Do you think the Federal minimum wage should be $15 per hour?

[Omaha Steve]

59 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Time expired
	YES Get these workers out of the poverty level and off public assistance!!!
	46 (78%)
	NO
	8 (14%)
	NO because my $1 menu item might go up a nickle
	0 (0%)
	NO because that just ain't right
	0 (0%)
	Other please explain
	0 (0%)
	undecided
	0 (0%)
	Just HELL YES!
	4 (7%)
	YES because I would get a raise
	1 (2%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[randome]

1. If that happens, the economy will go boom! (In a good way.)

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[RadicalGeek]

2. Try Telling That

To the folks who have been convinced by the media mouthpieces of the "%1" that it would harm the economy.

As they down Natty Ices in their double-wides!

[delete_bush]

41. It would certainly be a boost for the housing market

Linda and Paul somehow managed to get their high school diplomas, but just didn't have the desire (nor the grades, finished in the bottom 20% of their class) to further their education.

Instead, they're both going to work for Burger King, where their combined income of $60,000 will allow them to purchase a 4 bed, 3.5 bath, 2,710 sq ft house like this...



Not bad for a starter home, and they'll have plenty left at the end of the month for a new car! And more!

[Ghost in the Machine]

88. Where is that house located? In Miami, with the size of the land it appears to have, that would be

a $350,000 (or more) house. When my grandfather bought his first house in Miami back in the 50's, he paid less than $20,000 for it, It was a single level, 3 br/2 ba on a 1/4 acre lot.

When he sold it in 2002, he got $160,000 for it! The only thing he ever did to the house was put a new roof on it and solar panels for the hot water heater. Oh, and my Uncle and I tiled the kitchen and bathroom floors and resurfaced the cabinets.

I framed some houses in Miami in the mid to late 80's, and one that size went for about $250,000 back then... with just a 1/4 acre lot! I've also built houses in Georgia that were $250,000 homes that would have cost over a MILLION in Miami. These were 3 story houses ( 2 stories on top of a full basement ) sitting on 5 acre lots.

It's amazing how location affects the prices of homes... I know it blew *my* mind, anyways.

Peace,

Ghost

[delete_bush]

94. For whatever reason, I choose

Cedar Rapids Iowa, with a 3-county population of 250,000. I looked at cities over 100,000 population that are not considered part of a larger metro area, trying to keep it real.

The house in question I found on Zillow, sales price of around $300,000.

"Odell custom built 2 story sits high atop a quiet cul de sac, nestled on just over a 1/2 acre lot over looking woods and nature. This home boasts over 3600 square feet and has two fireplaces, a main floor den, granite kitchen counters, stainless appliances, solid wood doors, a screen porch, sound system, and numerous custom built-ins in lower level family room. Lower level offers plenty of space for in home gym or pool table as well as a 5th nonconforming bedroom.... All of this on a private street near Cedar Rapids Country Club."

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/822-Augusta-Dr-SE-Cedar-Rapids-IA-52403/73091518_zpid/

[Ghost in the Machine]

98. Thank you, and my bad... I thought the post said that house was only $60,000 when in actuality

you said the $60,000 combined income of the couple would allow them to purchase the home. That should teach me to read and post while half awake!


Peace,

Ghost

[marym625]

101. I am confused as to your point

If they're making $60k a year, combined, assuming they have the same pay, they're making just under $15 per hour.

Qualifying for a mortgage with that salary means they either have a ton of money to put down or they're not going to have the money to keep up the house. It is highly unlikely they would qualify for a mortgage much over $140k.

[delete_bush]

110. Not to get too technical, because

that was not my intent, but I punched in $60K on several "how much house can I afford" and the results were around $285,000. Assuming 10% down, a mortgage payment on $270,000 with taxes etc. was around $1,700/month. Considering the Burger King couple will take home after taxes around $4,100, they'll have enough left for other obligations. If you're concerned about "upkeep", I'll put them in a new house instead, doesn't change the overall point.

Now whether or not an 18 year old can qualify in the traditional sense, meaning they would not have any longevity on the job nor perhaps any credit history, the fact remains that in a financial sense they in fact DO qualify.

[marym625]

112. The reality is

That figure does not include taxes and insurance and qualifying someone that has a bring home pay of (what would be closer to $3600 per month) for a mortgage alone of $1700 would be exactly what was done that caused so many to lose their homes. With fabulous credit and 10% down with $60k, combined income they would be lucky to qualify for a $200k home.

And what the hell would be bad about that?

[delete_bush]

120. The figure DOES include taxes and insurance

The monthly principal/interest on a $270,000 loan at 4% is $1,289.

How did you calculate "bring home" pay?

Married filing jointly on $60K seems to around $5K to the feds, SS/Med would be $4,600, giving a monthly take home of $4,200. I threw in an extra $100 for other taxes which may or may not apply. I'm really don't care if the Burger King Couple lives in Iowa or Texas, so state and other income taxes are rather arbitrary.

Are you in the mortgage loan business?

The multiple sources I looked at indicated that a $60,000 income with no outstanding debt would qualify for a $285,000 loan. There are plenty of sites out there coming up with the same general number so I have to ask you're just guessing.

[marym625]

123. I was in the mortgage

Business and I never would qualify someone for more than they could really afford. Your monthly mortgage should not be more than 1/4 of your monthly take home pay.

I don't know where you live but most places with income tax of much more than $100. If you actually figured it out, you're closer to a bring home pay of $3319. per month. That's married filing jointly.

To think anyone making $15 per hour would be debt free but even if they were, that kind of mortgage would be insane. Since in your scenario these people are kids, 18, to assume a child would not be in the near future, as a lender, would be irresponsible. Maybe someone that works for JPMORGAN.

Regardless of all that, what would be wrong with 2 people working 40 hours a week at a thankless, more than likely unbenefited job, having a decent home? In a decent area in Chicago, that would be a small place.

