Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama's proposal to raise the minimum wage collides immediately with usual Republican malarkey (171 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Good post. Rubio's statment appears to (34+ / 0-)

    reject the entire concept of the minimum wage, which may resonate in tea party circles, but does not among most Americans.  The Rs are in a box of their own making and cannot get out.  

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 09:11:25 AM PST

    •  They don't want out of the box. (19+ / 0-)

      Which is fine.

      If I could set that box on fire and push it off a cliff into a massive sewer, I'd call in sick to do it.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 09:22:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Because it's an obvious lie (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      renzo capetti, TomP

      businesses can't magically get more work out of people because they have to pay them more.  You can't wring blood from a stone.

    •  And they wonder why the young voters (13+ / 0-)

      turn out for the Dems.  Case in point: Our granddaughter works her butt off at a popular fast food/entertainment establishment.  She also carries 16 college credit hours and has managed to stay on the Deans List.  The kid doesn't complain, she just keeps plugging away to get a good education to better herself. Extra money in her pay check would make her life easier no doubt, but we aren't holding our breath waiting for Bohner to bring it to a vote.  Young folks like our granddaughter pay close attention to just who is on their side.  They talk, and believe me, the Republicans don't have a snow ball's chance in Hades of winning their vote.  The kids don't want a hand out, they just want an even break.

      Don’t argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.—Greg King

      by Pinto Pony on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 10:32:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Some people aren't worth $9/hr (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus

      I'm sorry, but it's true. I am speaking from personal experience as a small business owner. I buy and renovate old houses, a job which requires lots of unskilled labor.

      There are some workers who do not have the education nor experience to be worth $8/hr.  I am not saying that they are not valuable as human beings. I am just saying that a business that pays them $9/hr will not get enough value from their work to be profitable.

      What happens to these guys when we raise the minimum wage?

      Instead of hiring unskilled, young, uneducated guys for $8/hr I must either:

      1) Hire skilled workers instead. They cost 3x as much, but do a better, faster job.

      2) Not renovate that particular house, leaving it vacant, an eyesore, and a drag on the whole neighborhood.

      Either way, it will be poor kids with no skills who lose. (As an aside, this reveals the Minimum Wage for what it really is: A way for the skilled middle-class to price the unskilled poor out of the labor market!)

      We need to improve the condition of poor workers. Nobody who works should be poor. The better way to do this is to have low minimum wages -- but a better safety net.

      All the energy we put into messing with the minimum wage should go into expanding public Healthcare, Education, and the EITC.

      Poor workers need help, but shouldn't all taxpayers be asked to help, not just those who happen to have employees?

      •  Option #3 (12+ / 0-)

        Hire unskilled workers, pay them a living wage and treat them nicely, and retain some of those workers as they become skilled in what you do.

        It's not like there weren't always "unskilled" people (more people go to college and vocational schools now than in the past), but the workforce used to actually TRAIN workers and expect to do that regularly as part of a trade, especially in the kind of jobs you speak of. It's not as though the skills you're speaking of in renovating a house take years to learn or even really months. Some skills are specialized, but you need at least SOME specialized labor for that anyway (electricians, etc) if you don't have the knowhow yourself and even that can be learned relatively quickly.

        •  Doesn't work. (0+ / 0-)

          The workers will take the free training I give them and then go work for someone else. Once they have gotten experience, they have no financial incentive to keep working for me.

          The money I lose training people who will never pay off for me will make my business unprofitable. I will be forced to stop fixing up houses.

          •  Then it's bad industry. (6+ / 0-)

            If you can't pay workers a livable wage, it is not an industry we should build our economy on. Plain and simple.

            But, really, I don't believe what you say is true. I don't see why there isn't someone who, if it paid a good wage, would want to do the work you do. Yes, as people's skills rise, their price should rise some, sure, but most employees don't expect a raise immediately. I also think there's a huge problem with jobs that NEVER pay above minimum wage - again, not the kind of industry or economy we want.

            Multiple data points show that as long as the employer is reliable, good to work for, and paying a good wage for the position employees will stay.

