Raising the minimum wage is part of the Democrats platform

[The Free Hornet]

Import, outsource, automate.

The minimum wage is a signal to not hire, lay off, and fire.

Minimum wage = fuck the people.

It is extremely inflationary. If your $5 can't buy an hour's labor, then your $5 is worth less. More so, if you can't just hand somebody $5 but one or both parties have to do eligibility checks, tax forms, business licenses, et cetera, then it is less likely to be worthwhile. Either spend more with an established player or go without or do for yourself.

The minimum wage increase is a signal to all workers that they should disregard their own competitive advantages and instead spend their time packing a lunch (since basic food prep is now that much more expensive). This re-allocation of resources harms the "have nots" more than the "haves".

Edit: I used to spend $3 for lunch going to Wendy's. Now I spend $3 by bringing a frozen meal bought at Wal*Mart.

 

[Elwar]

I hope they raise the minimum wage to a million dollars so that we can all be millionaires!

 

[TheGrinch]

Did you see the error in your flow chart? You went from employee in the singular to employees in the plural. If you have fewer employees, your equation doesn't work.

I actually already changed that to plural if that makes you feel better, because what we're talknig about is something like a national minimum wage raise, where many companies are forced to pay more for labor, not just one.

Thus, you as an employer are not the only one in this equation. If all fast-food restaurants have to pay more, then fast food will be more expensive in many cases to compensate for higher costs and higher wages across the board.

Of course prices could lower if competition or other factors make it more desirable to, but no, prices do not have to lower somewhere to raise somewhere else. I cannot even believe I have to argue against the idea that price is correlated simply to price and monetary supply. That's simply not the case.

 

[TheGrinch]

//

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Simple supply and demand. Increase demand or reduce supply, and wages will rise (and along with them, essential liberty).

The Democrat solution is to increase the supply of labor via immigration, and to introduce price controls. It's like there is a bumper crop which is causing prices to drop, and their solution is to plant more, and to fix prices.

Let's face facts. Both Democrats and Republicans are part of the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex. What they want is excess labor so that the price of labor will fall. They also understand that essential liberty declines when the worth of each individual declines. This scenario naturally results in power and money concentrating at the top, in their hands. They can take away liberty, grant themselves more power, and shift more and more wealth into their pockets. And unemployed and under-employed people are far easier to control, to co-opt and to put under the yoke of government dependence. Price controls on wages are just another example of making the masses believe that government is "working for them", while in reality, they are doing the exact opposite.

 

[CaptUSA]

I actually already changed that to plural if that makes you feel better, because what we're talknig about is something like a national minimum wage raise, where many companies are forced to pay more for labor, not just one.

I would argue that a national minimum wage does not make employers spend more on labor. Actually, I would say they spend the same but on fewer employees. So if you have the same amount of money going to a fewer numbers of employees, your equation still doesn't work. I understand what you are trying to say, but you are off a bit.

 

[oyarde]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120811/POLITICS03/208110367

Oh boy, how many of those crying about jobs do you think will be fooled into thinking that this is a good idea?

And if you really want to cry, read some of the comments, there is even one stating that mandating hiring like China would be a good idea. Wow. There are a lot of people there that, like most people I have come to find out, don't understand a thing about business. There are a few bright spots there though.

You have to give credit where credit is due , these people are experts in job killing.

 

[TheGrinch]

I would argue that a national minimum wage does not make employers spend more on labor. Actually, I would say they spend the same but on fewer employees. So if you have the same amount of money going to a fewer numbers of employees, your equation still doesn't work. I understand what you are trying to say, but you are off a bit.

I am off, because I'm having to grossly oversimplify it to counter his gross oversimplification. There are of course many other factors involved, but when you artificially manipulate the market, it can artificially change it without necessarily needing to compensate elsewhere for it. The employer/employee/consumer relationship can (and will) compensate for it without the market as a whole having to compensate in the opposite way.

As I said earlier, that is an alternate possibility that the employer will instead look to lower costs or increase prodcutivity with better employees for the wage, but the point is that they don't have to. It could just easily easily be more desirable to simply raise prices, especially if everyone else is and the consumers have cash to support it. The market will dictate that part, but nonetheless can still be influenced by market manipulation without need for an opposite and equal reaction, as has been proposed.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

All that said, there could definitely be a correlation between minimum wage and inflation of the money supply. Since inflation relieves the burden of the minimum wage, a government could raise the minimum wage along with inflation at a pace that keeps its net burden on the economy constant. And that way politicians could keep re-using their pro-minimum wage arguments each election, and as long as they don't go overboard, they'll be able to do it without making a noticeable change in unemployment. To pull this off, they need to keep inflating the money supply. So the two things work together.

Exactly!

(I believe that minimum wage actually lags behind inflation, which further goes to show that their minimum wage laws are nothing but a lie to placate and control the masses, while in reality, they are doing the exact opposite.)

