What do you think is an acceptable Minimum wage?

[Sir Kenyth]

Raise the minimum wage and use "Student Wages" to help offset low profit margin business's like McDonalds, where kids are inclined to work. Student wages are lower and only for use with kids who are still living at home and going to high school. They had these when I was a kid. I think discrimination against non-students became an issue and that's why it went away.

Got no way to prove it, but I will bet, that if you force employers to pay the workers more (ie a living wage) all you will end up doing is making those employers raise prices which will put the Living wage at a new level which will force the employers to raise their prices..etc. etc. You just cannot dictate supply and demand.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by khazadman: I am strongly against a cap on earnings. And I'm also opposed to raising the minimum wage. Just how many people working for the minimum are actually raising families, and how many of them are students and retiries looking for extra money?

Well, I was a student looking for rent. And, had I had a decent minimum wage in my town, I would not have had to live an hour away (wasting 2 hrs a day on a commute) where work paid better, kill myself waiting tables 40 hrs a week, do lots of non-postable things on the side for extra money, and take a huge grade hit in my studies (graduated bottom 10 or 15% in my class).

In law school, I said "F- It" and borrowed an extra $10-12K a year to live on so I could graduate in the top of the class. But, try owing a very nice home's worth of student loan debts and having to toss a $30K icing on top. So, now I dare not even consider having kids or buying a home until my income tops [edit:]*quite a bit* [end edit] because $1100/mo student loans, $1500/mo rent, and leftover credit card debt from the student years are killing me.

[ 06-09-2003, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by MagiK: Got no way to prove it, but I will bet, that if you force employers to pay the workers more (ie a living wage) all you will end up doing is making those employers raise prices which will put the Living wage at a new level which will force the employers to raise their prices..etc. etc. You just cannot dictate supply and demand.

Precisely. Unless you do something which will save these companies the money they'll lose in labor costs. Which brings me back to CEO salary caps. The whole impetus for those is the need to raise minimum wage without having living wage simply jump up in response.

[pritchke]

Yip, I understand perfectly Timber.

This is the last month for my loan that will be one less thing to moan about. Next thing will be a car, not having a car helps to get the loans gone quicker, although it also diminishes ones social circle, and some people look at people over 25 with a license and no car like they have two heads.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by MagiK: Got no way to prove it, but I will bet, that if you force employers to pay the workers more (ie a living wage) all you will end up doing is making those employers raise prices which will put the Living wage at a new level which will force the employers to raise their prices..etc. etc. You just cannot dictate supply and demand.

According to a NPR news report this has not been the case in several cities that adopted limited living wage laws with regards to city contracts and services. I think Baltimore was one of them.

I think the idea is if you tax businesses less, particularly with regards to wages, and give consumers more money and tax them more, you end up with a wealthier society. Not that I am really for or against this as I dont know enough about economics to make my opinion stick but it is food for thought.


And a side note: CEO's should make alot of money because of the responsibility they hold (alot of stockholder's money is a big responsibility if you ask me) but they do make too much.

I like the Ben and Jerry's corporate pay concept where no employee, including Ben and Jerry themselves, has a salary more than 7 times the lowest paid employee's salary. That is capitalism at it's best if you ask me.

[ 06-09-2003, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[pritchke]

Assuming that the lowest paid employee makes $30,000 that would mean the CEO would only make a little over 200,000/year. While this is a fair amount it is peanuts to what most of them make now and most would protest thinking they are worth more than any one else, for the most part it would be a hit to their ego. However the benefit to this cap is there would be more for shareholders, growth, unlikely the companies like airlines would go bankrupt even in hardtimes, etc.. As well since most companies are often shareholders than all would benifit. If the CEO's are not happy with it than I would say they are just plain greedy.

[Kakero]

For me it's should be $25. A simple lunch can cost $5. plus bus fee (to and fro) cost $4 . for bachelor he may be eating out for his breajfast and dinner so that cost another $10. and of course I'm talking about what workers should normally get.

There's nothing wrong if CEO get lots of money, it's just that he got lots of bills to pay and liabilities to take care as well. Not to mention he need even more if he got mistress. * cough cough *

[ 06-09-2003, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Kakero ]

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Note that the more manual a labor job is, the less you make. [img]graemlins/dontknowaboutyou.gif[/img] Sad but true. Thinking is worth loads more than heavy lifting.

Somebody, I think it was Robert A. Heinlein, said that, the nastier and more soul-destroying the job, the lower the wage, and the most-comfortable, interesting, and fun the job, the higher the wage. [img]graemlins/blueblink.gif[/img]

[harleyquinn]

Originally posted by pritchke: Yip, I understand perfectly Timber. This is the last month for my loan that will be one less thing to moan about. Next thing will be a car, not having a car helps to get the loans gone quicker, although it also diminishes ones social circle, and some people look at people over 25 with a license and no car like they have two heads.

I can agree with that. I unfortunately finally had to break down and buy a car because the public transportation here is a joke so getting to work was a huge headache (took 2+ hours using public trans to get what would take 15 min to drive). But, I didn't get my liscense until I was 25, and I was constantly getting hassled when buying liquor, going to clubs, or anywhere else where I had to show and ID and only had a driver's permit.
I think one thing that would help people learn how to live within their limit would be to include a basic finance class in high school (or better yet, junior high, before most kids have jobs). Teach them how to balance a check book, how to set up a budget, how saving your money in a fund rather than buying that video game can add up to a lot in a few years, etc. Wish someone had taught me all that when I was little, but being an adult now and seeing how little my parents seem to actually understand about handling credit (not credit cards, but credit) and finances, I can see why they didn't teach me.
I think teaching skills like this would result in far less people needing public assistance because they'd learn how to better handle their income.

PS -- I found a great book for women about finances, credit, mortgages, finding a better job and just about anything else about money (could be useful for men to, it's just written for women) called "What's your net worth by Jennifer Oppenshaw if anyone wants to read more.