            •  I can pay a living wage... (0+ / 0-)

              ...if I hire expensive, skilled workers. Read Option #1.

              I just can't pay a living wage to unskilled workers.

              •  You renovate houses? (5+ / 0-)

                Then you should only need one "unskilled" person on the jobsite. A laborer. Even laborers need a few skills though, so really, there's no place for an "unskilled" person on your job.
                You complain that you train people and then they leave? Of course they do, since you apparently don't pay any sort of skilled labor wage. There's an old saying - "You get what you pay for."

                The money I lose training people who will never pay off for me will make my business unprofitable. I will be forced to stop fixing up houses.
                I've been in the building trades since the mid-1980s. I've worked both in and outside the union. Everyone I've ever met who had your business model didn't stay in business long.
                Maybe you should hire some union guys, they are trained.

                Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

                by Icicle68 on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:09:20 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Then you need skilled workers. (3+ / 0-)

                Unskilled workers need to either get training (in construction, that's not exactly considerable in most cases and is within just about everyone's grasp if they are physically capable, as unskilled workers would need to be to do it anyway) or do jobs that don't require specific skills, like flipping burgers, etc, then.

                If you CAN hire skilled workers and pay them acceptable amounts for their level of skill, then that is a better business model anyway.

                Most construction companies I've seen that work (my dad and grandfather are both contractors and I've worked for contractors, both residential and commercial, though only in college as side jobs doing their books and hiring and such) have a mix of skilled, certified and unskilled, training workers (apprentices, etc). A guy off the street can become an apprentice fairly easily and gain skills and move up within the same business, usually.

                •  Fine. (0+ / 0-)

                  Raise the minimum wage.

                  I will no longer hire unskilled kids from bad neighborhoods.

                  Instead I will hire pro renovators.

                  You just killed the only job opportunity those kids had.

                  Wonderful.

                  •  Then we need better education in (0+ / 0-)

                    those bad neighborhoods so they have the chance to learn skills. What makes these kids you speak of so unemployable? You haven't really said what they lack.

                    Though I know (and have taught in Title 1 schools) plenty of kids from bad neighborhoods who can and do get minimum wage jobs that won't be replaced by skilled labor or go away - the service industry is where you'll see the most increases and no one is going to do away with jobs there for "skilled" labor and pay 3x as much.

          •  Get a new business then (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Thomasina, AoT, Larsstephens

            Sounds like a losing model if you rely so heavily on below-market labor costs.

            The real estate boom is over and not coming back this generation, you need to adapt to the market.

            Isn't that what the almighty job creators always tell people? Economic darwinism, invisible hand? If you can't cut it, find a new hustle, buddy.

            Deficits don't matter, jobs do.

            by aguadito on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:09:12 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Think about what you are saying. (0+ / 0-)

              Are you saying that the dilapidated houses in bad neighborhoods should not be fixed up?

              Obviously you have never spent time in such a neighborhood.

              •  I used to buy and fix up houses (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                schnecke21, TerryDarc, Larsstephens

                You have to purchase the house at a low enough price to afford the fix-up costs.

                If you can't afford to fix it up and make a reasonable profit (which means different things to different people) without exploiting people by paying low wages  then you've paid too much for the property.

                If you have to pay a lot of unskilled labor low wages, then whether you like it or not something is wrong with the business model.

                Could it be, perhaps, that to make the big bucks you want, you have to pay low wages? How much do you make from these houses? What's your return on investment? For all readers here know, you're making a ton of money from the houses and paying low wages is necessary so you can enjoy a far better life than the people you exploit. That's capitalism.

                Frankly, I think the real answer is socialism. Take out all the profiteering, the middlemen, the agents, the bureaucrats, and there will be plenty of production to make life livable for everyone.

                "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

                by ZhenRen on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 02:01:46 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Have you looked in the mirror and asked (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Thomasina, Roadbed Guy

            yourself "What's wrong with this picture?".  I'd guess you're an unpleasant person to work for.  Before you criticize the mote in someone else's eye, perhaps you should consider dealing with the beam in your own.

            We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

            by Observerinvancouver on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:13:35 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  You sound like a really shitty businessperson (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aguadito

            Your job #1 should be getting and keeping talented people.  Obviously, you don't have what it takes to do that.

