Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Minimum Wage Myth

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Minimum Wage Myth

    Quite an old article, but it still gets the point across, I think. What does anybody else think about minimum wages?

    http://www.cato.org/dailys/10-28-99.html

    Minimum Wage Myth

    by Edward H. Crane

    Edward H. Crane is president and founder of the Cato Institute.

    Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rudy Giuliani are not usually thought of as politicians who are much concerned about repealing laws. But on one law they apparently agree: The Law of Demand. The Law of Demand states, quite logically, that an artificial increase in the price of something will cause less of it to be purchased. In the case of increasing the minimum wage by government edict, this means fewer low-income workers will be hired. But Hillary and (soon, apparently, based on statements he made over the weekend) Rudy believe that the law can and should be repealed. They want the federal government to increase the hourly minimum wage from $5.15 to $6.15.

    And because the Law of Demand would no longer exist, there would be little or no unemployment among the poor as a result.

    Excellent!

    But now that the Law of Demand has been repealed, why not increase the minimum wage to $20 an hour, or $100?

    Even better, why not repeal the Law of Supply and mandate that the cost of food, clothing, shelter and Yankees games be cut by 50%? Under Hillarynomics, surely the supply of these goods won’t decrease, and they’ll be half as cheap!

    Or we can stop the political pandering and start dealing with reality. According to the Employment Policies Institute, the average family affected by the minimum wage has an annual income of $38,000 because seven out of 10 minimum-wage workers live with a working spouse or relatives.

    Furthermore, the average income of minimum-wage workers increases by 30% within one year of employment on the basis of learned skills. Which is why any artificial barriers to learning those skills — which is what the minimum wage is — represents a cruel hoax to the working poor. Wage increases due to increased skill levels explain the remarkable fact that only 2.8% of workers over the age of 30 are receiving the minimum wage.

    The Clinton administration and far too many members of both parties in Congress seem enamored of the labor policies of European countries such as France and Germany — policies that claim to be compassionate but that end up creating double-digit unemployment and economic stagnation. We don't need to import Euroscloris to the United States.

    In fact, the primary reason to reject an increase in the minimum wage is rooted in the very essence of America: freedom.

    If you as a job hunter wish to take a $5-an-hour job offered by a prospective employer who sees that as the value of the job, why should that be against the law?

    Why, in the land of the free, should the federal labor police be allowed to step in and prevent that free economic contract from taking place? But if freedom isn’t reason enough to oppose the minimum-wage law, consider this pithy comment from two real economists. Donald Deere and Finis Welch of Texas A&M University write:

    “Our conclusion is simple and direct: To the extent that increased minimums raise the cost of hiring low-productivity workers, fewer of those workers will be employed.”
    No one, neither labor nor management, wants that to happen.
    "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

  • #2
    I view it very simply: artificially increasing wages lowers the value of every dollar I make.

    For that reason alone I am not in favor of the idea of minimum wage in the first place. Increasing it is just throwing good money after bad.

    -dale

    Comment


    • #3
      "...The average income of minimum wage workers increases by 30% with in one year of employment on basis of learned skills..."
      I have never seen, nor heard of an increase of anything close to that magnitude on a min wage job. Hard fought nickel and dime raises are more common.

      In smaller comunities, cashiers, customer service workers, grocers ect with skills and experience, many over the age of thirty, take a cut in pay as Wallmart arrives and closes the smaller local shops and stores. The displaced workers have no choice but to work at Wallmart for less money as there are no other jobs to be had.

      It seems to me that an employer would want to train the employee ASAP so the employee can earn the pay and be a profitable asset to the company. Min wage is not a barrier for training. Secondly, The higher the min wage is, the better group of applicants the employer can choose from. If the employee is not pulling his weight, the higher wage would encourage the employer to let him go and hire a new worker, instead of stringing the first worker along. Many employers dont like letting a poor worker go, because the next person that would work for that pay could actually be worse. Higher min wage encourages a better workforce. One place I worked for had the motto, " Be productive, or be replaced." Works for me no matter what the pay scale is.

      Someone should tell Deere and Welch that in Oregon the min wage went up AND the number of jobs went up as well.