People used raise a family and put the kids through college and have a decent home on one income. That is impossible now. Burger King, Jimmy Johns, McDonald's, etc, have more than enough profit to pay their employees a decent wage. Jimmy John's won't even include benefits for managers.

Your argument against the wage because you believe it might allow them to buy a decent home is reprehensible to me.

[delete_bush]

127. It must have been awhile since you were in

the business, because the current measurement appears to be the 28/36 rule, which is applied to gross income.

I don't know where you live but most places with income tax of much more than $100. If you actually figured it out, you're closer to a bring home pay of $3319. per month. That's married filing jointly.


I actually did figure it out, and I gave you the numbers. If you're going to dispute them then break it down, and please feel free to correct me. I also mentioned they could also live in TX, which doesn't have a state income tax. Not that at this point it means anything.

It's not that I'm against them buying a decent home, in a perfect world everyone could have an ocean view or live on a mountain or whatever. I support an increase in the federal minimum wage, but not to $15.00, which I believe would be highly inflationary and cost jobs. There is too much variation in the cost of living from region to region, urban, rural, etc. If states and local districts want to go higher, as many have, let them vote on it.

[marym625]

128. Not that long

What I said was "should be" and stated qualifying someone for more than that is wrong. It was a good guideline because it's realistic. Hence the unbelievable number of foreclosures in this country. I left because of the push to qualify people for more than they should because the banks bet on people to lose their homes. And nothing in that practice has changed.

I will happily share how I came to the bring home pay but will have to do it tomorrow. I am no longer near a computer. But with 7.65% SS&MEDICARE, $7800 deduction, the tax was well over $5k. Plus a 3% State tax, assuming they live in almost any State in the union.

You might want to read some studies by economists on how a minimum wage increase helps the economy. Also on what it would be now if it grew as it should have with inflation and productivity.

Before the corporate welfare and monopolies, with outrageous and egress bonuses to C level employees, the idea that a corporation will hurt because it paid its employees a living wage was a non issue. Just like all the bs about companies having to close and raise their prices if the ACA was enacted, the argument that a $15 per hour minimum wage will hurt the economy is just plain wrong.

http://www.rdwolff.com/content/minimum-wage-blog

http://www.creators.com/liberal/david-sirota/dont-pity-the-billionaire.html

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/yellow/54944/more-evidence-to-support-a-minimum-wage-increase

http://www.nationalmemo.com/gops-minimum-wage-hysteria-overblown/

http://www.rdwolff.com/content/global-capitalism-june-2014-monthly-update

[delete_bush]

130. The "national memo" link

references the proposed $10.10 minimum wage, NOT anything close to $15/hr. To wit....

"The Congressional Budget Office projected on Tuesday that raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour would “reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers".

First, the CBO does not flatly claim that raising the minimum wage will kill 500,000 jobs. Rather, it projects that a $10.10 minimum wage would contract employment by somewhere between a “very slight decrease” and 1 million workers — 500,000 is the CBO’s best guess on where the total number of job losses will fall, but many economists disagree.

$15/hour is 50% more than $10.10, which in my opinion would be a complete disaster. Regardless, the article addresses $10.10/hour, and even at that level with mixed results. I can only imagine the results of the larger amount, could not be positive.

[marym625]

132. You realize you just did exactly what the GOP did?

Last edited Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:25 AM - Edit history (1)

Did you finish reading it? 98% of those affected would have a increased benefit. And that's even if the report is correct. Most economists disagree and believe the benefit would be greater.

[delete_bush]

134. I did nothing of the sort.

I support the $10 wage, they don't. Did you even bother to read my response?

The "national memo" link references the proposed $10.10 minimum wage, NOT anything close to $15/hr. To wit....

"The Congressional Budget Office projected on Tuesday that raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour would “reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers".

$15/hour is 50% more than $10.10, which in my opinion would be a complete disaster. Regardless, the article addresses $10.10/hour

I stated in an earlier post that I support an increase in the federal minimum wage, just not to the $15.00 level.

[marym625]

136. I did read your post

And I did read that you support some increase. But you didn't address the fact, that even if the CBO report is correct, 98% of those affected would be affected positively, and so would the economy.

The minimum wage should be with inflation, productivity increases, just under $15 per hour. There is no reason to believe that minimum wage growing along with the economy would do harm to the economy. $10 per hour might do a little good but not what is needed. The idea that pulling people out of poverty would hurt the economy makes no sense.

The average gap between highest and lowest paid employees is 331 times. (Edited - I said it incorrectly 1st) That's insane. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/4/15/executive-pay-compensationceoworkerratio.html

Even in smaller, family owned companies, that is the trend.

[delete_bush]

137. I must not be explaining this properly...

1). The report you are referring to uses $10.10 as the minimum wage
2) Yes, the report DID in fact state what you posted
3) The report DID NOT address what would happen at $15.00 (the results would be completely different)
4) Therefore, it would be senseless to address that for which there is no information

[merrily]

3. I voted yes.

However, understand as well that employers are not going to take a hit when the minimum wage increases. They are going to pass the increase along to the public (and maybe more than just the increase). They even passed increased fuel costs onto us, let alone a wage increase.

So, while the lowest paid workers will get some relief, they will, like the rest of us, be paying more for things produced by minimum wage workers.

I don't know how to avoid the "one pocket fatter, the other pocket thinner" outcome.

[gratuitous]

19. How much of the cost is worker wages?

People seem to think that if the guy flipping burgers back there on the flat top is getting $7 more an hour, that will directly result in a burger that costs $7 more. But the cost of the finished burger is determined by a number of factors independent of what the guy with the spatula makes. Your 99 cent burger might go up to $1.29, but probably more likely to $1.09. You'll see prices go up faster and stay up longer with a spike in fuel prices.

