Raise the minimum wage now

[xbuzzerx]

No, we allow in a million a year LEGALLY each year, and of course, they are mostly poor. They are willing to work for low wages and compete with blacks , Native Americans and prior immigrants. We do not just allow poverty to exist, we intentionally cause it to increase. With 14 million unemployed, hiking the minimum wage will not solve the problem. What is the purpose of all that immigration?

- - - Updated - - -



No, we allow in a million a year LEGALLY each year, and of course, they are mostly poor. They are willing to work for low wages and compete with blacks , Native Americans and prior immigrants. We do not just allow poverty to exist, we intentionally cause it to increase. With 14 million unemployed, hiking the minimum wage will not solve the problem. What is the purpose of all that immigration?

You're just making things up to fit your conclusion. Now Native Americans are poor because hispanic immigrants come into the country, move to reservations and take all their jobs? Get real. That's not the reason at all and you're just throwing every kitchen sink you can find at your conclusion hoping something sticks.

[opinterph]

we allow in a million [immigrants] a year LEGALLY each year

all that immigration[!]

1 ÷ 314 = 0.0032

[Benvolio]

1 ÷ 314 = 0.0032

Plus the illegals. Easy to be dismissive unless you are one of the 14 million unemployed. Next year another million, Then another. An unending flow.
Do not intend another thread of immigration, but how can we talk if poverty without discussing the inflow.

[tigerfan482]

No, we allow in a million a year LEGALLY each year, and of course, they are mostly poor. They are willing to work for low wages and compete with blacks , Native Americans and prior immigrants. We do not just allow poverty to exist, we intentionally cause it to increase. With 14 million unemployed, hiking the minimum wage will not solve the problem. What is the purpose of all that immigration?

So when you said we let in millions per year you meant that we let in a million a year. Gotcha. Edit: Also, about 600,000 of those 1 million are Change in Status immigrants, who are already in the country.

And many studies have shown that the net impact on the economy of immigration is a positive one. One example is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New...of_Immigration

Also, in regards to jobs, several of the same studies mentioned above show that immigrants don't actually take jobs that other Americans would work, but instead work jobs that wouldn't exist otherwise.

[Benvolio]

You're just making things up to fit your conclusion. Now Native Americans are poor because hispanic immigrants come into the country, move to reservations and take all their jobs? Get real. That's not the reason at all and you're just throwing every kitchen sink you can find at your conclusion hoping something sticks.

No, but any Native American who wants to leave the reservation will have lots of competition willing to work cheap. Obviously you don't care.

[opinterph]

Plus the illegals.

I seem to recall another member posting evidence that the trend of undocumented residents in the US has been negative in recent years.

Next year another million, Then another. An unending flow.

Maybe we should ban pregnancy. That’s causing a lot more population growth each year than a million immigrants.

[JockBoy87]

Do not intend another thread of immigration, but ...

Yes you do.

[xbuzzerx]

Plus the illegals. Easy to be dismissive unless you are one of the 14 million unemployed. Next year another million, Then another. An unending flow.
Do not intend another thread of immigration, but how can we talk if poverty without discussing the inflow.

As I've pointed out to you before, this argument presupposes that every American out of work or who has lost a job wants a minimum wage job, or lost one, or would take one even if they've been out of work. What you are saying is only true for some portion of Americans out of work, definitely not all. Given the specific sectors hurt most by the economic downturn, I even doubt the majority of jobs lost in the downturn right after Bush lost office were minimum wage jobs.

No, but any Native American who wants to leave the reservation will have lots of competition willing to work cheap. Obviously you don't care.

Native Americans who are reservation dwelling and need work are overwhelmingly too poor to leave the reservation in the first place so this is a specious argument.

[JB3]

Speaking from experience in management for a company that employees a lot of people at minimum wage or slightly above: a minimum wage would deter hiring and cause cuts in hours for many employers. Where part-timers would usually get 15-30 hours a week, they would be capped at 20 or below. Similarly, where we would hire as many as four more employees, we would instead only hire 2 and eliminate shifts during the week.

Essentially, their pay might go up, but their actual take-home wouldn't increase because their hours would be cut to compensate. I've seen how companies respond to increases in minimum wage first hand, and it won't be pretty.

