I think it really depends on the employer. If they want to make a change in their pay based on a change in minimum wage, they are allowed to do so.
The whole minimum wage debate reminds me of the bush stimulus checks. By giving everyone more money they will in theory go out and spend more and this will save the economy.
Minimum wage is playing the class war card and really seems like a nice issue to get his opposition in a tizzy so that they do not focus on healthcare, diplomatic issues, guns and other issues.
I think Obama or at least his strategists knew that the minimum wage talk would send the opposition into emotional outrage crisis mode once again as it appears to be working quite well getting them all worked up in a frenzy...
0
I think it really depends on the employer. If they want to make a change in their pay based on a change in minimum wage, they are allowed to do so.
The whole minimum wage debate reminds me of the bush stimulus checks. By giving everyone more money they will in theory go out and spend more and this will save the economy.
Minimum wage is playing the class war card and really seems like a nice issue to get his opposition in a tizzy so that they do not focus on healthcare, diplomatic issues, guns and other issues.
I think Obama or at least his strategists knew that the minimum wage talk would send the opposition into emotional outrage crisis mode once again as it appears to be working quite well getting them all worked up in a frenzy...
As far is how wages are paid out, I believe that they would remain at $9/hr as well - unless their productive efforts were worth more to the employer than that amount.
Minimum Wage - Another idea of the Central Planner's that is
0
As far is how wages are paid out, I believe that they would remain at $9/hr as well - unless their productive efforts were worth more to the employer than that amount.
Minimum Wage - Another idea of the Central Planner's that is
In 2007, when Congress was in the process of passing the “Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007,”Larry Reed of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy argued that what members of Congress (and now President Obama) needed is not another lecture on the minimum wage from an economist, but rather an old-fashioned Socratic inquisition. If Socrates was alive today, here’s how Larry Reed imagines such a dialogue might go (updated for the $9.00 per hour minimum wage proposal).
Congressman: Look, a minimum wage of $9.00 per hour isn’t much.
Socrates: I’d like to know how you arrived at that figure. Was it some sophisticated equation, divine revelation or toss of the dice? Why didn’t you choose $20.00, which is not only a nice round number but also a lot more generous?
Congressman: Well, $20 would be too high, for sure. Too much of a jump at once.
Socrates: It sounds like you think the cost of labor might indeed affect the demand for it. Good! That’s progress. You’re not as oblivious about market forces as I thought. What I want to know is why you apparently don’t think higher labor costs matter when you raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $9.00. Do you think everyone, regardless of skill level or experience, is automatically worth what Congress decrees?
Congressman: Now hold on a minute. I’m for the worker here.
Socrates: Then why on earth would you favor a law that says if a worker can’t find a job that pays at least $9.00 per hour, he’s not allowed to work?
Congressman: I’m not saying he can’t work! I’m saying he can’t be paid less than $9.00!
Socrates: I thought we were making progress, but perhaps not. Can you tell me, if your scheme becomes law, what happens to a worker who is worth only $7.00 because of his low skills, lack of education, scant experience or a low demand for the work itself? Will employers happily employ him anyway and take a $2.00 loss for every hour he’s on the job?
Congressman: Businesses need workers and $2.00 isn’t much, so common sense and decency would suggest that of course they would.
Socrates: So employers who employ people are too greedy to pay $9.00 unless they’re ordered to, but then when Congress acts, they suddenly become generous enough to hire people at a loss. Who was your logic instructor?
Congressman: Can we hurry this up? I’ve got other plans for other people I have to think about.
Socrates: I give up. You congressmen are incorrigible. You’re the only people on whom my teaching method has no discernible impact.
0
Socrates and the Minimum Wage
In 2007, when Congress was in the process of passing the “Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007,”Larry Reed of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy argued that what members of Congress (and now President Obama) needed is not another lecture on the minimum wage from an economist, but rather an old-fashioned Socratic inquisition. If Socrates was alive today, here’s how Larry Reed imagines such a dialogue might go (updated for the $9.00 per hour minimum wage proposal).
Congressman: Look, a minimum wage of $9.00 per hour isn’t much.