            •  Actually, I *DON'T* have what it takes... (0+ / 0-)

              ...because what it takes is more money!

              I am not in a high-profit business. I don't have Facebook options to hand out. So I pay what I can afford.

              If you make me pay more than I afford, then people will not get work.

              •  The entire market will readjust (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                what whit

                And if what you are doing is needed by society, and is worthwhile, you'll get by, the same way your low paid wage slaves get by.

                "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

                by ZhenRen on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 02:03:57 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  My goodness! Why would they want to go and (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ZhenRen

            work for someone else? You sound like such a good boss.

            You cannot cross the sea merely by standing and staring at the water. Rabindranath Tagore

            by Thomasina on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:22:51 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  'Someone else'? You mean, like you if you're (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ebohlman

            only hiring 'skilled' workers?

            I see what you did there.

            by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:56:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Why do they go work for someone else? (0+ / 0-)

            Better pay? Better working conditions? Better managment? Those are all things you can presumably address so you are the "someone else" other people's employees want to go to work for.

            "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

            by Catte Nappe on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:16:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  EVERY employer I 've met has voiced that myth (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            what whit, roadbear, efrenzy

            -and yet I've NEVER seen it actually happen.

            Perhaps it's because such idiots alway go out of business before it can.

            The most inept people I've ever seen were always "small business owners." I mean REAL SBO's, not large corporations subdivided to evade taxes or get undeserved subsidies. And every single one aspires to be a BIG business, and so, emulates them - especially the worst of them.

            But there seems to be some misguided assumption by most Americans that everyone is suited to run a business, is honest enough to provide a good service or product, and therefore deserves to make a profit. It is extremely rare when any one of those things is true, never mind two of them, and NEVER three.

      •  Nonsense (4+ / 0-)

        Why would you "not renovate a house", leaving it vacant, if you're an investor/small business guy, all because of a $1 increase in minimum wage? Smells like bullsh to me.

        Any business model that relies so heavily on marginalizing labor (which is clearly a key component of said model if a change is spurring such backlash) is not a viable sustainable system anyway.

        I've got mixed feelings about the minimum wage. Not because it would kill jobs (there's very little evidence of this anywhere), but because it actually entices businesses to pay the bare minimum wage instead of bid up the price of unskilled labor. It's almost like low-skilled service employers use the minimum wage to engage in price-fixing -- they all agree to pay whatever the minimum wage is and then they don't have to compete over the workers' services and so the wages stay low.

        One example is the unpopular summer work picking fruits and vegetables -- illegals get paid double the minimum wage to do this stuff in many areas! Meanwhile, the legit unskilled workers get stuck at the minimum wage because all the employers who don't hire illegals collude to essentially only pay the minimum wage and not a cent more.

        In this sense, the minimum wage sometimes acts more as a wage ceiling than a wage floor for a lot of unskilled labor interests.

        It also takes away the value-added services of unions, who engage in bargaining for laborers.

        Countries in Scandinavia don't even have a minimum wage because labor unions and community pressure are so effective at keeping employers and workers honest and open about the process.

        But your understanding is totally wrong. Poor kids with no skills don't lose, they gain. Because any employer paying the minimum wage is going to eat the increase and keep a poor unskilled worker on board if they are reliable anyway. There are numerous valid arguments against the minimum wage, but yours is not one of them.

        Deficits don't matter, jobs do.

        by aguadito on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:00:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Here is why... (0+ / 0-)

          ...I leave the house vacant.

          1) A foreclosed house costs $20K and needs $10K in renovations to sell (or rent for the NPV of) $35k. About 75% of that cost is labor.

          2) If I buy this neighborhood-killing eyesore of a house, I can make money, and more housing becomes available for the community!

          3) You raise MW by $2 or 28%. Now my renovation costs are $2100 higher ($10k x 75% x 128%). I no longer make money.

          4) I don't buy the foreclosed house, it stays vacant, and continues to drag down the neighborhood. People who could have made $7/hr now make nothing. (Some of them may even rip the copper out of the house and sell it, but that's a different tale).