      All that talk of freedom crap is a veil. The prospective employer has the freedom to hire someone or not. The "Problem" is that the goverment is giving the little guy a bit of protection from being taken advantage of by the employer.

      Many people would like to return to work, but only min wage jobs are offered. They may have skills, but there are no jobs for what they are skilled at. When childcare, transportation, etc is factored in, the person goes into the hole instead of breaking even, let alone getting ahead. Where is the incentive?

      Min wage is not isolated and many other jobs pay as a loose percentage above min wage so as the min wage goes up so does the pay for other jobs. Most of the extra money is pumped into the local economies, as opposed to being siphoned off to some corperate headquarters.

      As long as the min wage is kept at a reasonable level it is a good thing.
      Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

      Comment


      • #4
        They also conviently forget the fact that an increase in the minimum wage will increase prices comparably. This negates the increase right, it in turn hurts higher paid workers who don't get a mandatory raise. Some higher wage workers that do get a raise to keep their pay above minimum wage will only serve to increase prices elsewhere as well. So the cycle continues.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Wraith601
          They also conviently forget the fact that an increase in the minimum wage will increase prices comparably. This negates the increase right, it in turn hurts higher paid workers who don't get a mandatory raise. Some higher wage workers that do get a raise to keep their pay above minimum wage will only serve to increase prices elsewhere as well. So the cycle continues.
          Don't worry, evil WalMart prices will still be low ;)
          "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Wraith601
            They also conviently forget the fact that an increase in the minimum wage will increase prices comparably. This negates the increase right, it in turn hurts higher paid workers who don't get a mandatory raise. Some higher wage workers that do get a raise to keep their pay above minimum wage will only serve to increase prices elsewhere as well. So the cycle continues.
            Agreed.

            If the feds mandate i give all my employees $1/hr raises, guess who's going to eat my increased business costs?

            Not me, but rather you, the consumer. Because i'm just going to raise my prices.

            Comment


            • #7
              [QUOTE=bonehead] In smaller comunities, cashiers, customer service workers, grocers ect with skills and experience, many over the age of thirty, take a cut in pay as Wallmart arrives and closes the smaller local shops and stores. The displaced workers have no choice but to work at Wallmart for less money as there are no other jobs to be had. [/QUOTE
              Who is telling these people they have to stay in the smaller communities? If there are no jobs that pay what someone wants to be making and can be making, why can that person not relocate to a community where they'd be making more money?

              Originally posted by bonehead
              It seems to me that an employer would want to train the employee ASAP so the employee can earn the pay and be a profitable asset to the company.
              So you think that average companies want to give their employees vauable skills so that either that company has to pay that employee more or that employee can then take that training to another company who will pay him more without the cost of having to train this employee? Not so much.


              Originally posted by bonehead
              If the employee is not pulling his weight, the higher wage would encourage the employer to let him go and hire a new worker,
              Have you ever been responsible for the hiring/firing of employees? It makes sense to think that if an employee is not living up to the expectations they could be let go, but that is not the case. Seriously, an employee really has to screw up bad to justify firing that employee. If not, they can go on unemployment, and then guess who has to pay for that? The employer. Might as well pay the employee to work poorly than to sit @ home and watch Oprah.


              Originally posted by bonehead
              Many people would like to return to work, but only min wage jobs are offered. They may have skills, but there are no jobs for what they are skilled at. When childcare, transportation, etc is factored in, the person goes into the hole instead of breaking even, let alone getting ahead. Where is the incentive?
              It is my strong belief that if someone REALLY wants a job, they can find one. If there is not one available in the community they are in, they may have to move, but that is a compromise for getting the job and the salary they want. Some people are not willing to make a move, and that is fine, but it is also part of the compromise.

              I can go on my company website right now and find hundreds of jobs across the US, more if I search worldwide. So why are those jobs available? Because there are no qualified people out there? Not at all. Because people do not want to move to where the jobs are at. Which, again, is fine, but that means that they may have to accept a job with a lower salary. One cannot always have their cake and eat it too.

              I also believe, however, that a skilled person who wants a particular job, can and wil get it and can and will get the salary they want. It's more in the confidence level of the individual.

