Ok.. Minumum wage... Immagration

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
If the minimum wage were to be abolished, what would you say is a good baseline pay for a fast food worker?

Whatever the free market dictates.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's a hell of a non-answer.

If you owned a fast food joint in your city, and there were no minimum wage laws, what would you offer Charles the recent High School graduate on an hourly basis? It's a simple question.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

If you understand free market economics the answer I gave is quite clear: the least amount possible.

The free market will vary from place to place and will even be, in some instances, micro-regional. A wage that is acceptable to a worker in one location may not, due to market driven circumstances, not be acceptable in another locale. Charles if free to accept my offer on $X as is monetary remuneration for his services. If he refuses and another accepts the free market dictated that I am not underpaying. If no one accepts I obviously need to increase my initial wage offering in hopes of attracting and retaining workers.

When it comes to illegal immigrants taking jobs at lower wages holding down over all income of those who are here legally or citizens I would say the answer lies in prosecuting the employer not raising the minimum wage. It is illegal to hire illegals. Business needs a legal check and balance that prevents it from profiting using illegal means. Time to enforce the laws that are there.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Your answer should be the. Ost possible and minumum wage shouldn't even be part of the damned discussion.

a reply to: 2gd2btru

You didn't understand the op but I get it my thoughts aren't always cohereint.

Reread the op and understand the totality of the situation.

originally posted by: onequestion

Your answer should be the. Ost possible and minumum wage shouldn't even be part of the damned discussion.

Why would I, as a business owner, want to willingly overpay for anything? Be it wages, material good costs, services, etcetera.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Because you care about the people who work for you.

Oh yeah your a free market capitalist. only an idiot would care about people.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

So you're telling me that if you could, you would pay something WELL below what is considered a living wage for an honest 40 hours a week, and you'd sleep well? a minimum wage is necessary to keep exactly that kind of thinking from being put into practice.

originally posted by: onequestion

Because you care about the people who work for you.

If someone is wiling to work for a mutually agreed upon wage why do you feel the urge to interject yourself into the equation?

Oh yeah your a free market capitalist. only an idiot would care about people.

Spare me you hysteric hyperbole.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Do you get tired of asking that queation?

Here's your answer, you need to pay more, just because! Stinky rich, greedy business owner, poop head!

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
So you're telling me that if you could, you would pay something WELL below what is considered a living wage for an honest 40 hours a week, and you'd sleep well? a minimum wage is necessary to keep exactly that kind of thinking from being put into practice.

You are missing the point. If your hypothetical Charles and I agree upon a wage he obviously thinks that he can get by on it otherwise he would refuse or ask for more.

a reply to: KawRider9

It's not an issue of simply paying "more". It's an issue of a person being able to work their 40 hours, and still be able to afford to put food on their table. Those who work minimum wage jobs are (in general) the most vulnerable when it comes to economic exploitation. Abolishing the minimum wage would only serve to bring about increased income disparity.

a reply to: onequestion

A free market depends upon supply and demand. When the workers are many, and the demand low - an employer can pay lower wages and people will accept this. When the demand for workers is many, and the workers themselves in short supply, then an employer will need to pay a higher wage in order to attract workers to his employ.

(This is why high immigration has a tendency to make the working class extremely angry)

All the above is true even when you set a minimum wage. If an employer desperately needs workers, and there just aren't enough to go around, the employers will begin paying higher than the minimum in order to attract the workers.

The workers themselves in any economy can set their own wages for their profession, simply by no one who is trained for said type of work accepting less than x amount of dollars for their wage. (even when that means being unemployed for a while until said employers become willing to pay the amount workers are willing to accept) HOWEVER, when the economy itself is very bad... more workers become willing to work for less in order to feed their families.

Therefore, whether you set a legal minimum wage or not, really doesn't matter as you are free, in a free market, to turn down lower paying jobs.

However, what workers need to realize is demand... as workers it is important TO THEM, that there be a demand for whatever it is they are doing. And, work not only for an employer, but work to keep demand high. This usually happens when quality is high for most products, and more workers actually working.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You're assuming Charles is making informed and educated decisions about his finances. Charles could accept a wage well below what he needs to be able to live. Work a few months, end up destitute and homeless and eventually quit or get fired because he can't afford basic things. Then, another "Charles" will be there, waiting to fill his uninformed shoes. Of course, you the employer wins and it honestly isn't any of your business whether Charles can live on the salary you give him or not. You can just hire another Charles. There are 50 more "Charles"s outside needing a job too. Yes, it's an efficient and cost effective way to run a business, but is it a HUMAN way to run that business?

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

You're assuming Charles is making informed and educated decisions about his finances.

Charles better be making informed and educated decisions about his finances because it is certainly not anyone else's obligation to do so.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: KawRider9

It's not an issue of simply paying "more". It's an issue of a person being able to work their 40 hours, and still be able to afford to put food on their table. Those who work minimum wage jobs are (in general) the most vulnerable when it comes to economic exploitation. Abolishing the minimum wage would only serve to bring about increased income disparity.

Your talking to a rock he will argue in circles.

It's a principle I would pay someone what I could because I'm not selfish and greedy. If I can't have employees and pay them reasonably I would just do the work myself.

Yes I out this in practice on jobsites I do construction.

There's more to it then that but unless he addresses the rest of my op it's not worth my time.

originally posted by: onequestion

Your talking to a rock he will argue in circles.

My logic is not circular, it is quite clear in its simplicity.

It's a principle I would pay someone what I could because I'm not selfish and greedy. If I can't have employees and pay them reasonably I would just do the work myself.

Which is your prerogative. Just as it should be mine to negotiate, as an adult, with another adult about what we both feel is fair compensation for services rendered.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I agree with you there, Charles SHOULD be making informed decisions about his finances. But a lot of folks just aren't financially "smart", and a good number are downright dumb.

un-ironically, it's usually these people who need the minimum wage jobs. You're absolutely correct, in that it's none of your damn business whether charles can live on the salary you give him. But that kind of thinking is cold and mechanical.

If you're fine with being a cold, mechanical person, then that's on you I guess.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

I agree with you there, Charles SHOULD be make informed decisions about his finances. But a lot of folks just aren't financially "smart", and a good number are downright dumb.

Then they need to educate themselves. This is, after all, basic math.

un-ironically, it's usually these people who need the minimum wage jobs. You're absolutely correct, in that it's none of your damn business whether charles can live on the salary you give him. But that kind of thinking is cold and mechanical.

If you're fine with being a cold, mechanical person, then that's on you I guess.

Am I cold and mechanical when I negotiate with the produce vendor for the lowest price? Or the seafood vendor to get a better price on lobsters? Or my insurance representative for an enhanced rate on my coverage?