- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Huffpo Insanity: Min wage should have reached $21.72 an hour
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:36 pm
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:36 pm
If based in productivity
i truly think the people who parrot ridiculous and insane stats like this truly have no concept of reality
we cannot develop and progress without increased efficiencies and lowering costs (labor is a cost). if labor costs mimicked productivity, then there would be no productivity increase and the corresponding costs would prohibit progress
look no further than the building block of society: food production/farming
we can't progress/grow without an increase population. we can't increase population without productivity increase
the workers are displaced, yes, but with fewer workers devoted to farming, they are free to devote their precious personal resources to other fields, allowing those fields to develop. further, as price remains similar (or decreases) due to productivity increase, society can devote more of its collective resources to progress.
if we increased salary for efficiency, this development would be all lost b/c society would have to devote its collective resources to more expensive food
quote:
President Obama's call to increase the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour was one of the more significant proposals he laid out in his State of the Union address Tuesday night. But $9 an hour is still a far cry from what workers really deserve, a 2012 study finds.
The minimum wage should have reached $21.72 an hour in 2012 if it kept up with increases in worker productivity, according to a March study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research. While advancements in technology have increased the amount of goods and services that can be produced in a set amount of time, wages have remained relatively flat, the study points out.
i truly think the people who parrot ridiculous and insane stats like this truly have no concept of reality
we cannot develop and progress without increased efficiencies and lowering costs (labor is a cost). if labor costs mimicked productivity, then there would be no productivity increase and the corresponding costs would prohibit progress
look no further than the building block of society: food production/farming
we can't progress/grow without an increase population. we can't increase population without productivity increase
the workers are displaced, yes, but with fewer workers devoted to farming, they are free to devote their precious personal resources to other fields, allowing those fields to develop. further, as price remains similar (or decreases) due to productivity increase, society can devote more of its collective resources to progress.
if we increased salary for efficiency, this development would be all lost b/c society would have to devote its collective resources to more expensive food
18
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
The basement dwelling unemployed social outcasts on reddit have been parroting this for the past year.
The sad thing is there are a lot of people who believe this.
The sad thing is there are a lot of people who believe this.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:43 pm to goldennugget
I'm pretty sure you can find "data" to back up any position you choose to make.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
The part they forgot to mention is that they want everyone to make that much, regardless of occupation.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The minimum wage should have reached $21.72 an hour in 2012 if it kept up with increases in worker productivity,
Ya know, this argument is amusing because it presupposes that increases in overall worker productivity in the U.S. by definition means equal rates of increase in productivity at all worker levels. A dubious assertion at best.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:46 pm to blueboy
quote:
The part they forgot to mention is that they want everyone to make that much, regardless of occupation.
this is another angle that is more "mean" so i ignored it, but yes
and in society today, DUE TO THE EFFICIENCY AND DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIETY, our "minimum wage" jobs should be paid less, due to their lack of value. we've developed past truly needing to pay these jobs that salary. it's the ultimate irony of these discussions
sure, if we just looked at inflation since the inception, it would be x-insane figure, but that ignores the reality of efficiency, which deems those salaries should be much lower than the inflationary rates
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
This is one bad thing about the internet. The unemployed morons are very vocal on the internet. Stuff like this spreads like wildfire on the internet, and impressionable young people soak up stuff like this and parrot the same things.
So now we have a bunch of morons because they've been influenced by a mass of basement dwellers online.
It's a theory I just came up with just now.
So now we have a bunch of morons because they've been influenced by a mass of basement dwellers online.
It's a theory I just came up with just now.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:49 pm to SettleDown
quote:
it presupposes that increases in overall worker productivity in the U.S. by definition means equal rates of increase in productivity at all worker levels
it's not that
it presupposes that an increase in production should reflect a similar increase in total value, when it's an inverse relationship. the elite in each important field/industry will be more valuable, but the lowest-level workers will be much, much less valuable.
this is the backbone of the "wealth inequality" argument and why it's stupid, especially since this system improves life for EVERYONE. efficiency, technology, and progress makes life better for everyone, at the end of the day
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:49 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I'm pretty sure you can find "data" to back up any position you choose to make.
Yep, in the statistical process control world we often quoted: statistics don't lie but statisticians certainly do.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
So a full time minimum wage job should pay $45k a year?
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:52 pm to ehidal1
45k/year currently is the median household income
Posted on 3/6/14 at 5:58 pm to davesdawgs
quote:Meh. Statisticians understand what stats actually mean. Often, it isn't the stat that is wrong, it's the lay bull shite conclusion drawn from said stat that is wrong.