              A year and a half ago, I came to the company I work for now. I woke up, decided I had taken enough from the company I worked for and had moved up there all I wanted to and could and that I wanted to work for this company and went for it. I did not look for random jobs. I looked for jobs at this company and applied for the one I have now. I completely changed industries (from a printing company to an oil company). I even got a higher salary than I asked for. Is this because I was the only person in the Chicago metro area that was qualified for this position (remember I had NO background in the oil industry and knew NOTHING about it), was I the only one that applied (for a major oil company?, please), or because I projected the aura that I wanted the job more than anyone else out there and that I could learn this from the ground up better than anyone else? There you go. It is not impossible for someone to get the job they want along with the salary they want. They just have to want it bad enough and be willing to learn whatever they have to learn to get it.


              Originally posted by bonehead
              As long as the min wage is kept at a reasonable level it is a good thing.
              It is called minimum wage for a reason. It is normally applied to very entry level starting or minimum jobs meaning jobs that most of the population can do and require few skills.
              Last edited by THL; 04 Jan 06,, 17:29.
              "To dream of the person you would like to be is to waste the person you are."-Sholem Asch

              "I always turn to the sports page first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures."-Earl Warren

              "I didn't intend for this to take on a political tone. I'm just here for the drugs."-Nancy Reagan, when asked a political question at a "Just Say No" rally

              "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules."-Earl Butz, on the Pope's attitude toward birth control

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Wraith601
                They also conviently forget the fact that an increase in the minimum wage will increase prices comparably. This negates the increase right, it in turn hurts higher paid workers who don't get a mandatory raise. Some higher wage workers that do get a raise to keep their pay above minimum wage will only serve to increase prices elsewhere as well. So the cycle continues.
                That is nothing more than a protectionist attitude that keeps the money in the hands of the corporations instead of giving their workers a fair share. we still work under a free market. When the price of goods goes up too much, people wont buy it, untill the price comes down. Nor does the cost of everything rise across the board. There are companies that realize that customers today means profits tomorrow. Not all companies are out to gouge the customer for every penny.
                Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

                Comment


                • #9
                  [QUOTE=TopHatsLiberal]
                  Originally posted by bonehead
                  In smaller comunities, cashiers, customer service workers, grocers ect with skills and experience, many over the age of thirty, take a cut in pay as Wallmart arrives and closes the smaller local shops and stores. The displaced workers have no choice but to work at Wallmart for less money as there are no other jobs to be had. [/QUOTE
                  Who is telling these people they have to stay in the smaller communities? If there are no jobs that pay what someone wants to be making and can be making, why can that person not relocate to a community where they'd be making more money?


                  So you think that average companies want to give their employees vauable skills so that either that company has to pay that employee more or that employee can then take that training to another company who will pay him more without the cost of having to train this employee? Not so much.



                  Have you ever been responsible for the hiring/firing of employees? It makes sense to think that if an employee is not living up to the expectations they could be let go, but that is not the case. Seriously, an employee really has to screw up bad to justify firing that employee. If not, they can go on unemployment, and then guess who has to pay for that? The employer. Might as well pay the employee to work poorly than to sit @ home and watch Oprah.



                  It is my strong belief that if someone REALLY wants a job, they can find one. If there is not one available in the community they are in, they may have to move, but that is a compromise for getting the job and the salary they want. Some people are not willing to make a move, and that is fine, but it is also part of the compromise.

                  I can go on my company website right now and find hundreds of jobs across the US, more if I search worldwide. So why are those jobs available? Because there are no qualified people out there? Not at all. Because people do not want to move to where the jobs are at. Which, again, is fine, but that means that they may have to accept a job with a lower salary. One cannot always have their cake and eat it too.

                  I also believe, however, that a skilled person who wants a particular job, can and wil get it and can and will get the salary they want. It's more in the confidence level of the individual.

                  A year and a half ago, I came to the company I work for now. I woke up, decided I had taken enough from the company I worked for and had moved up there all I wanted to and could and that I wanted to work for this company and went for it. I did not look for random jobs. I looked for jobs at this company and applied for the one I have now. I completely changed industries (from a printing company to an oil company). I even got a higher salary than I asked for. Is this because I was the only person in the Chicago metro area that was qualified for this position (remember I had NO background in the oil industry and knew NOTHING about it), was I the only one that applied (for a major oil company?, please), or because I projected the aura that I wanted the job more than anyone else out there and that I could learn this from the ground up better than anyone else? There you go. It is not impossible for someone to get the job they want along with the salary they want. They just have to want it bad enough and be willing to learn whatever they have to learn to get it.



