2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Minimum Wage: How Much is Too Much?
A good read for people bashing Hillary for "only" supporting a 66% increase in the minimum wage, up to $12, which would be an all-time high after adjusting for inflation.
...
I am frequently asked, How high can the minimum wage go without jeopardizing employment of low-wage workers? And at what level would further minimum wage increases result in more job losses than wage gains, lowering the earnings of low-wage workers as a whole?
Although available research cannot precisely answer these questions, I am confident that a federal minimum wage that rises to around $12 an hour over the next five years or so would not have a meaningful negative effect on United States employment. One reason for this judgment is that around 140 research projects commissioned by Britains independent Low Pay Commission have found that the minimum wage has led to higher than average wage increases for the lowest paid, with little evidence of adverse effects on employment or the economy. A $12-per-hour minimum wage in the United States phased in over several years would be in the same ballpark as Britains minimum wage today.
But $15 an hour is beyond international experience, and could well be counterproductive. Although some high-wage cities and states could probably absorb a $15-an-hour minimum wage with little or no job loss, it is far from clear that the same could be said for every state, city and town in the United States.
More logical is the proposed legislation from Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, and Robert C. Scott, Democrat of Virginia, calling for raising the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020. Their bill is co-sponsored by 32 senators, and supported by President Obama and Hillary Clinton. High-wage cities and states could raise their minimums to $15.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/opinion/sunday/the-minimum-wage-how-much-is-too-much.html
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)"Stand with Elizabeth Warren calling for $12/hr minimum wage!".
yourout
(7,520 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)One million dollars, for example, would be too much.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Epic fail.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)How about we raise it and keep raising it until we catch up with the rest of the world and then go a step further and destroy poverty once and for all. That includes broad sweeping changes including limits on the amount of money CEOs and other executives can make in comparison to their lowest paid employees.
This has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Guess what? The workers making 35 dollars are still the poor in the country as they will still be at the bottom of the scale. We will always have a poor.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)AOR
(692 posts)labor is entitled to ALL it creates. You, Hillary Clinton, and the New York Times are spewing right-wing ruling class talking points.
Solidarity Forever
When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run,
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun;
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one,
But the union makes us strong.
Solidarity forever,
Solidarity forever,
Solidarity forever,
For the union makes us strong.
Is there aught we hold in common with the greedy parasite,
Who would lash us into serfdom and would crush us with his might?
Is there anything left to us but to organize and fight?
For the union makes us strong.
It is we who plowed the prairies; built the cities where they trade;
Dug the mines and built the workshops, endless miles of railroad laid;
Now we stand outcast and starving midst the wonders we have made;
But the union makes us strong.
All the world that's owned by idle drones is ours and ours alone.
We have laid the wide foundations; built it skyward stone by stone.
It is ours, not to slave in, but to master and to own.
While the union makes us strong.
They have taken untold millions that they never toiled to earn,
But without our brain and muscle not a single wheel can turn.
We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn
That the union makes us strong.
In our hands is placed a power greater than their hoarded gold,
Greater than the might of armies, magnified a thousand-fold.
We can bring to birth a new world from the ashes of the old
For the union makes us strong.
Ralph Chaplin
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)I wish our unions were stronger and our workers better paid.
AOR
(692 posts)and the beginning of the sell-out to capital. Still we fight on. We need more modern day Joe Hills and Bill Fosters and less Bob Kings and Richard Trumkas.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)AOR
(692 posts)the fight back is always just beginning for leftists and labor. We'll get there.
azmom
(5,208 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."
- Abraham Lincoln
AOR
(692 posts)and yet it can't be repeated enough. I have a habit of injecting that one into many conversations with lifetime social scabs and business owners. They really have no answers... and it terrifies them because Lincoln was a capitalist for all intents and purposes. Cheers
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)That's what it means to put people first.
It's completely unacceptable we've got millions of people working for less than they can afford to live on.
Whether you're a brain surgeon or a floor scrubber every person deserves a chance to have a family and live a decent life. It's a matter of basic human dignity. No more starvation wages.
If a business can't afford to pay enough for workers to live on, then we need to ask some hard questions about why. Why do we have that sort of exploitation built into our economy and how do we change it.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)What kind of damage will be inflicted on working families between now and then, when they reach that lordly level?
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)Fuck this shit. $12 is a survivable wage. If that, in most places. As someone who makes that much in Seattle and still ended up almost homeless, I can tell you that article is pure bull.
It's called a living wage for a reason.
Fucking right-wing talking points on DU, what fun.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)on the minimum wage. In fact, he explicitly rebuts right-wing talking points about how raising the minimum wage would automatically result in more unemployment. The question is how high should it be.
As far as Seattle goes, the article clearly says that more expensive states and municipalities should impose their own higher minimum wages.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)that people should not have to bust ass 40-80 hours a week and still live in poverty, have to get foodaid, and live in squalor.
12 aint gonna cut it. not sure 15 will either but it might be livable.
please, dan, you are The first in the pool to criticize the use of right wing talking points. I don't care who wrote this article. The idea of a minimum wage being "too high" is a classic right wing talking point. In fact they don't even want any minimum wage. So maybe we can all try and stick to real progressive ideals
DanTex
(20,709 posts)It's written by a liberal economist, who supports raising the minimum wage, and challenges the right-wing orthodoxy that raising it will cause unemployment.