Also, when the guy flipping burgers has more disposable income, he will be more able to patronize other business establishments, goosing their sales and bottom lines. He might even have a better attitude at work, and flip 12 burgers in the time it now takes him to flip 10.

[merrily]

21. Not the point I was making.

There is not necessarily a direct and penny for penny correlation between the reason people cite to justify price increases and an increase in workers' wages.

For example, if you're buying coffee or sugar, they may cite bad weather in South America. Do I think every sugar supplier increases exactly to account for the bad weather and nothing more while they are at it? No, I don't. Do I notice that the price always goes down the following year, when the weather is perfect growing weather? No, I don't. (Ditto quietly changing sizes from say 16 oz to 14 oz for the same price, or even more.)

Also, I was not so much concerned about the cost of my burger or my purchases as the cost of their burger*--and everything ele they buy that might go up in price. Minimum wage laws do not apply only to fast food employees and burgers are not the only things that may increase in price.

Thank heaven or my lucky stars or whatever, I am not going to have to do without if everything I buy goes up a few cents. I am not so sure about them, though, especially minimum wage workes with big families.

*i could have been clearer: When I said one pocket fatter, one pocket thinner, I was talking about two pocket of the same person. The income pocket would be thicker because of an increase in minimum wage, but the expenditures pocket of that same individual would be thinner because they would be paying more for the same purchases.

[Laelth]

37. No, not the point you were making, no.

Instead, it was the point you might want to hear. In fast food, for example, labor accounts for about 20% of cost, so one could double the minimum wage and increase the price of a hamburger by 20%. In this case, the owners would make the same amount of profit, but their employees would have double the money to spend. It would work similarly across the economy. Doubling the minimum wage will make the cost of good and services go up, but the cost should not double (or even nearly double) Across the board, one might expect a 33% increase in the cost of goods and services, while millions of people will have twice as much money to spend. We would all be richer as a result.

Note, however, that education is an exception. At the elementary and secondary levels, payroll accounts for nearly 90% of the cost of keeping schools open. A wage increase, therefore, would dramatically increase the cost of primary and secondary education.

-Laelth

[merrily]

43. Why do you think I would I want to hear it? Nothing in any of my posts suggests

that I think increasing minimum wage is going to increase the actual cost of a burger by all that much, if at all. My point was that not all increases are based on reality. And, I am not worried whether costs to me increase or not. Either way, I won't do without. And either way, I favor an increase in minimum wage and hope it is more than $15.


I am aware of what both you and gratuitous said and was trying to make a different point entirely.

[Laelth]

45. Cool. Sorry. n/t

-Laelth

[merrily]

46. No need to apologize. Misreading intent on a message board is easy.

Next time, I may well misread a post of yours and you will fill me in on what you really meant.

[Politicalboi]

27. Government could give businesses tax breaks

For about 5 years till it settles in. And MAKE businesses not gouge their customers if they use the tax break.

[merrily]

29. No thanks. They get enough tax breaks as it is.

I am of the view that if you really cannot afford to pay your employees minimum wage, you should make more money or re-think the viability of your business plan.

There is no reason the taxpayer has to subsidize Burger King, any more that there is a reason why the Taxpayer has to subsidize WalMart.

Besides no matter how many tax breaks and incentives they get, it's never enough. If it's cheaper for them to offshore and they can, they will. If it's cheaper for them to move to Canada, they will. It's not about breaking even or making a modest profit. It's about making as much as they think they can.

For example, Massachusetts gave Fidelity Investments millions and Fidelity still moved out of the state. It's never enough.

[upaloopa]

34. If you give workers more money they will spend it.

There is no need to pass on increased cost to customers. Costco is the best example I can think of and Walmart is the worse.
On edit: cities with Walmarts pay more in social service costs then ones without. Those who pay poorly pass extraneous costs on to you so in effect you are screwed and you have no say in the matter.

[merrily]

36. I agree there is no need, yet it happens all the time.

Please don't get me wrong: I fully support an increase, and to more than $15 an hour, if lawmarkers can manage to pass it.

[upaloopa]

38. Businesses compete for customers using

pricing and quality. A manufacturer who has loyal happy employees has lower costs because of less non value added things that add cost.
I have been a controller of several manufacturing companies.

[merrily]

40. Also true, yet many employers don't pay enough to make employees loyal and happy.

And many increase prices more than they need to. Oil companies are famous for it, citing "supply and demand."

Pharmaceutical companies, also famous for it.

[upaloopa]

44. That's because they control the supply of needed

products. The have little competition.
Now an alternative to high gas prices is a Ford hybrid. Ford has a profit sharing program.
What you are saying was said to Henry Ford when he raised wages to $5 a day. He said he wasn't losing money he was creating customers.
I think I heard it said that no minimum wage increase has ever hurt the economy.

[merrily]

47. What do you think I am saying that was said to Ford?

[upaloopa]

50. All the other car makers said they would have

to pay $5 just to get workers and that cost would have to be passed on to the customer and it would kill their business. Henry did not raise prices and when it was pointed out that he was losing money on each car he called the losses investments in his workers. He went on to create a moving assembly line and further lowered prices and costs. The only thing he did wrong business wise was to keep building the Model T when the competition was building more modern cars.

[merrily]

51. Thanks for the info, but you did not answer my question.

I did not say employers would HAVE to pass the minimum wage on to customers.

I said they might do so, even if they had no reality-based reason to do so. I don't think other auto manufacturers said that to Ford. Not so anyone would find out about it, anyway.

[upaloopa]

52. Ok I got it

[merrily]

54. Great.

I must not have been clear because gratuitous and Laelth had the same impression of my posts as you did.

I am totally FOR an increase. Also, I am not worried about my own buying power. I won't do without.

I just worry that, in the end, an increase of say $10 in increase would not mean another $10 in buying power for minimum wage workers.