                  It is called minimum wage for a reason. It is normally applied to very entry level starting or minimum jobs meaning jobs that most of the population can do and require few skills.
                  1) It does not do any one any good to move to another place where they could get paid more when the cost of living is greater. Quality of life is important to people as well. For those nearing retirement such a move is a huge thing. Some cases a move is mandatory, other times it is better to fight wallmart and keep them out of the area.

                  2) The company only has to train the employees so the employees can earn their keep. If the employee is a short order cook, you train them to be so, you do not have to give them management training. additionally, if the company treats its emplyees well and pays them well, there is little turnover, as employees are loyal to good companies. The more the employee is trained on the better and more efficient the company can be. Our military is a great example of cross training.


                  3) I have worked in a position to hire and fire. It drove me nuts to oversee a group of under achievers. Only after my first boss moved on, and I was given more leeway to cull the herd and reward those that worked well, that my crew proved its worth.
                  In my state, if you are fired, it is difficult to get unemployment. There is no reason to keep a sub par employee.

                  4) If you car to go through the state jobs for oregon you will also find many openings, some of which have been available for quite some time. There are qualified people for those jobs, but those who do the hiring are making sure the jobs stay open. Sick but true. I have traveled out of my state a few times for work. Each time home was a much better place to live and work. Rather odd your company can't train someone from within the ranks to fill some of the jobs, but atleast it worked out for you. Much of the hiring I have seen is accomplished through nepotism and the "good old boy" circles. Qualifications are secondary.

                  5) Many see the min wage as the min requirement to bother working. Even though they have few skills, their time is still worth something. Others have skills yet the only jobs available are min wage so they work there until something better comes along. Lastly, many people start at min wage, and a few years later are still eligible for welfare. We are infact ALL subsidizing companies who keep most of their employees near the min wage level.
                  Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'm not trying to pick on you, but you have never been self employed or run your own business.

                    Originally posted by bonehead
                    In smaller comunities, cashiers, customer service workers, grocers ect with skills and experience, many over the age of thirty, take a cut in pay as Wallmart arrives and closes the smaller local shops and stores. The displaced workers have no choice but to work at Wallmart for less money as there are no other jobs to be
                    had.
                    Why are these 30 yr olds working in min wage jobs to begin with? If you started as a cashier at 18 and are still doing it at thirty. Something is wrong. And its not the company you work for. Min Wage is for ENTRY level jobs. You are suppose to move on to bigger and better things.

                    Originally posted by bonehead
                    It seems to me that an employer would want to train the employee ASAP so the employee can earn the pay and be a profitable asset to the company. Min wage is not a barrier for training.
                    No, I want to train him/her ASAP because they are loosing me money since I have him 'piggybacking" with one of my better employees. I not only loose the productivity of the trainer but I also have to pay someone to fix the mistakes that the new guy is making. Not to mention materials that he is wasting.

                    Originally posted by bonehead
                    Secondly, The higher the min wage is, the better group of applicants the employer can choose from. If the employee is not pulling his weight, the higher wage would encourage the employer to let him go and hire a new worker, instead of stringing the first worker along.
                    Originally posted by bonehead
                    Many employers dont like letting a poor worker go, because the next person that would work for that pay could actually be worse. Higher min wage encourages a better workforce. One place I worked for had the motto, " Be productive, or be replaced." Works for me no matter what the pay scale is.
                    Not in my experence. The avg installer in my area makes $7.00 to $10.00 an hour. When I started my buisness, I started guys off at $13.00. What did I get?
                    People that had $7.00 work habits and speed that thought they should get paid more. Did I fire them? No. Didn't need the hastle of going before the state labor board,License board, lawsuits or WC/UI claims.

                    I changed the method of pay. Went from hourly to production wage. ie X amount per square foot . Turned them into "subcontractors", if you will. They got paid by the job. The ones that work fast, can, and do, make alot of money. Those that don't I'll string along until they starve themselves into quitting. Kind of like selling on commission.