Could the minimum wage be too high? Of course. I think we can all agree that $7.25 is too low, and, say, $100 is too high. The question is what the right level is, and how much the right level depends on which city or state a person lives in.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)this idea of a minimum wage being "too high" is a classic right wing talking point to keep people at starvation wages. It shouldn't be that tough to calculate. Most cost of living factors can be calculated and anticipated. The minimum wage should provide for a standard of living that is appropriate for the most advanced first world country in the world and the one that has the most wealth. I don't know if that's 15 or not, but I can't imagine in 1 million years that it's 12. And as far as the bunk about it costing jobs, more right wing bile.
edit. I agree with you that 100 is clearly too high, but quibbling about whether 12 or 15 is appropriate in a country where people are working full time and still struggling to pay their heating bills or buy groceries or pay for doctor visits is insane in my opinion
DanTex
(20,709 posts)It's strange that in the same post that you admit that, you also say that "this idea of a minimum wage being "too high" is a classic right wing talking point." Are you accusing yourself of repeating right-wing talking points?
Off the top of my head, I have no idea what the best minimum wage level is. It could be 12, it could be 15, it could be 20. This is why I think it's a good idea to consult economic research, to determine how high it can be raised without risking higher unemployment. Which is what this article does.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)they want us to fight among ourselves about the particulars while they continue to push the ridiculous idea that having any minimum at all hurts the economy. I think it would be a good idea to do more research on what the upper end of the minimum should be. But as long as people who work full-time are struggling in poverty and can't make their bills or have to live in rundown shitty apartments, or have to choose between medication and heat, I think it's safe to say we are not close to being there yet. The Republicans approach to this is "how much do we want to pay" which of course is minimal because they want to keep as many profits as they can. Well I think most Progressives take the approach of "How much do people need to live comfortably" and not be in squalor.
I just think that we as a country can be better then "how much can people get by on" when there is so much obscene wealth supporting such a small number of people's opulent lifestyles.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)BooScout
(10,406 posts)Is a lot cheaper in Arkansas or Mississippi than it is in New York or California. I think the minimum wage needs to take local cost of living into account.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)You don't need the federal law to take those places into account.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Congratulations!
DanTex
(20,709 posts)on the minimum wage and found that increasing it does not automatically reduce employment, the way the GOP claims. You should read it, it's a good piece.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)You are not in good company
DanTex
(20,709 posts)wants to get rid of the minimum wage. Pretending that a $12 minimum wage is "GOP policy" is just silly.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)is "maximum wage." their foray into the bizarro world posits that having a minimum wage somehow prevents people from achieving greater wages, that it's some kind of artificial cap On wages. I don't know how they can say the stuff with a straight face I truly don't.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)BernieFan57
(80 posts)I was looking for something like it, I know I've seen it before.
Also not considered, I think, is that 30 years ago a minimum wage job would more likely have benefits. We have seen stagnation of hourly wages coupled with diminishing benefits, which are counted separately.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)It is from an editorialist that is trying to prop up his "$15 and hour is too much" nonsense based on an article that says NOTHING about a raise of $15 an hour either positive or negative.
Skip the article and read the study.
LettuceSea
(337 posts)Both D and R have taken pretty black and white stances on an issue that needs some details, IMO.
The national min wage should be increased ($10-12), but more importantly, more benefits should be extended to full time min wage workers. I'm for $15, even up to $20 in cities and states that have higher expenses. But I'm not for giving a 15 year old kid in Mississippi $15 an hour for their first job. That's an economy wrecker and a bit idealistic.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I think this is an important election issue. If you let this sort of thing go unchecked, you end up with poor people having more self esteem, money, and maybe even leisure time. Someone MUST put a stop to this.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)I have serious questions about that article in the NYT.
There is NOTHING in CPI's study on this matter that states that an increase to $15 an hour is a bad thing. Absolutely nothing. The framing by Alan Krueger was his own and he had no input into that study at all and is just bloviating about a change that the study does not address at all.
The intellectual dishonesty by referencing the study in his denouncement of a $15 an hour increase is utterly galling.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)EPI study and also by international studies he cited, and found not to be economically disruptive. But $15 would put us in uncharted territory, which means risking increased unemployment. As he put it:
Economics is all about understanding trade-offs and risks. The trade-off is likely to become more severe, and the risk greater, if the minimum wage is set beyond the range studied in past research.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)He has no factual study to back it up. He is resting his "$15 could be too much" on an actual study that necessitates that the minimum wage could and should be raised to at least $12 an hour.
Take away the study (which he really isn't using anyhow) and the whole thing sounds like typical conservative talking points.
And aside from this desperate attempt for the author of this editorial to rub himself against academia, what about the idea of walking into the halls of congress and asking for somewhat more than what you are willing to settle for. Isn't that sort of the very nature of tactical negotiations? Or is that sort of negotiating tactic only to be used by and for the powerful?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)raising it to $15. This is why he concludes that the risk of entering uncharted territory are not worth the potential benefits, particularly when there are other tools he mentions that can be used to further help low-wage workers.
Calling it a right-wing talking point is utterly ludicrous, because he supports raising the minimum wage to $12, which no right-wingers do.
Your point about negotiations is a good one. You're right, this isn't about negotiating with congress, it's strictly about policy. As far as congress goes, I don't think either $12 or $15 will pass, and I'm not convinced that the starting point is going to make much difference.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)We also don't know what would happen if we gave every child in America an orange.
My point is that this op-ed isn't based on anything. Depriving it of the study that in no way supports his thesis reduces it to just being: "What if increasing the wage to x causes economic damage"
Which is a republican talking point. I am sorry that this is the case but that is all it is.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)who has done research on the effects of minimum wages.
Fair enough.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Minimum Wage Would Be $21.72 If It Kept Pace With Increases In Productivity: Study
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/13/minimum-wage-productivity_n_2680639.html
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)So he is in line with her right-think.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)have way too much money and the rich pigs don't have enough.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)The top tax rate was 90%. The world didn't end. The rich were still rich. We also had a middle class that was expanding and whose share of the total wealth was increasing rather than decreasing.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)we've ever had, as everyone here well knows. We should go back to those tax rates.