[delete_bush]

61. Do you have a link for your assertion

that he was "losing money on each car"? The only source I found stated that Ford's profits increased from $30M to $60M between 1914 and 1916.

[upaloopa]

63. It is from a biography that is on Netflix

[delete_bush]

69. So this is from your memory.

I did find that total production in 1913 was 170,000+ units, 1914 was 202,000+ units, 1915 was 308,000, and 1916 was 501,000. Based on these numbers, I rather doubt Ford was losing money.

They had 14,000 employees, and the $5/day was not paid to everyone. In fact half of it appears to be a form of profit-sharing, which had to be earned. In order to partake in the profit sharing, the employees were subject to the company's "Social Department", which made visits to their homes to ensure they were not heavy drinkers, gamblers, etc.

[upaloopa]

77. I heard it or read it. If that is a bad thing too bad

I don't come here to fight

[delete_bush]

95. I come here to hopefully learn something.

I checked sources and responded. Sorry if this is a bad thing.

[LanternWaste]

117. The number cited is also refered to in 'Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jung

The number cited above is also refered to in 'Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jungle City' by Greg Grandin

[Taitertots]

59. The "passed on to consumers" view misses several key concepts

The simple way of explaining it is to say:
If increasing prices increased profits, then prices would have already increased. Even when a factor price increases, the profit maximizing price doesn't necessarily increase.

If businesses could pass the cost (maybe more) onto the consumer, big business would support it.

[merrily]

62. Please see my reply 51 to upaloopa and my reply 43 to Laelth.

I am not sure what it was in my wording that is causing so many people to misunderstand what I meant in that post by so much.

[delete_bush]

67. I disagree

"If increasing prices increased profits, then prices would have already increased. "

Prices, especially in the fast food industry, are EXTREMELY price sensitive. The big corps know this, which is why they're always tweaking their offerings and price structure. Look at McDonald's "dollar menu". Check the signage plastered on the windows of Carl's Jr/Burger King. They always consider the effect of pricing on units sold, and take prices to whichever level has the best effect on the bottom line.

For example, there is the effect of substitute awareness. What is the availability of substitute products? If buyers are aware of competing products offered for less, they will consider changing their buying habits. Especially today, when price comparison data is available in seconds, it is much easier for consumers to identify alternative products and compare features and price.

[Taitertots]

68. But do you agree that minimum wage increases wouldn't be directly passed to consumers?

You are looking at an over simplification outside of the context of the discussion.

[delete_bush]

71. I will say that for some enterprises this will

not be the case, yes. Unfortunately, they will more than likely be the large corps, because they can take the short term hit, but not the little guy (the one I'm rooting for).

Take the owner of a sandwich franchise, for example. Here are the real numbers for an existing business.

Sales = $570,000
Wages = $130,000
Net to working owner = $70,000

I'm not sure of the average wage, but let's be generous and say it's $10.00 per hour. An increase to $15.00 per hour would increase the cost of labor to $195,000, an increase of $65,000. Without increasing prices, the owner, who invested over $300,000 to build the place, will now take home $5,000 per year.

So tell me his choices, and the effect each will have on the landscape.

[Hippo_Tron]

73. What sandwich franchise has 6 employees working over 40 hours a week?

I worked in an extremely busy pizza joint where during dinner rush we had 5 people in the kitchen, 3 cooks, 1 dishwasher, 1 manager. Most hours of the day it was 1-2 cooks and a manager.

If your sandwich shop owner is keeping 6 employees busy for 40 hours a week, he's making more than $70k.

[delete_bush]

75. In my example,

the percentage of labor to sales was 23%, which is on the low side. I seriously doubt you can refute this with anything more than anecdotal evidence.

"Labor is typically among the highest costs restaurant owners incur. According to a 2010 study by the National Restaurant association, the typical full-service restaurant spends about a third of its sales revenue on labor, including front- and back-of house-positions. Limited-service restaurants such as fast-food outfits have lower average labor cost percentages, spending less than 30 percent of their income on payroll."

[link:http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/normal-restaurants-labor-cost-percentage-13115.html|

[Hippo_Tron]

81. By your own admission, you're not sure of the average wage and just set it at $10

And does your article state that 23% is "on the low side" for a non full service restaurant.

[taught_me_patience]

83. His example is extremely conservative

High sales and a low % for wages. This owner would make any money but would be able to keep the doors open. Most would fold quick because their labor is much higher.

[delete_bush]

97. I set the average wage at what I consider to be

a conservative level. Most posters are stating that a restaurant will be doubling their wages if they go to $15 per hour, I only increased them buy 50%, allowing for perhaps a few higher paid employees at the management level. Perhaps you have better data?

The industry average for labor at fast food restaurants is around 26%. You will find very few that are below 23%. I have a ton of experience in analyzing these numbers, but try Googling if you care to disprove what I know to be true.

[taught_me_patience]

82. Add up the hours

Open 12 hours means 14 hours per day.

Most will have 2 people on shift at all times and 3 during lunch... which means 35 man hours/day. That is 12,700 man hours/year, or approx 130k at $9/hr+15% for taxes and workers comp.

[Hippo_Tron]

85. Lunch lasts for 7 hours?

[taught_me_patience]

80. Wages at 23% of sales?

Extremely low. I'd venture to guess that wages would be closer to 30-35% of sales for a typical sandwich/coffee/fast food shop. Also... 570k in sales is A LOT of sandwiches. I'd venture to guess most "subway" franchises gross less than this. A $15/hr minimum wage would completely and totally decimate a typical sandwich shop (or a coffee shop).

I own a coffee shop and would be out of business within 2 months if I had to pay $15/hr without significantly raising prices.

[delete_bush]

92. I was being conservative with the numbers...

as you're well aware, the effect on the bottom line of the owner worsens as the percentage increases.