                    Someone should tell Deere and Welch that in Oregon the min wage went up AND the number of jobs went up as well.
                    But I'll bet few of them were entry level jobs.

                    Many people would like to return to work, but only min wage jobs are offered. They may have skills, but there are no jobs for what they are skilled at. When childcare, transportation, etc is factored in, the person goes into the hole instead of breaking even, let alone getting ahead. Where is the incentive?
                    Then learn a different job. I had no problem getting paid above min wage with no qualifications.

                    Retired from the MC. Wanted a "Do nothing job" so I could quit. And Bluesman, I would encourage you to do the same. Wouldn't believe how refreshing it is to say "Thats BS, I QUIT!" So I found a entry level job, shop helper. Skills needed
                    Read a tape measure, use a chop saw, cut wood to specified length +/- 1/8". Keep shop floor clean. Wage $7.50 hr. 2 weeks later it increased to $10.50, because I came to work every day. And on time. Then I quit, cause I could.

                    Originally posted by bonehead
                    Min wage is not isolated and many other jobs pay as a loose percentage above min wage so as the min wage goes up so does the pay for other jobs. Most of the extra money is pumped into the local economies, as opposed to being siphoned off to some corperate headquarters.

                    As long as the min wage is kept at a reasonable level it is a good thing.
                    Depends on the profit margin of the employer. You look at it as if a 1 dollar increase in pay cost the employer 1 dollar. But that aint so. I'll just hit the big 3.

                    You get $1.00

                    I pay You $1.00
                    State/fed unemployment up to $0.06 *
                    FICA $0.08
                    WOrkmans Comp $1.00 **

                    So you get $1.00 and for that I pay $2.14. Just in those 3 programs. This doesn't include other obligations I have to the Feds and State.

                    *I must maintain 3.7 - 4.7% of of yearly taxable payroll in a state trust fund. They can charge up to 5.4 % to get me there.

                    **% based on job. Min of 15% for office workers up to 100% for Laborers. Even more if they work on ladders/roofs over 12 feet. Seen some jobs classified at 200%
                    Last edited by Gun Grape; 05 Jan 06,, 05:25.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Gun Grape
                      I'm not trying to pick on you, but you have never been self employed or run your own business.



                      Why are these 30 yr olds working in min wage jobs to begin with? If you started as a cashier at 18 and are still doing it at thirty. Something is wrong. And its not the company you work for. Min Wage is for ENTRY level jobs. You are suppose to move on to bigger and better things.



                      No, I want to train him/her ASAP because they are loosing me money since I have him 'piggybacking" with one of my better employees. I not only loose the productivity of the trainer but I also have to pay someone to fix the mistakes that the new guy is making. Not to mention materials that he is wasting.





                      Not in my experence. The avg installer in my area makes $7.00 to $10.00 an hour. When I started my buisness, I started guys off at $13.00. What did I get?
                      People that had $7.00 work habits and speed that thought they should get paid more. Did I fire them? No. Didn't need the hastle of going before the state labor board,License board, lawsuits or WC/UI claims.

                      I changed the method of pay. Went from hourly to production wage. ie X amount per square foot . Turned them into "subcontractors", if you will. They got paid by the job. The ones that work fast, can, and do, make alot of money. Those that don't I'll string along until they starve themselves into quitting. Kind of like selling on commission.




                      But I'll bet few of them were entry level jobs.



                      Then learn a different job. I had no problem getting paid above min wage with no qualifications.

                      Retired from the MC. Wanted a "Do nothing job" so I could quit. And Bluesman, I would encourage you to do the same. Wouldn't believe how refreshing it is to say "Thats BS, I QUIT!" So I found a entry level job, shop helper. Skills needed
                      Read a tape measure, use a chop saw, cut wood to specified length +/- 1/8". Keep shop floor clean. Wage $7.50 hr. 2 weeks later it increased to $10.50, because I came to work every day. And on time. Then I quit, cause I could.



                      Depends on the profit margin of the employer. You look at it as if a 1 dollar increase in pay cost the employer 1 dollar. But that aint so. I'll just hit the big 3.