          These numbers are hypothetical, but not unrealistic.

          Why not let me pay the kids $7 and make up for it with food stamps, section 8, single-payer healthcare, etc? Why boot them out of the only job they're likely to get?

          •  You said (0+ / 0-)
            Why not let me pay the kids $7 and make up for it with food stamps, section 8, single-payer healthcare, etc? Why boot them out of the only job they're likely to get?
            See that's sort of the problem I think.

            I'm a democrat, but I really do think it's better to pay people a living wage rather than by taxing the rich, then using it to subsidize a business that pays substandard wages.

            Because that means the business actually using the labor is paying for it rather than some third party.

            Plus if you give workers the money rather than running it thru the middleman of the gov't is works better

            •  If you don't... (0+ / 0-)

              ...let me pay $7, I am gonna fire the 19-year olds and hire professional renovators. I have no choice.

              This means:

              1) Kids don't get jobs.
              2) Some houses remain vacant
              3) Taxpayers are still on the hook for the safety net benefits the kids will need.
              Pay particular attention to #3. You see, we are already shelling out for these guys. At least my way they can work, create something of value (which I will pay taxes on), and get training.

              If we use the minimum wage to price them out of the labor market, they have no options at all.

              •  Or (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                what whit, berrieh

                We could give the 19-year-olds training/university grants or any other number of different opportunities through social programs so they don't get taken advantage of by weasily slumlords trying to exploit desperate individuals for below-market wages.

                Totally different example by the way, not referring to you :P

                Deficits don't matter, jobs do.

                by aguadito on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:54:26 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm fine with that. (0+ / 0-)

                  Because I'm a classy guy, I'll ignore your petty personal insults.

                  But I wouldn't mind having more college graduates out there. College grads can afford higher rent.

                  If my rents were higher, I could afford to pay more to renovate houses.

                  See, that's the problem with increasing the Minimum Wage. You aren't making people more productive. You're just pretending that they are more productive.

                  Send them to college and you actually make them more productive. But instead, we spin our wheels playing with the minimum wage...

              •  Good. Then the 19 year olds can make $9 an hour at (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Catte Nappe, Nada Lemming

                McDonalds and professional renovators can have the jobs at an even higher wage (truly skilled construction professionals aren't going to be going for $9/hour most of the time anyway). Win-win.

                •  These kids... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...get rejected by McDonald's at $7/hr.

                  What makes you think McD will suddenly hire them if the mandated wage is $9?

                  I don't think people on this thread understand:
                  I am dealing with the people that McDonald's turns away.

                  These are the people who get hurt by minimum wage increases.

                  •  I don't buy it. (0+ / 0-)

                    If someone is literally unemployable after (or even during) high school, there should be some training available or we should better education. Because that's essentially what you're talking about: People who can't do extremely basic tasks.

                    Really, a lower minimum wage doesn't HELP them - it keeps them stagnant with no skills, from your own description - and it HURTS the mostly employable minimum wage workforce.

            •  Problems are definitely bad enough, we need both (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TerryDarc, Nada Lemming

              actually all three - Tax the rich, single payer hc, AND a $21 minimum wage.

              And the reason is solely because the VERY rich, WallSt, LARGE corporations (esp. energy extractionists)- have moved essentially ALL the money upward and are stripping the economy and selling it off overseas like a stolen car in a chop shop - including natural resources, jobs, owed/evaded taxes, the laws, and our Democracy - AND the economy itself.

              No reaction or response to this is TOO radical.
              Unless of course one just doesn't care.

          •  Doesn't sound like a very socially (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rhytonen, BusyinCA

            important service you're providing anyway.

            at such low numbers, a buyer would just be willing to renovate themselves anyway.

            so you're just trying to middle and hustle in a market that doesn't have a bubble anymore. that's the crux of what you're presenting.

            find a new business. real estate is dead. move on already.

            you're trying to make yourself out to be this angel that goes around fixing dilapidated forcelosed homes and making them nice to help the neighborhood. that's a crock. you're profiting off of people screwed by the banksters. probably some guy who was underwater because of a lousy crooked mortgage broker pushing an ARM on him and the bank foreclosed on them. so dont act like you're performing some amazing service that requires that we give you some cheap laborer by subsidizing the wage with food stamps and section 8 etc.