And I'm sure you're spot on with your statement that that most "subway" franchises gross less than this. In my experience in dealing with the industry, it's not uncommon for a Subway franchisee to own five locations, most of which are doing $400k or less. This allows enough revenue to hire a roving manager to make the rounds of all stores. Even at this, they're hardly raking in the big bucks. Subway is notorious for overpopulating areas with locations, keeping the per store revenues down for the individual franchisees.

[taught_me_patience]

109. Exactly, you gave a great realistic and conservative example

of a small business with great sales and running efficiently. The impact to net profit of a $15/hr min is dramatic.

[delete_bush]

115. It's good to hear from someone who

has real experience with running a small food service business. I'm sure you have loyal customers who would stay with you should you be forced to raise prices, but there are others who might go elsewhere, not come as often, etc., not to mention the increased difficulty in obtaining new customers. Starbucks and the other biggies out there can weather a storm like this, in fact it's good for them in the long run if they force more independents out of business.

And if you can't raise prices to cover the additional costs, then another option is to get rid of some of your staff or work even longer hours yourself. The good thing is that the minimum wage at the federal level will increase, but nowhere near $15. This should be a state/local issue. Too many differences in the cost of living from coastal to urban to rural etc.

[Eleanors38]

141. "Pass increase," or just maybe compete with pricing.

[MANative]

4. From productivity gains alone...

some economists have estimated that it should be more like $22/hour.

From 2012: http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage1-2012-03.pdf

[Lochloosa]

5. I ws just about to post no for this very reason. Beat me to it.

[MANative]

6. Great minds...

[Go Vols]

23. +1

[freshwest]

65. $15 now gives people the ability to lobby for $22. As it is, their lives are chaotic and they can't.

[fadedrose]

7. maximum wage permissable is what's needed

When profits are at an all-time high, and those at the top are getting them by squeezing their workers paychecks, it's time to control how much profit a person can make.

And tax those making an all-time high at the same rate as those in the middle and lower classes....

[Half-Century Man]

8. Actually I like $15.50

It rolls off your tongue, would sound great as a chant.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

9. I feel the same

about $20.20.

[Heidi]

10. Other: _At least_ $15 per hour. (nt)

[JustAnotherGen]

11. I went with hell yes

Because a lot of people DON'T get public assistance yet teeter on poverty.

I think we worry about 'prices' rising - but if we pay people enough money to buy the products they sell - we will all win.

[freshwest]

66. Not only that, but the reductionists who oppose the raise because they make more will get one, too.

And dammit, it's the right thing to do!

[leftstreet]

14. +1

[TBF]

64. ^^ this nt

[uppityperson]

12. If minimum wage were to raise to $15/hour, would other wages also rise accordingly?

I agree that most all wages need to be raised, but was wondering how it would all work. Thanks.

[jamzrockz]

13. K&R

[KamaAina]

15. In a few years.

Hike it by a buck or two each year until we get there. That would ease some of the pressure on the mom 'n' pops; McDonald's could swallow that right now, but Rosie's Diner or whatever couldn't, all at once.

[JaneyVee]

16. Perhaps $15/hr in city $12/hr suburban?

Im all for $15/hr minimum wage, especially in cities.

[jwirr]

17. If they are going to talk about a living wage then it should definitely be that much.

[FSogol]

18. Voted yes, but it should be higher than $15. n/t

[Omaha Steve]

22. A rising tide....

What makes you think they will get overtime? They don't get it now. Most don't get over 32 hrs per week.

Is there a better way to argue for a raise for teacher's?

OS

[NightWatcher]

24. I'm in favor of a rising tide, just not a tsunami

Jumping to nearly double overnight in some states would be quite disruptive in my opinion.

Plus, I'm on disability and if it jumped to 15 an hour I'd be receiving about one third what a burger flipper makes. I paid in to the system, worked hard, and followed the rules before being struck down to chump change. Let's start making across the board raises to follow cost of living.

[Laelth]

32. If you can find a mecahnism ...

... that would allow the United States Congress to force across-the-board wage increases, I will gladly listen and I might be happy to aid you in accomplishing that goal. As it stands, however, the minimum wage is about the only mechanism we have to address this issue, and I think Congress should use it.

-Laelth

[cascadiance]

33. We need to make sure that COLA is adjusted properly for SS and get rid of H-1B too...

Yes, not just minimum wage up to $15 (which is a GOOD first step!), but finding ways to rebuild the middle class across the board. That comes with getting rid of these "guest worker" programs (aka indentured servant programs) like H-1B and H-2B which take away more workers' rights and lower average salaries, etc. too for the rest of us.

If companies want to hire foreign workers, they should be willing to ante up for green cards, etc. for these workers, and let them work alongside domestic workers with the same rights and therefore salary demands to keep salaries from dropping in the toilet. And that would help us be able to organize unions more too, if green card holders, as opposed to other "guest workers" have the rights to vote and be members of unions too. Start reverting back to the tax rates before Reagan too.

The right wing keeps telling us that prices are all going to go up if this happens. Well, I'd rather have a job and/or higher salaries that dwarf the amount of extra costs I might have for a FEW things that I buy outside of rent, insurance, and other things that HAVE and ARE increasing more than our salaries are. And if those at the top that will get lower income with more taxes and have to pay a little more for day to day expenses, well I don't have any sympathy for them, since they've been stealing from us for years with the wealth redistribution that's gone on towards the top for the last 30 years.

[leftstreet]

39. Teachers have a union. 'Burger flippers' don't n/t

[Omaha Steve]

58. Some states forbid teachers being in a union

Just to keep it honest.

[merrily]

48. The thing to do is raise teachers' salaries not keep the min. wage

where it is.

[NightWatcher]

55. that's what I said, slowly raise everyone, just don't double overnight

[merrily]

57. I never said slowly.

A raise for teachers earning 37000 is long overdue. Ditto a significant increase in the minimum wage. I would not recommend slow action for things that are long overdue.