                      You get $1.00

                      I pay You $1.00
                      State/fed unemployment up to $0.06 *
                      FICA $0.08
                      WOrkmans Comp $1.00 **

                      So you get $1.00 and for that I pay $2.14. Just in those 3 programs. This doesn't include other obligations I have to the Feds and State.

                      *I must maintain 3.7 - 4.7% of of yearly taxable payroll in a state trust fund. They can charge up to 5.4 % to get me there.

                      **% based on job. Min of 15% for office workers up to 100% for Laborers. Even more if they work on ladders/roofs over 12 feet. Seen some jobs classified at 200%

                      No I do not feel picked on. The forum is for exchanging veiwpoints and would be boring if we all agreed. Never ran my own business and never said I did.

                      As Bush took over, millions of higher paying manufacturing jobs were lost, As these people looked for other jobs, they found nothing but min wage jobs. Others who returned to the workforce after absences or because their spouse lost their job had to start somewhere. Then there are many people who simply like where they are at and low wages are ok with them. Finally, do to the predatory nature of some companies, they refuse decent raises so their workers never get much above min wage. If the unemployment is high, the workers have little choice.

                      I think we agree that new hires do need at least some basic on the job training. In construction, I live by the rule of three. If the worker screws up on a task, he cost the company three times. 1) parts and labor for doing the job wrong the first time, 2) for the parts and labor to do the same job the second time, and 3) for the second task he is NOT doing as he is doing the first task twice. I have found that 2-3 skilled and motivated people can take the place of 10 incompetants, do the job with less labor cost and have a better finished product.

                      I cant argue your experience with your employees as that is your experience alone. When I travel to other areas, I have noticed a huge difference in quality of local workers and companies. I will maintain that people who have the skills wont usually apply for work that pays less than what they think they deserve, or what the local market bares. I will ask you to think about who would apply if you offered 2-3 dollars/hr as a starting wage.

                      The lion's share of new jobs in oregon have been min wage.

                      From what I have heard, not from personal experience however, is that comp claims tend to rise when changing to a production wage as some employees take more risks and end up getting hurt. I have seen first hand where shops have had to close down as they hired and kept dangerous workers who shot the workmans comp insurance through the roof. For me, lack of safety is yet another reason to get rid of an employee. Some general contractors won't even allow a sub to bid if they have too many workman's comp claims. I understand the rest of the taxes and what not that goes on the check, though not quite as intimately as you. I get around thirty on the check, but my total package is around 54 dollars. I do my best to earn every cent. Unfortunately not everyone I work with, or the people who work under me have the same ethics.
                      Last edited by bonehead; 05 Jan 06,, 20:49.
                      Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bonehead
                        1) It does not do any one any good to move to another place where they could get paid more when the cost of living is greater. Quality of life is important to people as well. For those nearing retirement such a move is a huge thing. Some cases a move is mandatory, other times it is better to fight wallmart and keep them out of the area.
                        And that is fine. That is the compromise I am talking about. You give up one "luxury" (living where you want to) to get another (higher salary).



                        Originally posted by bonehead
                        In my state, if you are fired, it is difficult to get unemployment. There is no reason to keep a sub par employee.
                        IL is much different. Maybe perhaps because it is a Liberal run state. It is very easy to get unemployment here.



                        Originally posted by bonehead
                        Rather odd your company can't train someone from within the ranks to fill some of the jobs, but atleast it worked out for you.
                        my company does train internally and prefers to hire within. This is a difficult company to get in with (my ex-husband, who is far from being an idiot tried for a year and a half). This was part of my being so aggressive and "confident" in getting this job. I did not have a face to face interview, I had a phone interview instead, but I basically acted as though I already had the job and was only going through the motions to satisfy the labor board. I went into the interview with the idea in my mind that the job was already mine. If everyone displayed this type of confidence (even if it were false confidence) during the interview process, I truly think there are few jobs that person could not get (with the exception of walking into a law firm without a law degree for example).

                        This company also does not like to keep its employees in the same position for longer than two years or so. The employees that want to move around are certainly encouraged to do so. We actually have mandatory 40 hours of some sort of job training each year. That could be PC training, job specific training, etc. If an employee does not complete their 40 hours of training it actually counts against them on their performance review in the spring.