            Those public services aren't meant to be provided so slumlords can get dirt-cheap labor. It's meant to be supplemental to a dignifying wage for all laborers, regardless of skill.

            anyway, get a new hustle, as i said before.

            Deficits don't matter, jobs do.

            by aguadito on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:51:55 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're wrong. (0+ / 0-)

              My tenants can't get credit to buy.

              Yeah, the banks made a mess, and somebody's gotta clean it up. That's what I'm doing.

              •  Where Do You Sell Houses For $35k? (0+ / 0-)

                Or apts. or whatever? I see your handle but where do you do business for that little money?

                Time is an enormous, long river, and I’m standing in it, just as you’re standing in it. My elders are the tributaries, and everything they thought and every struggle they went through & everything they gave their lives to flows down to me-Utah Phillips

                by TerryDarc on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 05:02:52 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't sell... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...for $35k. I rent. The value of the total rental stream is about $35k.

                  I do this in poor communities on the Eastern Seaboard. Not NYC.

                  •  So For 35K ROI Should Be What Per Month? (0+ / 0-)

                    But you said in your numbers above that the housing was worth $35 and implied it wasn't worth your while.

                    You're actually getting some fair %age of $35k/year I'd guess, at least 10-12%, hmmm-tedum...$300-400 per month?! You rent for that?!

                    Cuz if it's more, you could afford to PAY more per hour, no?

                    Time is an enormous, long river, and I’m standing in it, just as you’re standing in it. My elders are the tributaries, and everything they thought and every struggle they went through & everything they gave their lives to flows down to me-Utah Phillips

                    by TerryDarc on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 05:18:09 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  The Walmart business model? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            berrieh, schnecke21
            make up for it with food stamps, section 8, single-payer healthcare, etc?
            You admit your guys need quite a bit more than $7/hr; but you don't want to pay it - you want others to pay it for you.

            "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

            by Catte Nappe on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:20:48 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Exactly. (0+ / 0-)

              Why?

              Because we are paying anyway.

              At least by letting people get jobs, they can get some training, and they can produce something. Something that can be taxed, so we can continue to fund and expand the safety net.

              •  You realize you wouldn't be paying anyway? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                roadbear

                If people made, at minimum, enough to maintain basic living conditions; then you wouldn't be paying so much for those "benefits" that require your employees to grovel through an application process to find out if they can qualify for some small bit of assistance. And things may be different where you are, but where I am that kid you are underpaying can only get Food Stamps for 3 months in any three year period. He can't get Section 8 at all. And,as you well know, there is no single-payer healthcare, so you aren't paying for that, and he isn't getting it, either.

                "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

                by Catte Nappe on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 04:35:14 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  You make some very good points. However, with (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ManhattanMan, AoT, Catte Nappe

          respect to picking fruits and vegetables, maybe the " illegal" workers are worth more pay in terms of experience, efficiency and endurance.  Legit unskilled workers may not start off with these qualities.  Have you ever picked strawberries or raspberries?  Stoop labour in a hot, humid summer is no fun.  

          (I never got paid for picking berries but put in a few hours in the summer picking enough for a few batches of jam. BTW picking tree fruits is a lot easier IMO.)

          We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

          by Observerinvancouver on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:25:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Given that we don't have those things (5+ / 0-)

        You're saying that a lot of the population simply isn't worth enough to feed, house, and clothe them.  Not that you think they should go without those things, clearly you don't, but that's what wages mean in our society.

        As an aside, this reveals the Minimum Wage for what it really is: A way for the skilled middle-class to price the unskilled poor out of the labor market!
        Which is absolute nonsense.  Paying a living wage, which this barely meets the requirements for in may places, should be the bare minimum, unless you think that people should just shut up and be poor.  This is going to affect industries that have huge numbers of "unskilled" employees like fast food, etc, much more than small businesses in that it will help the workers survive.

        According to your logic we should have no minimum age at all because we might end up paying people more than they're "worth".