 

[Dr.3D]

All that said, there could definitely be a correlation between minimum wage and inflation of the money supply. Since inflation relieves the burden of the minimum wage, a government could raise the minimum wage along with inflation at a pace that keeps its net burden on the economy constant. And that way politicians could keep re-using their pro-minimum wage arguments each election, and as long as they don't go overboard, they'll be able to do it without making a noticeable change in unemployment. To pull this off, they need to keep inflating the money supply. So the two things work together.

And all the while they are doing this, they make it nearly impossible to save money in savings accounts. The money in those accounts becomes worth less and less as they steal it right out of them using the inflation tax.

Someone putting money away to buy an automobile or house ends up with much less value in their savings than they put there. Essentially, they are stealing labor.

 

[erowe1]

Edit: I used to spend $3 for lunch going to Wendy's. Now I spend $3 by bringing a frozen meal bought at Wal*Mart.

In between then and now, the money supply has increased. That is the cause, not the minimum wage.

 

[angelatc]

OMG - the stupidest thing I am going to read all day was right there in those comments.

Steven P. Schonfeld Top Commenter · Wayne State University

I have seen free market choice destroy this city. From the 40's to the '90's, people left for one reason, and one reason only: black people started moving in, and racist whites weren't having it. If government got involved and stopped them from leaving, Detroit would still be on the level with New York and Chicago.

 

[tod evans]

OMG - the stupidest thing I am going to read all day was right there in those comments.

Fucking amazing!

 

[Acala]

OMG - the stupidest thing I am going to read all day was right there in those comments.

Surely he must be joking. Please tell me he's joking.

 

[The Free Hornet]

In between then and now, the money supply has increased. That is the cause, not the minimum wage.

I didn't give a timeframe to support your "In between then and now". It is an anecdote and it would apply to direct monetary inflation as well as increases in the minimum wage (wheter motivated by inflation or vote buying/pandering).

Often, people neglect to mention that "Government regulation and taxation also reduce supplies" and thus cause inflation.

Consider pain medication. It could be cheap and easily available without the regulations that outlaw natural solutions. Instead, supply is constricted and heavily controlled so that it takes great expense to obtain some forms of pain relief either legally or illegally.

Again, a situation where your $5 doesn't go as far not due to the money supply but to the government protecting vested interest. "Big labor" is one of the original and most influential vested interests.

 

[TheGrinch]

In between then and now, the money supply has increased. That is the cause, not the minimum wage.

While this is true in many cases ("keeping up with inflation" is frequently used to justify minimum wage increases) does not make the minimum wage change any less signicant. In fact, its the wage increases that help the prices higher, or else consumers would get tapped out easier and demand would fall.

So although the two are often used in conjunction with one another does not make either manipulation Amy less significant

 

[erowe1]

I didn't give a timeframe to support your "In between then and now". It is an anecdote and it would apply to direct monetary inflation as well as increases in the minimum wage (wheter motivated by inflation or vote buying/pandering).

Often, people neglect to mention that "Government regulation and taxation also reduce supplies" and thus cause inflation.

Consider pain medication. It could be cheap and easily available without the regulations that outlaw natural solutions. Instead, supply is constricted and heavily controlled so that it takes great expense to obtain some forms of pain relief either legally or illegally.

Again, a situation where your $5 doesn't go as far not due to the money supply but to the government protecting vested interest. "Big labor" is one of the original and most influential vested interests.

Whatever the time frame was, my claim about the money supply is correct.

What you're saying about prices being affected by regulations and taxes isn't the same as inflation. It's prices of particular things. Yes, of course, even while keeping a constant money supply, the government could institute laws that affect the prices of specific things like medicine or unskilled labor. But then the economy would adjust to those changes by reducing the prices of other things, like skilled labor and video games.

 

[erowe1]

While this is true in many cases ("keeping up with inflation" is frequently used to justify minimum wage increases) does not make the minimum wage change any less signicant. In fact, its the wage increases that help the prices higher, or else consumers would get tapped out easier and demand would fall.

But if the price of something goes up, and all the consumers in the economy overall still have the same total amount of money to spend, then on account of paying more for that thing, they WILL get tapped out faster and end up buying either less of that thing or less of something else. That will happen precisely because of a minimum wage increase. The only way around it is by increasing the money supply.

 

[VanBummel]

OMG - the stupidest thing I am going to read all day was right there in those comments.

BRB, brain aneurysm.

 

[TheGrinch]

But if the price of something goes up, and all the consumers in the economy overall still have the same total amount of money to spend, then on account of paying more for that thing, they WILL get tapped out faster and end up buying either less of that thing or less of something else. That will happen precisely because of a minimum wage increase. The only way around it is by increasing the money supply.

Seriously, dude, how can you not understand that the amount that people spend in the economy is not synonymous with the money supply. It can be affected by it, but it's not the same thing.

The total amount of money does not have to increase for consumers to have more money to spend. It really can be as simple as just consumers having more money to spend because of higher wages, but things costing more. The compensation for higher wages can really be that simple.

Just because Keynesians do in fact inflate the money supply and then wages, does not mean that it's only the money supply that has effect. This can all occur without the need for more money supply, when there is already plenty of money that is not currently active, that can be circulated and gotten back through higher prices.