Socrates: I’d like to know how you arrived at that figure. Was it some sophisticated equation, divine revelation or toss of the dice? Why didn’t you choose $20.00, which is not only a nice round number but also a lot more generous?
Congressman: Well, $20 would be too high, for sure. Too much of a jump at once.
Socrates: It sounds like you think the cost of labor might indeed affect the demand for it. Good! That’s progress. You’re not as oblivious about market forces as I thought. What I want to know is why you apparently don’t think higher labor costs matter when you raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $9.00. Do you think everyone, regardless of skill level or experience, is automatically worth what Congress decrees?
Congressman: Now hold on a minute. I’m for the worker here.
Socrates: Then why on earth would you favor a law that says if a worker can’t find a job that pays at least $9.00 per hour, he’s not allowed to work?
Congressman: I’m not saying he can’t work! I’m saying he can’t be paid less than $9.00!
Socrates: I thought we were making progress, but perhaps not. Can you tell me, if your scheme becomes law, what happens to a worker who is worth only $7.00 because of his low skills, lack of education, scant experience or a low demand for the work itself? Will employers happily employ him anyway and take a $2.00 loss for every hour he’s on the job?
Congressman: Businesses need workers and $2.00 isn’t much, so common sense and decency would suggest that of course they would.
Socrates: So employers who employ people are too greedy to pay $9.00 unless they’re ordered to, but then when Congress acts, they suddenly become generous enough to hire people at a loss. Who was your logic instructor?
Congressman: Can we hurry this up? I’ve got other plans for other people I have to think about.
Socrates: I give up. You congressmen are incorrigible. You’re the only people on whom my teaching method has no discernible impact.
I should ask you what you should happen if minimum wage was raised?
I know you could go on and on in variety of ways about whether or not it should... But that would be off topic...
The question and topic you posed was what to do with the people that's or slightly above the current minimum wage...
As a small business owner, I probably would do nothing... But I am interested to see your opinion on the actual topic..
Hopefully you can respond to the question you pose on your own thread as your recent pattern has been to cut-and-run when the dialog/discussion begins...
0
Canos...
I should ask you what you should happen if minimum wage was raised?
I know you could go on and on in variety of ways about whether or not it should... But that would be off topic...
The question and topic you posed was what to do with the people that's or slightly above the current minimum wage...
As a small business owner, I probably would do nothing... But I am interested to see your opinion on the actual topic..
Hopefully you can respond to the question you pose on your own thread as your recent pattern has been to cut-and-run when the dialog/discussion begins...
I really can't credit Obama ad his peeps for rattling the cage of his opposition driving them absolutely bananas...
It takes fox"news", chain-emails, blogs, taking heads, and others to prescribe the talking points of the rhetoric/propaganda for the lemmings to follow....
It takes a village ; )
Being consistent with my conservative views I really think it will come down to individual states making the decision. And then employers and workers will make decisions on where they want to live. So I personally see no need to hyper-focus on the prescribed current talking point... But that's my person view... It's America so others do have the right to have a conniption over this in a wild temper tantrum if they choose to..
0
Canos,
I really can't credit Obama ad his peeps for rattling the cage of his opposition driving them absolutely bananas...
It takes fox"news", chain-emails, blogs, taking heads, and others to prescribe the talking points of the rhetoric/propaganda for the lemmings to follow....
It takes a village ; )
Being consistent with my conservative views I really think it will come down to individual states making the decision. And then employers and workers will make decisions on where they want to live. So I personally see no need to hyper-focus on the prescribed current talking point... But that's my person view... It's America so others do have the right to have a conniption over this in a wild temper tantrum if they choose to..
Great point Heat Holder. If this debate ever makes it to the floor in DC a congressman/senator who is against raising the min wage should pose these questions to congressmen/senators who are for it.
DL:
As usual your ramblings make no sense.
"Cut-and-run", "FOX News", "Chain e-mails", "lemmings", "it takes a village", "temper tantrum", "tizzy"...You always accuse people of having an alias. I guarantee you DO NOT use an alias on this site because you are the only one who uses these terms and you use them in every post.