                        Originally posted by bonehead
                        Lastly, many people start at min wage, and a few years later are still eligible for welfare.
                        Well this starts a whole new topic. People who are able to work, physically, should HAVE to work. Welfare should be a temporary thing to help get people on their feet, not a means to subsidize an income.

                        This is going to sound not very nice, but take a look at the majority of the workers making minimum wage (majority, not all). Let's take fast food chain workers (which, at least here in Chicagoland, start off making more than min wage). Most of these employees do not act as though they deserve anything more, so why should any other company hire them? They are not always dressed well (I do not consider pants that allow underware to be seen as "well dressed") they do not even walk with confidence. If they changed how they appeared just a little bit, it would be much easier for them to get a better job. So why should they work a min wage job AND receive welfare benefits on the side?

                        Why should the taxes that are coming out of my paycheck go to people who simply put, do not want to work? There is no reason any of us should be supplying people with the funds they need so that they can sit home, watch TV and breed OR go to a job where they only have to do the bare minimum, make min wage and have the state supply them with extra money? I am by no means an over-achiever, but we should all be expected to pull our weight in society.
                        "To dream of the person you would like to be is to waste the person you are."-Sholem Asch

                        "I always turn to the sports page first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures."-Earl Warren

                        "I didn't intend for this to take on a political tone. I'm just here for the drugs."-Nancy Reagan, when asked a political question at a "Just Say No" rally

                        "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules."-Earl Butz, on the Pope's attitude toward birth control

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by dalem
                          I view it very simply: artificially increasing wages lowers the value of every dollar I make.

                          For that reason alone I am not in favor of the idea of minimum wage in the first place. Increasing it is just throwing good money after bad.

                          -dale
                          Bingo.
                          "The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world. So wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes." G-Man

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gun Grape
                            Why are these 30 yr olds working in min wage jobs to begin with? If you started as a cashier at 18 and are still doing it at thirty. Something is wrong. And its not the company you work for. Min Wage is for ENTRY level jobs. You are suppose to move on to bigger and better things.
                            Hell, even if you start as a cashier @ 18 and are still doing that @ 30, you'll be making more than min wage. Unless you are putting NO effort whatsoever, surely this person would have gotten a raise in 17 years.

                            EDIT: 12 years
                            EDIT AGAIN: Good thing I am not that cashier counting back change, huh? ;)


                            Originally posted by GG
                            No, I want to train him/her ASAP because they are loosing me money since I have him 'piggybacking" with one of my better employees. I not only loose the productivity of the trainer but I also have to pay someone to fix the mistakes that the new guy is making. Not to mention materials that he is wasting.
                            and please help me explain to bonehead that this now trained employee can take this training and go somewhere else with it and get paid more. so you now spent the money and time to train someone else's employee.

                            that is why jobs start min wage. it is rare that an employee @ age 18 will be trained and still be with that company @ retirement putting the training that company gave that employee to use for that company.
                            Last edited by THL; 05 Jan 06,, 21:19.
                            "To dream of the person you would like to be is to waste the person you are."-Sholem Asch

                            "I always turn to the sports page first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures."-Earl Warren

                            "I didn't intend for this to take on a political tone. I'm just here for the drugs."-Nancy Reagan, when asked a political question at a "Just Say No" rally

                            "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules."-Earl Butz, on the Pope's attitude toward birth control

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by bonehead
                              As Bush took over, millions of higher paying manufacturing jobs were lost, As these people looked for other jobs, they found nothing but min wage jobs. Others who returned to the workforce after absences or because their spouse lost their job had to start somewhere. Then there are many people who simply like where they are at and low wages are ok with them. Finally, do to the predatory nature of some companies, they refuse decent raises so their workers never get much above min wage. If the unemployment is high, the workers have little choice.
                              Care to source this with actual numbers? Right now, your posts sound like Democratic talking points. I agree that manufacturing jobs have been lost, but jobs have expanded far beyond the manufacturing jobs that have been lost, and I'm sure that not all of the new jobs are your your evil minimum wage Walmart jobs.

                              BTW, unemployment is a 5.0%, which is near historical lows.
                              "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X