Ask Our Northern Neighbors Whether Higher Minimum Wages Kill Jobs

originally posted by: ladylada


Higher minimum wage effects export to a great degree though, making it harder to trade within a world market. I've seen whole factories shut down due to high operating cost.

So not better, just different.

Oh man....that whole "world market" globalist BS is what has destroyed the middle class in North America. How do we compete with third world "emerging" countries that pay literally nothing to employees? Do we really undo 100 years of progress in the west to "compete"? That is what the corporate elites would love and have been trying to do with this globalization kick of the last twenty years.

For me it all started with the Free Trade agreement with the USA in 1990. I live in what used to be a manufacturing hub in Ontario. One by one the factories all shut down to head south for much, much lower wages. Now they are all leaving the USA for Mexico. When they find somewhere even more "competitive" it will be bye bye Mexico.

Like your mention of your salary going up with the rise of the minimum wage increase, it can work the opposite way as well.

Ive never understood what is so wrong with paying people a living wage to work.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

Not really much interested in revisiting this debate, just thought I should point out that the Canadian minimum wage varies by province, and accounting for the exchange rate is between USD $9.04 and $9.75.

Don't know how their taxes work in terms of what's considered "taxable" income, or whether there are exemptions, but Canadian Federal tax on "minimum" wages are 15% federal, plus between 4% and 16% province tax.

The effective US tax rate for US workers will be 4.1% federal (based on full-time, minimum wage, single), 6.2% SSI, and %1.45% Medicare.) Then comes state tax (some have none, most have some), and in some places, local taxes. And of course, sales taxes, which vary dramatically as well.

It can be very difficult to compare two different systems, or even different states - minimum wage in some small Texas or Florida town means a lot more than minimum wage living in Manhattan, DC, or SF.

This really has a fair answer.

A 40 hour work week is standard before overtime pay is protected.

If you employ a worker for 40 hours (100%) of that work week, then that worker should be able to afford to live on that wage.

If you are employing part time workers 20 hours(50%) of that work week, you should be paying for 50% of that worker's living wage.

This is the bare minimum that employees should be paid.

Across board.

If your business cannot survive paying your customers living wages, maybe you should change business practices. However, let's be real for a moment, business will be JUST fine if the poorest amongst us had more money to pump back into the economy instead of it going up the ladder to the 1%.

I mean, really.. the Waltons of Wal-Mart have like.. a 1/3 of a TRILLION dollars between them.

a reply to: peck420

Forgive me for my confusion; are saying that minimum wage adds to increased need for more government services such as food stamps and health care and as such they too are part of the minimum wage debate?

a reply to: AgentShillington


Please explain a living wage.
do you mean a 3 bedroom 2 bath home and a new car every three years with a trip to Disney world?
Or do you mean a $400 dollar apt.
Do you eliminate food stamps and all other government funded low income programs then? They should not need these programs if they make a living wage.

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

15% above the poverty line is generally regarded as a living wage.

If you are paying a living wage, food stamps aren't necessary.

Edit: The vast majority of people working at Wal Mart are on public assistance. Why should the tax payer being paying for people to work at Wal-Mart?

Im not going to enter the debate pro or anti

One thing Il point out in my experience is low wage labour can kill the competitiveness of a corporation or company.

I have a Science degree and many qualifications and I have worked for company's at both ends of the pay spectrum.

One multinational corporations that brought in multi billions but paid its skilled workers peanuts. There was no company loyalty, skilled workers would jump ship and move elsewhere so there was a brain bleed. Work quality was poor as we really didn't give a flying # about the company. Guess what? The company ended up slowly going broke and being brought out peace meal.

Second multi billion company I worked for paid really good wages, benefits and huge bonus out of the company profits as well as appointed senior managers and CEO's out of the rank and file rather than the old boys club. Result? People stayed there for there whole careers, people put in 200% work effort and went through hell for that company to sought problems, it was almost a family/brotherhood with huge respect for the company. That company's profits went up 20% while I was there and it still one of the world leading company's.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: macman

Care to bring any facts to this debate?

And please stay on topic "Minimum Wage", not Obama care nor role of the government, both are interesting you may wish to start your own thread on them.

Ahhhh, forced minimum wage is by the Govt. The Govt could screw up a wet dream, and people want them in charge of more in life?? Those items are very much within the topic.

Facts are simple enough to see what would happen. There is little need to bring a think tank sponsored research doc into this.

Costs go up, prices go up. Very simple.
Prices go up, people have less to spend.
As this happens, inflation follows.

Not difficult to understand. Unless you think that businesses should absorb any increase in costs.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
Forgive me for my confusion; are saying that minimum wage adds to increased need for more government services such as food stamps and health care and as such they too are part of the minimum wage debate?

No, I am saying that those factors must be taken into account for determining minimum wage.
2nd.

a reply to: AgentShillington

Yeah, I mean like, it totally isn't fair that some have more then others. So, like, the Govt should force those to give to the ones that don't have more.

originally posted by: AgentShillington


Edit: The vast majority of people working at Wal Mart are on public assistance. Why should the tax payer being paying for people to work at Wal-Mart?