[Starry Messenger]

70. Adjuncts make about as much as fast-food workers.

This world has already arrived. I'm happy to support raising wages in fast food--more wages circulating in the economy will give more money to local economies, which will translate into better school funding, allowing teachers to bargain for higher wages.

[Scootaloo]

78. A "burger flipper's" time and labor should be keyed by some other profession's pay?

Have you ever worked in the food industry, NightWatcher, or are you just repeating myopic right-wing anti-labor memes because they sound funny?

[NightWatcher]

84. I worked at Burger King, McD's, Blimpie, Ruby Tuesday...

I paid my way through school rarely making more than minimum wage. I even started down the road towards teaching.

I've served. I've worked. I climbed up a few ladders. I worked to levels that yes, we're worth more than the labor of others and myself at that time.

Everyone needs a raise. I only suggested that doubling minimum wage overnight might not be the place to start.

Oh, and don't insinuate I fall back on right wing talking points. You don't know what you're talking about.

[Scootaloo]

87. I know exactly what I'm talking about.

Your disdain for the notion of people you dismiss and trivialize as "burger-flippers" receiving a livable wage comes out loud and sure.

You're worth more? Okay. Go raise your own cow. Kill your own cow. Process your own cow. Then cook your own fucking hamburger. because you have just deemed that everyone in that chain, from bovine to burger, from field to frier, to fat fucking face, is less deserving of a living wage than your fine exalted self. So you had best get your ass in gear to demonstrate your superiority over these greedy takers, hadn't you?

Alternately, maybe try not measuring your own sense of self-worth according to how much greater your paycheck is than someone else's?

[NightWatcher]

102. Wow, so much wrong.

I do not have disdain for people who work in the fast food industry. I noted that I worked in several of these as well as other food service positions making minimum wage throughout school.

I suggested that people who go to school for an education or training or gain years of experience in a field are worth more than entry level employees. To suggest that everyone's labor should be paid the same rate is laughable. I also nowhere suggested that everyone in the fast food supply chain is less deserving than myself.

Do you honestly think that someone who has worked a month at a McDonalds should make the same as a teacher who went to college for four years?

I never called anyone a greedy taker.

I merely suggested up-thread that we should not double minimum wage overnight so that minimum wage employees make the same or more than teachers who have spent at least four years in college. I suggested that YES, we need to raise wages, but that it be done over the course of a year or two so that everyone's wage is brought on par with where we should be based on cost of living.

I can assure you that I make less than everyone here on this board. I am a stay at home dad and on disability. I have never made more than 80K a year back before I became sick. That I made more than minimum wage did not mean that I was worth more as a human than anyone else. I did suggest that my labor, having had six years of school, training, and experience is worth more than the labor of someone who had an entry level minimum wage job, with no experience.

Do you think that everyone should make the same wage regardless of education, training, experience and skill level? If you say yes, you are kidding yourself, because nowhere in the real world does this happen. If you say yes, you validate what I was saying.

There's no need to get nasty as this is a civil discussion board.

[justiceischeap]

100. It's not the "burger flippers" fault

that there is inequity in pay rates. If you have a problem with wage inequity, don't take it out on the service industry.

You show a slight disdain for the working-class which is sad because the working class deserve a living wage. In the DC area $15/hr is still not a living wage. My roommates and I pay $22k a year just for rent and we don't live in some fancy high rise.

[NightWatcher]

103. Where is the idea that I have distain for minimum wage employees coming from?

I used a term I heard on Thom Hartmann's show. I was a burger flipper for years.

[justiceischeap]

108. It was in your comment you've since deleted

The assertion that service industry workers shouldn't make as much as someone who has a degree. I agree that people with degrees generally make more money but it isn't an entitlement.

Wages in this country are not keeping pace with the economy and cost of living--and that's for most professions (unless you're a CEO).

[Orrex]

105. That's the most common argument against raising minimum wage, and it's misguided

What you are presenting is an argument that teachers should earn more, and you're 100% correct.

However, that's not an argument that "burger flippers" should make less than a living wage.


That's the sneaky strategy of the Right, by the way: they urge us to devalue the work of others so that we accept their low wages and thereby deny us the leverage to raise our own.

[NightWatcher]

106. I said work up to it and not just double overnight.

I'm deleting my original post because everyone thinks I'm saying to shit on minimum wage employees, which I'm not.

[Orrex]

107. Delete if you like, but I don't think you're shitting on anyone

It's just that the argument you presented is the same one that's always used to justify a decades-long freeze on the real value of minimum wage.

We're all victims of the larger strategy to keep the peasants fighting for scraps.

[Go Vols]

25. I had to vote no

I was making $15 per hour,+ bonuses, over 30 years ago and got by pretty good.

I would think $22-$25 would be close to right for a minimum wage today.

[Lars39]

28. Agreed! It should be higher.

[delete_bush]

60. $25/hour? Now you're talking!

With an income of $100,000, Paul and Linda, 18 year old high school grads with no desire to further their education (see post #41), can now afford to move up to a 4 bedroom, 4 bath 3-car garage house with over 4,900 square feet!

[link:|

[jamzrockz]

79. Like anyone is going to

give 2 18 yr old an employment opportunity when they will literally have experienced, college educated working hands banging down their door looking for a job. The question people should be asking is what happened to the factory jobs, the jobs that used to sustain the middle class. Or maybe why inflation is so high.

But no, we want to rebuilt the middle class on the backs of fast food jobs and service job workers. I do want people to make a living wage but I think this is the wrong way to do it.

[delete_bush]

96. Bingo!

I'm extremely disappointed in the apparent lack of this administration's interest in bringing those good, traditional middle class jobs back home. There are always going to be those who are not cut out for the type of job for which a college education provides, so let's deal with this.

