no minimum wage and poverty should be addressed not by corrupting the market for labor and hamstringing our businesses but by direct transfer payments to the poor combined with the elimination of the current bloated government distribution system. The 50 year multi-trillion dollar War on Poverty has been an epic failure....as 50 years later Poverty is the clear victor. Time for some new approaches.


My take is minimum wage increases speed up the march to the automation of the vast majority of minimum wage jobs."

I'd say I'm a model of consistency...now aren't you a little embarrassed?
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
One would need to know the context of what jobs are being created. If the jobs are in engineering, then the increase in the minimum wage is irrelevant


The argument from the right was increasing minimum wage would have a net decrease on jobs. That has never proved to be true throughout history ...and its not proving true now.

Its one thing to have an ideological viewpoint about minimum wage. We can agree to disagree. ...its something else when you ignore history, statistics, and facts. Its not worthwhile debating people who base their position on the Loch Ness Monster.
...If you're really interested in the truth, there is no consensus among economists on the impact of minimum wage on employment...
Okay, I'll buy that.

But I remember a previous thread on the subject where someone claimed there was, in fact, a cause and effect relationship between higher minimum wages and lowered employment. That person was you, alanleroy. Now aren't you a little embarrassed?


You mean the January thread where I said this:

"Economists disagree on the impact of the minimum wage on employment. There are hundreds of papers and studies on both sides of this issue. Some believe it reduces the pay of slightly higher paid workers. Others show it reduces benefits or hours or training. Still others claim businesses simply live with lower profits or raise prices.

Unfortunately ALL of these studies are comparing a minimum wage with a slightly higher minimum wage. I suggested there should be no minimum wage and poverty should be addressed not by corrupting the market for labor and hamstringing our businesses but by direct transfer payments to the poor combined with the elimination of the current bloated government distribution system. The 50 year multi-trillion dollar War on Poverty has been an epic failure....as 50 years later Poverty is the clear victor. Time for some new approaches.


My take is minimum wage increases speed up the march to the automation of the vast majority of minimum wage jobs."

I'd say I'm a model of consistency...now aren't you a little embarrassed?
I don't usually point out spelling errors, but when you referred to yourself as "a model of consistency," you misspelled "inconsistency."

After all, you'r the guy who touted this line: "The irony of the situation is that most people who advocate a higher minimum wage are hoping to help out the workers at the bottom of the ladder, when in reality, a higher minimum wage could very well put those workers out of a job."
I suggested there should be no minimum wage and poverty should be addressed not by corrupting the market for labor and hamstringing our businesses but by direct transfer payments to the poor combined with the elimination of the current bloated government distribution system.


Really? Direct transfer payments to the poor?
Who are "the poor" you speak of, and how much, how, when and how often would these direct transfers occur? Just askin'.
Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
One would need to know the context of what jobs are being created. If the jobs are in engineering, then the increase in the minimum wage is irrelevant


The argument from the right was increasing minimum wage would have a net decrease on jobs. That has never proved to be true throughout history ...and its not proving true now.

Its one thing to have an ideological viewpoint about minimum wage. We can agree to disagree. ...its something else when you ignore history, statistics, and facts. Its not worthwhile debating people who base their position on the Loch Ness Monster.
...If you're really interested in the truth, there is no consensus among economists on the impact of minimum wage on employment...
Okay, I'll buy that.

But I remember a previous thread on the subject where someone claimed there was, in fact, a cause and effect relationship between higher minimum wages and lowered employment. That person was you, alanleroy. Now aren't you a little embarrassed?


You mean the January thread where I said this:

"Economists disagree on the impact of the minimum wage on employment. There are hundreds of papers and studies on both sides of this issue. Some believe it reduces the pay of slightly higher paid workers. Others show it reduces benefits or hours or training. Still others claim businesses simply live with lower profits or raise prices.

Unfortunately ALL of these studies are comparing a minimum wage with a slightly higher minimum wage. I suggested there should be no minimum wage and poverty should be addressed not by corrupting the market for labor and hamstringing our businesses but by direct transfer payments to the poor combined with the elimination of the current bloated government distribution system. The 50 year multi-trillion dollar War on Poverty has been an epic failure....as 50 years later Poverty is the clear victor. Time for some new approaches.


My take is minimum wage increases speed up the march to the automation of the vast majority of minimum wage jobs."

I'd say I'm a model of consistency...now aren't you a little embarrassed?
I don't usually point out spelling errors, but when you referred to yourself as "a model of consistency," you misspelled "inconsistency."

After all, you'r the guy who touted this line: "The irony of the situation is that most people who advocate a higher minimum wage are hoping to help out the workers at the bottom of the ladder, when in reality, a higher minimum wage could very well put those workers out of a job."


And I was right-on I might add....That is clearly MY opinion...as I pointed out then and now...that Economists are divided on this topic.

This is unlike PJ...who said this:

"The argument ..... has never proved to be true throughout history ...and its not proving true now. "

and...

"...its something else when you ignore history, statistics, and facts. Its not worthwhile debating people who base their position on the Loch Ness Monster."

So instead of correcting PJ for erroneously claiming this is settled science akin to 2 + 2, Forkush attacks me for having an opinion on the employment impact of minimum wage...when I not only pointed out that economists disagree on the topic, but listed out several reasons why there may not be an impact.

You can't make this shit up.
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now