        •  Close. (0+ / 0-)
          "You're saying that a lot of the population simply isn't worth enough to feed, house, and clothe them."
          Not a lot. Some.

          Also it is not that they aren't worth it, it's just that they don't have the skills to produce enough goods and services to support what they consume.

          So, we must make up the difference.

          And by "we", I mean society -- not the unlucky guy who happens to hire one of them.

          •  A lot. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ZhenRen

            Unless 3.8 million as of 2011 isn't that much.

            You seem to want it both ways, to have society take care of people and not pay people very much.  For now, how much we pay people is how we take care of people.

            Also it is not that they aren't worth it, it's just that they don't have the skills to produce enough goods and services to support what they consume.
            Producing enough to support what we consume is pretty easy, as illustrated by the fact that very few of us actually produce anything and yet still support what we consume.  You have a very basic view of how the economy works based on what appears to be a very basic, and possibly terribly flawed if this will put you out of business, business model.
          •  The problem is the entire capitalist model (0+ / 0-)

            is based on exploitation.

            The reason business owners say they need low wage workers is because they demand a certain degree of profit, less than which they believe they can't maintain their standard of living, which means that their wealth comes at the expense of the poor. That is why it is called wage slavery.

            When wages are raised,  some industries will have to adjust and change the way they do business, but the economy will adjust, and life will go on, and the wage slaves will be a little better off. You might have to take a cut in income, and maybe then you will experience what it is like to earn less money.  You will be sharing the pain of those whom you exploit. Maybe that will spur you on to find another way to do business, and make a profit not based on exploitation.

            The answer, long term, is a different form of economy. And that would be some form of socialism.

            "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

            by ZhenRen on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 02:35:03 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  If you use so much unskilled labour, I'm (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Thomasina, Roadbed Guy

        puzzled that you can't do the necessary training yourself.

        We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

        by Observerinvancouver on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:02:51 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry, you're full of shit (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, Proletariatprincess

        study after study after study proves that raising the minimum wage does not impact employment, and you certainly are no judge of what people are "worth."  The whole issue is that people aren't "worth" a living wage.  You of course are just ignoring that.

        Everything you've said is bullshit.

        •  Study after study... (0+ / 0-)

          ...shows that raising the MW does impact employment in certain industries and job categories.

          I happen to be in one of those industries. Poor, inner-city young people happen to be in that category.

          C'mon, use your brain! We have millions of unemployed whom nobody will hire for current wages! Please explain how raising the wage will help them.

          •  It will put more money in the economy (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Proletariatprincess, schnecke21

            People earning minimum wages spend their money NOW. The more dollars that are spent in a wide range of daily products and services, the more revenue those firms have to expand and hire more employees.

            Will people have to pay a little more? Yes, but the amount will be spread over a large consumer base. You may find in a year or two that your customers may be able to afford the extra $2,100 (and more) due to the fact that they are earning more income. And your competition is in the same boat.

            If you're an effective employer, you should be able to get value in excess of $9/hour. Yes, they may leave, but that's your lot in life because you are hiring at the bottom of the chain. The best solution would be to hire a combination of skilled and unskilled labor, and work to have your unskilled workers learn the trade.

            •  Maybe. (0+ / 0-)
              "People earning minimum wages spend their money NOW. The more dollars that are spent in a wide range of daily products and services"
              This is true. But why not spread money around using the EITC or other benefits? That way poor people still get the money and no jobs are priced out of existence.
              "If you're an effective employer, you should be able to get value in excess of $9/hour"
              Sez who? Show your data.
      •  So you would pay them less and expect everyone (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, Proletariatprincess, schnecke21

        else, through their taxes, to supply the safety net that keeps them from starving? While you make a profit on the house they improved when you flip it?
        You don't seem to have much regard for the people who make your business possible, have you ever thought about what would happen if they all quit? Could you run the business without them? Maybe they are more valuable than you think?

        You cannot cross the sea merely by standing and staring at the water. Rabindranath Tagore

        by Thomasina on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:20:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes. Exactly. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Thomasina

          And, because my business is profitable, I would pay higher taxes to support low-paid workers.