If we need x million manufacturing jobs to sustain our workforce, then figure out which ones impact the environment the least, if this is the concern, and go for it. To hell with our trade agreements, change or ignore them. Germany seems to have this great system of transitioning high school students who have a tendency for "blue collar" work to apprentice with companies such as Mercedes et al, which leads to possible employment after graduation. Why can't we do this? I just shake my head in disgust.

[Go Vols]

91. Yep

That's what we used to call the middle class.
Only one adult had to work, as to let the other stay home, run the home,raise the kids,ect.
Further education means just what it says,you get smarter.

[Nite Owl]

26. It should be much higher than that

Maybe $20

[Adam051188]

30. doesn't really matter

human rights/social welfare is as close to a lost cause as you can get in china, the u.s., most of africa, parts of latin america, and most of the middle east.

highest number of billionaires in the world, by far. highest childhood poverty rate in the developed world, by far. that's the united states. what does that tell you?

[Laelth]

31. k&r for labor. n/t

-Laelth

[conservaphobe]

35. Not only do I think it should be $15 an hour, I think it should be a goddamned litmus test. nt

[merrily]

49. +1

[baldguy]

42. Minimum Wage Would Be $21.72 If It Kept Pace With Increases In Productivity

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/13/minimum-wage-productivity_n_2680639.html

The simple fact is that workers should be paid more because they're worth more!

[temporary311]

53. This is why i voted no.

It should be 20. 15 isn't a bad start, though.

[PeteSelman]

56. No.

It should be around $22.50 or so if wages kept up with inflation and top salaries.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

72. If nothing else, I'd like sub minimum for restaurant servers raised to 5.50

I'd certainly support $15. Any number north of the President's $10.10 (IIRC) would be good.

Here's what I'd really like, however: I'd like whatever minimum number we agree upon to be indexed to inflation and adjusted every two years. I will even throw this bone to the Republicans: if you'll raise min wage to $15, and agree to bi-annual indexing, I'd agree to the same bi-annual indexing for inflation of the current tax brackets (however, we'll still argue over just how much those brackets should be charged).

[delete_bush]

74. ALL workers should be subject to the same

minimum wage. The exclusion of 'restaurant' workers is not right.

The thinking is that they make "tips" to make up for it. I'd rather decrease the "respectable" amount of the tip. I've traveled in the last few years to France, England, Spain, Brazil, and Africa - in all of these countries the 'expected' tips are much less. Makes much more sense. I also find this promotes the idea that a job in the food service industry is truly a professional calling, not just something one does in between jobs or awaiting the call from Universal Studios.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

76. Realistically, it would take years to change the culture in America -- if it could be done.

In the short run, I'd like to see an increasing number of restaurants on the Panera/Chipotle models of providing quality food without table servers.

I'm not against a sub minimum (I've served and done a little bartending) to encourage good service and promote tips, but only if the realistic expectation is that the servers will take home no less than minimum wage.

If everyone wanted to be honest and above board, and report tips scrupulously, one solution could be sub-minimum with a minimum guarantee. You report your tips for a given shift (say 4 hours) and add that figure to whatever sub minimum ends up being. If you make minimum wage or any figure above that, you keep your tips; anything under minimum -- the employer makes up the difference. However, I suspect strongly that servers would push back. If a server works in a setting in which they make a lot of their tips in cash (which is less and less the case), they are going to report as little as they can get away with and keep the balance as untaxed income.

Yes.. I know they don't tip like we do in Europe and Japan. I've never heard anything bad about service in Japan. Europe......well, I've heard mixed things.

[Luminous Animal]

119. They are in San Francisco. All wait staff are paid at least minimum wage which is $10.74 an hour.

Plus tips.

[delete_bush]

122. I know, I live in CA,

one of only seven states that require employers to pay tipped workers the same minimum wage as nontipped workers. The federal minimum wage for tipped workers has remained stagnate at $2.13 since 1991, with no adjustment for inflation. Repubs are blocking the Minimum Wage Fairness act, which would over time would raise this to 70% of the minimum wage.

[YOHABLO]

86. Just think what that would do for the middle class in this country. It might save us.

[4b5f940728b232b034e4]

89. No

I worked hard to get my pay up to where it is now, and that is more than I make. I don't want to again go back to making minimum wage.

[Bonx]

90. But your boat will rise

or something.

[jamzrockz]

93. But everybody

working for below $15 and millions more making more than $15 will also be asking for a raise. So all those boats rising at the same time will raise the price of good too. That may come out as a wash at the end of the day.

We need to find a way to bring back real $15/hr jobs not trying to artificially turn fast food jobs to middle class creating jobs. We also need to rein in inflation so workers will retain more of their pay once contract is set. Slash our massive defense spending. If this was all it took to lift people out of poverty, then every third world country will just raise their minimum wage to double whatever it is now and enrich their citizens.

[Omaha Steve]

99. This turned into a great thread

I didn't expect this much reaction.

Thank you all.

OS

[Orsino]

104. There would be heavy inflation...

...at least on goods and services predominantly purchased by non-one-percenters. The bastards would do their best to re-extract that raise from all of us.

Let's do it anyway. No one should have to live in fear.

[CreekDog]

113. What do you mean "sorry...". You aren't sorry. Workers deserve a living wage, period.

don't bother us with that, "sorry you don't make enough money from working to eat and survive..."

that's BS.

and teachers should make more than $15/hour anyway.

[Aerows]

116. Well, the poster did discuss anchor stores

Which pretty much means that person hasn't followed an updated business plan in about 30 years, and blames workers on a beleaguered and blighted "mall" plan that started failing a decade and a half ago.

When your business can't shift with the times, you can either change your method of business or just stand around blaming factors that an astute owner would have anticipated.