You mention individual states making the decision. If DC says the new min wage is $9/hr then that's it.
You answer my question with a question. I imagine you do it for the following reasons:
1-As usual you have no idea where you stand on the issue
2-You can't criticize Obama
You asked so I will tell you what will happen:
1-The people making $9/hr will be bitter. They will want more money.
2-Companies will have to raise the costs of their services/products to make up for the costs in manpower.
3-Even though community organizers and liberal journalists disagree, employers will cut hours and jobs to make up for the costs in manpower.
Those last 2 comments go hand-in-hand with some rhetorical questions I posed last week: "Do liberals work in the private sector and are they in positions where they are responsible for people/budgets?" I assume none of the libs on this site can answer yes to those questions because they haven't answered yes to any of them.
0
Great point Heat Holder. If this debate ever makes it to the floor in DC a congressman/senator who is against raising the min wage should pose these questions to congressmen/senators who are for it.
DL:
As usual your ramblings make no sense.
"Cut-and-run", "FOX News", "Chain e-mails", "lemmings", "it takes a village", "temper tantrum", "tizzy"...You always accuse people of having an alias. I guarantee you DO NOT use an alias on this site because you are the only one who uses these terms and you use them in every post.
You mention individual states making the decision. If DC says the new min wage is $9/hr then that's it.
You answer my question with a question. I imagine you do it for the following reasons:
1-As usual you have no idea where you stand on the issue
2-You can't criticize Obama
You asked so I will tell you what will happen:
1-The people making $9/hr will be bitter. They will want more money.
2-Companies will have to raise the costs of their services/products to make up for the costs in manpower.
3-Even though community organizers and liberal journalists disagree, employers will cut hours and jobs to make up for the costs in manpower.
Those last 2 comments go hand-in-hand with some rhetorical questions I posed last week: "Do liberals work in the private sector and are they in positions where they are responsible for people/budgets?" I assume none of the libs on this site can answer yes to those questions because they haven't answered yes to any of them.
where is it that I accuse people of being an alias on this thread?
you seem pretty upset... u mad bro?
and I answered your question with an answer...
As a small business owner, I probably would do nothing..
thats my answer fool... I also ask for your opinion... dont know why your'e getting all mad for... you okay?
cause making up a lie to try to pin on me and argue against it seems like bowslit tactics...
thank you for giving me your opinion of what you think might happen... Here is my opinion (no better or worse)... just my personal opinion on your personal predictions...
1- I dont think that $9 and hour people will be bitter... now if they had to take a pay cut or increase in taxation, I can see being bitter... but they are not experiencing any simple mathematical change... and everyone at $9/hr wants more money... its the same whether it is raised or not...
2- Well run companies will not raise costs or will be able to so in a manner that does not send the customer shopping else where... poorly run companies will choose poor strategies (such as raising costs) that will result in them losing customers...
3- Companies that are well run and doing well will absorb this and adjust with little or no problems... poorly run companies and companies that are already just holding on by the skin of their teeth will fold... Capitalism is King...
0
where is it that I accuse people of being an alias on this thread?
you seem pretty upset... u mad bro?
and I answered your question with an answer...
As a small business owner, I probably would do nothing..
thats my answer fool... I also ask for your opinion... dont know why your'e getting all mad for... you okay?
cause making up a lie to try to pin on me and argue against it seems like bowslit tactics...
thank you for giving me your opinion of what you think might happen... Here is my opinion (no better or worse)... just my personal opinion on your personal predictions...
1- I dont think that $9 and hour people will be bitter... now if they had to take a pay cut or increase in taxation, I can see being bitter... but they are not experiencing any simple mathematical change... and everyone at $9/hr wants more money... its the same whether it is raised or not...
2- Well run companies will not raise costs or will be able to so in a manner that does not send the customer shopping else where... poorly run companies will choose poor strategies (such as raising costs) that will result in them losing customers...
3- Companies that are well run and doing well will absorb this and adjust with little or no problems... poorly run companies and companies that are already just holding on by the skin of their teeth will fold... Capitalism is King...
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