          Those who are getting rich in America should pay. But the problem with the Minimum Wage is that it hits you before you even make a profit.

          We don't want to stop economic activity from happening. We want the house to be renovated. We just need to make adjustments on the back-end...transferring wealth from the profitable businesses (or high-paid workers) to the low-paid workers.

          If we try to do the transfer on the front-end, we might stop the job from happening. Then there will be nothing to tax, no wages to spend, no house to live in.

          •  So either you pay higher taxes, or higher wages. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tim DeLaney, Catte Nappe, schnecke21

            It wiill be one or the other. Would the higher wages not be tax deductible for you? As a business expense?

            Look, I understand your need to make a profit and to do that you have to keep costs down.

            But most workers would rather make a decent wage and not have to rely on government  assistance as a supplement to low wages to keep from starving. For their dignity and sense of self-worth.

            Those un-skilled workers count too. Seriously, try flipping a house without them some time.

            You cannot cross the sea merely by standing and staring at the water. Rabindranath Tagore

            by Thomasina on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:30:49 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  At what rates? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Catte Nappe
            And, because my business is profitable, I would pay higher taxes to support low-paid workers.
            What effective tax rate (total amount of taxes in a year divided by total profits) would you be willing to pay? What marginal rate (tax on each additional dollar of profit) would you be willing to pay?

            Writing in all lower-case letters should be a capital offense

            by ebohlman on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:24:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  No, you wouldn't "pay the higher taxes," (0+ / 0-)

            and you know it.

            You would simply hire better lawyers and accountants to weasel out of them.

      •  This comment makes me angry (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bdop4, berrieh, schnecke21

        Small business owners think they deserve special consideration and the minimum wage (or other regs and laws) should somehow not apply to them because they aren't corporate scumbags.    But the thing all businesses have in common, large or small, is that they hate to pay workers and if they could eliminate all the help and still make money, they would.   They also seem to believe that all workers are overpaid and have no pride in doing a good job.
        The minimum wage is the only thing that keeps virtual slavery at bay....and it needs to be increased and better enforcement.
        If you cannot run a business while paying decent wages, then go out of business.  Let the competition fill the need.  If you think you have only the obligation to make a profit and no obligation to the society that allows you to make a profit, then just emigrate and we won't grieve your absense.

        •  Not all. Far from it (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Larsstephens, efrenzy
          the thing all businesses have in common, large or small, is that they hate to pay workers and if they could eliminate all the help and still make money, they would.   They also seem to believe that all workers are overpaid and have no pride in doing a good job
          I know quite a number of small businesses that value their employees highly, pay them as well as they possibly can, and manage to retain them for years and years. And those businesses get my business.

          "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

          by Catte Nappe on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:26:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "pay them as well as they possibly can," (0+ / 0-)

            -AND still make HOW MUCH profit?

            The real problem with capitalism is that it considers a viable, sustainable business, meeting its costs and salaries and making a modest profit; a failure-
            because it doesn't provide INCREASING profits for its "investors."
            - Infinite growth.
            An impossibility.
            At least without cheating somebody - usually everbody, workers, customers, suppliers...government....

            •  They make enough profit (0+ / 0-)

              Enough to keep the business open, and maintain a comfortable but far from extravagant lifestyle. A lifestyle not much different than that of their employees. What, they should have a smaller house and cheaper car than the guys who work for them?

              But yes, all the businesses I am thinking of would be considered "failures" if graded on the never ending growth metric. They may grow a little bit. The printer moved to a larger plant so he could do larger jobs, and hired an extra worker. The cafe has been busy, busy, busy and has a new waitress - not replacing those that have been there for ages, but a new addition. On the other hand, the roofer has had a couple of crews with the same guys on it for years. They know their stuff. They do good work. When this area was hit by massive hail the opportunity for growth, at least temporarily, was enormous. But then he would be hiring relatively less skilled people. People he didn't know, and the quality of his work would probably diminish. Besides, his company is the way he keeps the lights on and food on the table. He didn't want to spend more time on it at the expense of other personal passions he pursues.

              "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

              by Catte Nappe on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 02:46:20 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site