[JB3]

I missed my window to edit so let me just add this:

I am not against raising the minimum wage. It does have to be done carefully, however, so that companies have time to plan and budget for the increased costs so what I mentioned above doesn't happen. I would also be in favor of having a separate minimum wage for those that work over, say, 25-28 hours a week, that is higher to reflect the increased time they work.

[Benvolio]

[QUOTE=opinterph;8723918]I seem to recall another member posting evidence that the trend of undocumented residents in the US has been negative in recent years.

He pointed to claims that the recession has slowed the rate of illegal immigration and argued that therefore the problem is solved. But the problem is in the hundreds of thousand each year, depending upon how many failures to stop illegals the immigration bureaucrats chose to estimate.......................

[Benvolio]

As I've pointed out to you before, this argument presupposes that every American out of work or who has lost a job wants a minimum wage job, or lost one, or would take one even if they've been out of work. What you are saying is only true for some portion of Americans out of work, definitely not all. Given the specific sectors hurt most by the economic downturn, I even doubt the majority of jobs lost in the downturn right after Bush lost office were minimum wage jobs.



Native Americans who are reservation dwelling and need work are overwhelmingly too poor to leave the reservation in the first place so this is a specious argument.

The reason wages are so low is because there are so many people willing to work for those wages. Supply and demand. The Native Americans are not as poor as the Latinos who come long distances for the jobs.

[Rolyo85]

I love those numbers flying around and just morphing mid-flight. It was millions, then it was a million, then it became hundreds of thousands...

Dude, are you even remotely informed as to what the immigration processes to come to this country are? I mean, seriously, one shouldn't be so loud when they lack basic information...

[xbuzzerx]

The reason wages are so low is because there are so many people willing to work for those wages. Supply and demand. The Native Americans are not as poor as the Latinos who come long distances for the jobs.

I'm still amazed at the logistical problem you overlook when you claim something like if we cut off hispanic immigration Native Americans on reservations and African Americans concentrated in inner cities where retail stores and grocery stores won't even open because of "crime" are somehow going to just fan out across the nation and fill every minimum wage job, thus ending the poverty issue.

[tigerfan482]

I'm still amazed at the logistical problem you overlook when you claim something like if we cut off hispanic immigration Native Americans on reservations and African Americans concentrated in inner cities where retail stores and grocery stores won't even open because of "crime" are somehow going to just fan out across the nation and fill every minimum wage job, thus ending the poverty issue.

I'm amazed that people still hold the belief that if you were to get rid of all immigration, that wages will magically start to rise. There is a reason minimum wage jobs exist and that is because those that fill them aren't faced with a choice of the minimum wage job or one that pays more. They're faced with the choice of having a minimum wage job or no job at all. I don't see how people can say that if you raise the minimum wage jobs will disappear because employers won't be able to afford to pay the wages, but if you get rid of immigrants (with the mistaken idea that without those immigrants working those jobs that the wages for them will automatically go up to attract non-immigrants) that those same employers and those same jobs will magically stay even though wages will go up anyway.

[xbuzzerx]

I'm amazed that people still hold the belief that if you were to get rid of all immigration, that wages will magically start to rise. There is a reason minimum wage jobs exist and that is because those that fill them aren't faced with a choice of the minimum wage job or one that pays more. They're faced with the choice of having a minimum wage job or no job at all. I don't see how people can say that if you raise the minimum wage jobs will disappear because employers won't be able to afford to pay the wages, but if you get rid of immigrants (with the mistaken idea that without those immigrants working those jobs that the wages for them will automatically go up to attract non-immigrants) that those same employers and those same jobs will magically stay even though wages will go up anyway.

That's true too. It's like the inelasticity of gas prices, people pay it because they have to. The price doesn't go up or down based on demand. I agree the same is true of minimum wage jobs.