[alp227]

118. Post has been hidden.

On Fri Sep 5, 2014, 02:10 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

If you think it's just your fast food that would increase you're kidding yourself
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5493212

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

Right wing, judgmental bigotry against working people like "if your still working in fast food and your older than 25 and not in management something went wrong." Also, anti-minimum wage inflation paranoia. Divisive last sentence, "Are fast food workers really worth as much to society than teachers". Easy to say "discuss don't hide" or "it's just an opinion" - but juries are here to enforce ToS that state in part, "right-wingers in general are not welcome here."

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Fri Sep 5, 2014, 02:28 PM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I was going to say leave it and let the replies take down any rightwing astroturf. But then I got to the last part. I think he crossed the line with that bit of mean-spiritedness. Just barely crossed it - but crossed it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry I can't hide this, not enough proof in the post that this is a right winger. Sure they certainly have opinions I don't share but it's really hard to define them as a right wing poster based off that. They could be young and misinformed, I know it took some time for me to really realize how the world works. The poster certainly lacks empathy especially in the sentence the alerter highlighted. I get the alert but I just can't hide the post. Please alert MIRT/admin if you feel this is a troll.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If people who disagree with you are not welcome, then how is discussion possible at all?
Whatever the merits of the argument, it is not stated in a rude nor inappropriate manner and the poster even apologized for disagreeing.

Wow...3 jurors were willing to sympathize with that right wing BS post? Scary how many DUers are willing to allow any opinion to fly that they defeat the purpose of DU in the first place!

[CreekDog]

124. Poster seems to have posted almost exclusively on Israel from the start

and to justify Israeli actions.

ironically, this was one of his few posts that wasn't about Israel.

[CreekDog]

125. his sentiment sounds a lot like this:

Erick Erickson: If You're Earning Minimum Wage In Your 30s, You 'Failed At Life'

ByTom KludtPublishedSeptember 5, 2014, 10:04 AM EDT 6428 views

America's workers: You have until the age of 30 to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and earn more than the minimum wage, lest you want conservative blogger Erick Erickson to deem you a failure.

Filling in has host for Rush Limbaugh's radio show on Thursday, the RedState editor wasn't exactly sympathetic to the fast-food workers who have gone on strike to demand a $15 hourly wage.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/erick-erickson-minimum-wage-thirties-failed

[Aerows]

114. Anchors have dwindled in most places

Now, the biggest anchor, for say McDonald's, is Wal-mart.

It sounded like an intelligent argument until I realized you were using a business model that died out in the early 90's.

SMH. It's this idea that business models never change that boggles my mind.

[Jefferson23]

121. Yep, and yesterday Omaha Steve. K&R

[tridim]

126. Yes, and middle class wages need to rise as well.

[AnalystInParadise]

129. No because if we do that we get this.......

A low paying job is better than being replaced completely by a machine.

http://singularityhub.com/2013/01/22/robot-serves-up-340-hamburgers-per-hour/

[Unvanguard]

131. Eventually, increasing the minimum wage causes unemployment.

This is obvious. Just think about what would happen if you raised it to $100/hour.

We don't know what point that is, however. Most of the evidence suggests that the minimum wage increases that actually happen have little to no impact on employment. So increasing the federal minimum wage is a good idea, and in a high-cost city like Seattle, having a municipal minimum wage of $15/hour makes sense too. But I don't know if that makes sense nationally.

There's no question that everyone is entitled to enough to live comfortably, but increasing the minimum wage is not the only way to make that happen.

[marym625]

133. Great post

Very interesting discussion. Sad answers sometimes but certainly interesting. Thanks!

[panader0]

135. Higher

[daredtowork]

138. We need more Federal infrastructure

The invocation of "States Rights" has not resulted in glorious competition leading to better States - it has resulted in States hustling for pork barrel deals in Congress while quietly trying to arrange things so their problems (especially the problem of "poor people&quot get offloaded to other States.

Because of States Rights we have awful inequities in Affordable Care Act coverage. We have ATROCITIES in welfare policy literally designed to create such inhumane conditions that the poor will "drift" somewhere where "suckers" are more generous. And of course we have the uneven minimum wage where every time one place tries to raise it, businesses can easily flee to another place where minimum wage isn't "oppressing" them so much.

For heaven's sake people! Would we really be in danger of encroaching Totalitarianism if we allowed just a little more organized development of a national public services infrastructure? In theory, even in those tiny rural Southern towns, businesses would be able to afford a higher minimum wage if employees were making more money.

I think the trick here is how to raise the minimum wage and essentially raise all these boats together without undermining the value of those wages with a corresponding rise of prices and rent-taking. Both sides of this issue need to be addressed at the same time in order for this to be a real moment of change.

[Iggo]

139. Nope.

$22.00/hr

[delete_bush]

140. Sounds like you've done a lot of

research on the topic. Care to explain to me the effects on the economy of a $22/hour minimum wage?

[Iggo]

142. Nope.

I find your thinly veiled sarcasm as insulting as it was obviously intended to be.

Have a wonderful day.

[delete_bush]

143. My apologies, I took your

succinct and to the point response to mean you are confident about putting forth an amount and defending same. After all, you didn't use $20, not $25, but $22. It wouldn't be out of the question to presume you've honed in on a specific amount.

But if rather it was an off-the-cuff remark, I find THAT to be not only nonchalant but insulting to those who have actually spent the time doing research on the topic and are willing to put forth their arguments. I believe this to be an extremely serious issue with many facets and as such deserves more than an emotional response if one is to be taken seriously. There is a battle looming over this, and I prefer that those who are pushing for an increase are able to present a clear, reasoned approach.

[nomorenomore08]

144. I don't disagree at all, but gradualism will probably be necessary here.

Doubling the nationwide MW overnight would likely be too much of a shock to the economy, whereas incremental increases have been shown to yield mostly positive effects.

[Gormy Cuss]

145. Yes it should, and it should be phased in over several years

and then automatically indexed at regular intervals.