Yep, in the statistical process control world we often quoted: statistics don't lie but statisticians certainly do.
For example. The stat that says overall worker productivity in the U.S. is a perfectly non judgmental stat. It just is what it is.
It's the person taking that info and drawing conclusions about its implication for the min wage that is the problem. And, of course, it's that lay person's complete LACK of understanding of stats that's the issue.
First off, knowing overall productivity is COMPLETELY non-informative as to the value of any particular level of worker. It could well be that productivity at the lowest wage levels has remained stagnant or even dropped while productivity at the higher levels has expanded greatly thus driving overall productivity higher.
In fact, as someone who used to hire min-wage type workers some 22 or so years ago, I can state WITH CERTAINTY that the people I see in that same line of work are NOT NEARLY as productive as they were in my organization. The individuals blow arse and it is the wonders of technology that have increased or kept productivity apace.
I was a grocery manager and my cashiers had a per-minute ring requirement(as did every store). They also were tested and had to score 90% or better at memorizing produce codes. Failure to maintain either resulted in being unemployed. I haven't been in a grocery store in at least 10 years where the cashiers would've even had a job in my store.
Is that because they're dumber? Nope. Doubt that. But, there has clearly been some shift in work ethic at that level and it hasn't been to the upside. The only reason grocery stores don't have to have every damned register open all the time is scanners. So, we're supposed to pay people more now than we did then just because the company invested in tech that saved the min worker's arse?
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
The problem with that idea is if the minimum wage is raised to that level, more workers would be laid off and replaced with more machines. Therefore then productivity per worker would increase even more.
The only way you can have minimum wage that high is if the Government has full control over businesses and their decisions (full communism). Basically the Governent dictates how much the business owner receives of profit, how much he pays employees and how many he hires, and they take the rest.
In any resemblance of a free market capitalist system, minimum wage laws only hurt the low wage earner. Minimum wage should only exist as a very low amount to keep workers from being taken completely advantage of. I think right now it shouldn't be over 5 dollars an hour. The labor market would ensure that quality workers were paid more than that, at the same time many who are unemployed now would be employed at least.
The only way you can have minimum wage that high is if the Government has full control over businesses and their decisions (full communism). Basically the Governent dictates how much the business owner receives of profit, how much he pays employees and how many he hires, and they take the rest.
In any resemblance of a free market capitalist system, minimum wage laws only hurt the low wage earner. Minimum wage should only exist as a very low amount to keep workers from being taken completely advantage of. I think right now it shouldn't be over 5 dollars an hour. The labor market would ensure that quality workers were paid more than that, at the same time many who are unemployed now would be employed at least.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
increased efficiencies
quote:
productivity increase
These are the reasons we have resources to provide for those who DON'T produce. \
Sorry if this is a hijack.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:05 pm to FightinTigersDammit
that goes into the whole minimum income discussion
i favor emigration
i favor emigration
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:08 pm to deltaland
quote:If you think about it, even this is wholly unnecessary. With the number of government benefits out there for the poor, the min wage is effectively already set. IE, it's set at the number people will no longer take jobs for because govt benefits are just as good.
Minimum wage should only exist as a very low amount to keep workers from being taken completely advantage of.
Speaking of which. Let's assume that the new min wage got set at $21 per hour. Any guesses on how long it would take for liberals to demand increase in welfare benefits and other similar programs to "keep pace"?
I'm gonna take frickING IMMEDIATELY for $1000 Alex.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:09 pm to SettleDown
SettleDown, I often refer to our cashiers as 'regitards'.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:42 pm to FightinTigersDammit
I dont think the min wage should be $20 but its much too low as it stands.
Should be $10 range IMHO.
This is not a winning issue for republicans, most people think could I live off $7.50 an hour and go, well no I couldn't. And are ok with it being higher.
Better to cave and move onto a winning issue than continue to fight this.
Should be $10 range IMHO.
This is not a winning issue for republicans, most people think could I live off $7.50 an hour and go, well no I couldn't. And are ok with it being higher.
Better to cave and move onto a winning issue than continue to fight this.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:46 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:Why not?
I dont think the min wage should be $20
quote:How do you know?
but its much too low as it stands.
quote:What facts led you to this number?
Should be $10 range IMHO.
quote:Irrelevant to what the correct position is.
This is not a winning issue for republicans,
quote:At no point in my life, dating back to a MUCH lower minimum wage, would I have ever even contemplated "living on" minimum wage. That's not what it's intended for. People who try to live or more importantly, start a family while on min wage are fricking idiots.
most people think could I live off $7.50 an hour and go, well no I couldn't
Posted on 3/6/14 at 6:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
What a load of shite
Page 1 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News