[rareboy]

I'm amazed that people still hold the belief that if you were to get rid of all immigration, that wages will magically start to rise. There is a reason minimum wage jobs exist and that is because those that fill them aren't faced with a choice of the minimum wage job or one that pays more. They're faced with the choice of having a minimum wage job or no job at all. I don't see how people can say that if you raise the minimum wage jobs will disappear because employers won't be able to afford to pay the wages, but if you get rid of immigrants (with the mistaken idea that without those immigrants working those jobs that the wages for them will automatically go up to attract non-immigrants) that those same employers and those same jobs will magically stay even though wages will go up anyway.

If many of the low wage jobs had paid a wage that would actually support a person...I'll bet that they wouldn't have had to hire so many immigrant labourers who ship all their yankee greenbacks home.

It is just bullshit nonsense to say that jobs will disappear. They don't. They have already disappeared because lowering them to the bottom is a zero sum game that the third world has been 'winning', but won't in the long term.

[CowboyBob]

Rachel said it best last night. Raising minimum wage doesn't hurt jobs. She has the stats to prove it.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rache...9561/#50899561

[Kulindahr]

Rachel said it best last night. Raising minimum wage doesn't hurt jobs. She has the stats to prove it.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rache...9561/#50899561

Rachel is both correct and incorrect -- and that's a good place to start looking at the issue. She's incorrect because raising the minimum wage inevitably costs some jobs -- anecdotal evidence for that abounds. But she's correct because overall, raising the minimum improves the spending ability of those on the bottom in ways that result in the creation of new jobs. In honesty,
what raising the minimum wage does to an economy is cause job displacement, not job loss.

Now, some may say we shouldn't do that to people. But if that's the case, we shouldn't have a military, because merely having one causes job displacement, as spending by people who join it moves from their former areas of residence to new ones around military bases -- and the same holds for all aspects of government. In other words, the mere existence of government causes jobs displacement, no differently than do new inventions or taxes or trade treaties or other realities of life. So if we're going to accept all those other things -- and in general we do -- then we should accept raises in the minimum wage... for the same reason we accept the others, that being that on the whole they benefit our society.

A second argument against the minimum wage is that it results in inflation. Again, this is a two-sided matter: for those who benefit from it, the increase actually defeats inflation, because their spending power is increased; the inflation itself comes slowly. Further, we have other ways to battle inflation, ones which do not rest on keeping part of the population in effective poverty. So again, the argument fails because it is a matter not of inflation itself, but of inflation relocation, i.e. the moving of where in the economic ladder it has most effect.

The benefit of such a raise is plain and well-documented: people on the bottom have more to spend, and they do so, both immediately and steadily. That's good for them, good for those they buy from, good for everyone all the way to the top, since increased purchasing power by customers means increased receipts for companies. Thus in general the idea of raising the minimum wage is a good one for an economy.

Nevertheless, there are two points where there is a negative result, yet again neither is a good argument against raising the minimum wage, since both may be addressed individually. The first is that entry-level jobs become slightly more scarce; the second is a bit less obvious: it increases the movement of money by government fiat up the economic ladder. This seems, and is indeed, opposite of the intent, and the means is hardly obvious -- but must be addressed. So, to address both these:

To counter the issue of entry-level jobs, a simple adjustment to the law suffices: for those claimed as a dependent on someone else's tax form, an entry-level wage may be established at a level somewhat lower than the minimum. Thus, those depending on wages to maintain their own households can earn a wage allowing them some hope of doing so, while those not so dependent have the opportunity to earn (while merchants and others will have the opportunity to create jobs not presently in existence, as they would be able to hire people to do things otherwise not cost-effective.

The problem of moving wealth up the ladder -- by government fiat -- is also simply addressed. It occurs because of the current structure of cost of living adjustments, known as COLAs. So long as these are done as a percentage of everyone's income, the net effect of a rise in the minimum wage will be a ripple upwards, so that when a COLA kicks in, those with already ample income get a bonus while those barely surviving get none. This, too, is easily resolved: define a COLA as a percentage of some basic set sum, such as an income at twice the poverty level, and award that set amount to everyone receiving a COLA. In this fashion, there will be no bonus, as everyone would receive an increase equal to the actual rise in the amount of what it costs to live.

In summary, a bill to raise the minimum wage will be of benefit, but only if it contains as well the two provisions for an entry-level wage and a repair of the COLA system so that it no long directs wealth upward.