You are right. The tax payer should not be paying for others to live.

Proper motivation applied usually ends with a good result.

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

15% above the poverty line is generally regarded as a living wage.

If you are paying a living wage, food stamps aren't necessary.

Edit: The vast majority of people working at Wal Mart are on public assistance. Why should the tax payer being paying for people to work at Wal-Mart?

Why should walmart pay more than is required?
Do you send the government more taxes than you have to?

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: AgentShillington

Yeah, I mean like, it totally isn't fair that some have more then others. So, like, the Govt should force those to give to the ones that don't have more.

So, you are perfectly comfortable with Wal-Mart being able to pay their employees LESS than a living wage so that our taxes going to public assistance are subsidizing Wal-Mart's workforce?

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

15% above the poverty line is generally regarded as a living wage.

If you are paying a living wage, food stamps aren't necessary.

Edit: The vast majority of people working at Wal Mart are on public assistance. Why should the tax payer being paying for people to work at Wal-Mart?

Why should walmart pay more than is required?
Do you send the government more taxes than you have to?

YES!

By Wal-Mart NOT having to pay their employees a living wage MY TAXES are going to public assistance programs that are gong to WAL MARTS employees.

a reply to: macman

I think one of the issues people have is not the minimum wage itself but the fact you can be motivated all you like but there no jobs in some areas that are available to move up into.

Me? Yeah I worked minimum wage in a burger joint during Uni, no complaints as got my degree and then went on to bigger better things.

But thanks to company's running of to china and India and collapse of manufacturing in both our respective country's alot of people are stuck with no were to go.

The solutions not to raise minimum wage but to get a stable growing economy going so as to provide good jobs for people to go into. If there are plenty of good jobs like before 2007 then most people would shut up about minimum wages without any government interference.

originally posted by: AgentShillington


So, you are perfectly comfortable with Wal-Mart being able to pay their employees LESS than a living wage so that our taxes going to public assistance are subsidizing Wal-Mart's workforce?

Ahhh, the "living wage" angle.

I am perfectly fine with ANY company paying someone the market rate for work performed.

I am not okay with someone then expecting others to offset their life's choices in the financial realm.

Want a better paying job??? Go work for it.

originally posted by: AgentShillington

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

15% above the poverty line is generally regarded as a living wage.

If you are paying a living wage, food stamps aren't necessary.

Edit: The vast majority of people working at Wal Mart are on public assistance. Why should the tax payer being paying for people to work at Wal-Mart?

Why should walmart pay more than is required?
Do you send the government more taxes than you have to?

YES!

By Wal-Mart NOT having to pay their employees a living wage MY TAXES are going to public assistance programs that are gong to WAL MARTS employees.

Walmart has less than 6000 employees making minimum wage. That out of 1.6 million employees.

m.wsj.com...


I think most making that wage work for mom and pop type of businesses.

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: AgentShillington


So, you are perfectly comfortable with Wal-Mart being able to pay their employees LESS than a living wage so that our taxes going to public assistance are subsidizing Wal-Mart's workforce?

Ahhh, the "living wage" angle.

I am perfectly fine with ANY company paying someone the market rate for work performed.

I am not okay with someone then expecting others to offset their life's choices in the financial realm.

Want a better paying job??? Go work for it.

We aren't talking about "better jobs" we are talking about the lowest jobs.

Minimum wage.

15% over poverty.

Public Assistance doesn't help the poor. They're still poor.
Public Assistance helps those employing the poor because THEY don't personally have to make up the difference between what they pay their employees and a living wage. That difference goes into the corporate pocket, and my taxes subsidize that pocket money.

a reply to: crazyewok

A person's choice in life to stay in an area with no jobs, is still their choice.

In the state I reside, there are plenty of jobs and not enough people to fill them.

I am now contacted about 3 times every other day for job offerings, and not just in my home state.

NJ, CA, OR to name a few. All jobs paying around the $80-$100k a year mark.

God gave most of us 2 feet and 2 legs for a reason. Don't live were the jobs are? I guess you need to move. Or stay and not have a job.

All choices to be made by the person.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: AgentShillington

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

15% above the poverty line is generally regarded as a living wage.

If you are paying a living wage, food stamps aren't necessary.

Edit: The vast majority of people working at Wal Mart are on public assistance. Why should the tax payer being paying for people to work at Wal-Mart?

Why should walmart pay more than is required?
Do you send the government more taxes than you have to?

YES!

By Wal-Mart NOT having to pay their employees a living wage MY TAXES are going to public assistance programs that are gong to WAL MARTS employees.

Walmart has less than 6000 employees making minimum wage. That out of 1.6 million employees.

m.wsj.com...


I think most making that wage work for mom and pop type of businesses.

Out of the people not making minimum wage, what is the percentage working at or below 15% abovethe poverty line?

Those are the people that need to be factored in as well.