Gov Controled Minimum Wages Good?

[rushmc 18]

Consider this, since conservatives have been saying this will happen (and it has every time)

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0210biz-teenwork0210.html

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 1,644]

Quote

Consider this, since conservatives have been saying this will happen (and it has every time)

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0210biz-teenwork0210.html

Please provide PROOF that it has happened EVERY time.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[warpedskydiver 0]

When was the last time you worked outside of academia?

[kallend 1,644]

Quote

When was the last time you worked outside of academia?

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Hey I was really wanting to know.

I think it might have a bit to do with your perception of the typical business environment.

Sauce in the hood comes wrapped in a paper bag

[kallend 1,644]

Quote

Hey I was really wanting to know.

OK, January 2006.

And I really want to see proof of his assertion.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[warpedskydiver 0]

No proof, but I was wondering if you needed to be concerned about being overpriced in the labor force and therefore not find suitable employment.

I guess you don't remember being a kid who wasn't wealthy...or maybe you do.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Consider this, since conservatives have been saying this will happen (and it has every time)

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0210biz-teenwork0210.html

So what makes these thievings bastards better than the little guy? Fucking foxes guarding the henhouse if you ask me>"Congress receives frequent pay raises. Since 1989 a cost of living increase takes effect each year unless Congress votes against it. Pay for the average member of Congress has more than doubled in the past 20 years. For example, the average salary in 1983 was $69,800 and $141,300 in 2000. However, if you were to adjust the 1983 salaries for inflation, members of Congress made $119,708 in 2000. As of January 1 2005, members of Congress make $162,100. The president pro tempore of the Senate and the majority and minority leaders of both houses are paid $180,100. The speaker of the House of Representatives makes $208,100

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[willard 0]

Quote

Consider this, since conservatives have been saying this will happen (and it has every time)

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0210biz-teenwork0210.html

I used to hire high school kids to help around the shop. They got minimum wage but learned a skilled trade, many of them went on to college and paid their way working with the skills they had learned. Then the government came in and boosted the minimum wage once too often to a level we could not justify paying someone to fetch tools, sweep floors, etc. so we stopped hiring those kids. Hated to do it, but it was the realities of running a business.

[kallend 1,644]

Still waiting for proof it happens "every time".

So who sweeps the floors and runs errands now?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,426]

Gov controlled minimum wage - good. Gov controlled minimum wages at the levels they are at now - bad.

[willard 0]

Quote

Still waiting for proof it happens "every time".

So who sweeps the floors and runs errands now?

Economically it was cheaper to pay the regulars a few hours overtime each week than to have the couple extra employees so it was put onto them. They didn't have a problem, most were happy to get the extra bucks. It's ironic that what was intended to help those kids ended up, in our case, hurting them.

[gontleman 0]

Here's an idea. (Warning this is layman's speak)

#1. Government stops throwing money into the Middle-Eastern abyss.

#2. Bring taxes back to a sustainable level.

#3. Then take that money and pay down our national debt thereby increasing the actual value of our currency.

#4. At the same time, divert portions of that money into subsidizing employer insurance premiums so that the minimum wage increase is at least partially negated.

WAIT! I forgot. We won't make it past step 1.

[kallend 1,644]

Quote

Quote

Still waiting for proof it happens "every time".

So who sweeps the floors and runs errands now?

Economically it was cheaper to pay the regulars a few hours overtime each week than to have the couple extra employees so it was put onto them. They didn't have a problem, most were happy to get the extra bucks. It's ironic that what was intended to help those kids ended up, in our case, hurting them.

And those regulars get more than minimum wage, of course. Yes, I can see how paying them overtime makes sense.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[gontleman 0]

Quote

Economically it was cheaper to pay the regulars a few hours overtime each week than to have the couple extra employees so it was put onto them. They didn't have a problem, most were happy to get the extra bucks. It's ironic that what was intended to help those kids ended up, in our case, hurting them.

You have 4 employees.

#1 makes 6.50/hr
#2 makes 6.50/hr
#3 makes 5.15/hr
$4 makes 5.15/hr

Each one works a 30 hour week. (fast food teens rarely get more than 35 per pay week)

This brings your total weekly labor cost to $699 for 120 hours of labor.

If you fire employee #4 and evenly divide the hours between the remaining 3 (40 hours per week for each employee) you then end up paying $726 for the SAME 120 hours of labor!

So I dont think it's necessary to speculate what having to pay employees overtime would do to your weekly labor cost.

So this translates to firing your higher paid regulars and hiring minimum wage people to replace them.

Also this assumes that 120 labor hours per week lets your business run optimally. That is to say... you're not over working your employees and not over paying them.

Anytime you make adjustments, things change. For better or worse usually takes a while to be seen.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Still waiting for proof it happens "every time".

So who sweeps the floors and runs errands now?

Economically it was cheaper to pay the regulars a few hours overtime each week than to have the couple extra employees so it was put onto them. They didn't have a problem, most were happy to get the extra bucks. It's ironic that what was intended to help those kids ended up, in our case, hurting them.

And those regulars get more than minimum wage, of course. Yes, I can see how paying them overtime makes sense.

Yes, it did. In case you aren't aware, there are expenses associated with every employee that are called "fixed". These have to be paid by the employer regardless of how many hours the employee works, even if they don't work at all during a given pay period. Insurance is just one of them, and in case you haven't noticed insurance costs are constantly rising. In one year alone our insurance premiums for our shop went up almost 200%. No, it wasn't because of safety issues. In fact, with app. 12-15 people on the payroll we went the entire year without a single day lost due to a work related injury. So before you start telling me, the one who went over the numbers with our accountant and had to make the decision, that it didn't make sense, you better know what the hell your talking about. And the only way you possibly could in this case is if you somehow looked at our financial records, which I'm pretty certain you don't have access to. So there.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Yes, it did. In case you aren't aware, there are expenses associated with every employee that are called "fixed".

I'll go even further. There are additional marginal costs associated with simply having another human being around: paper work, personnel management time, desks, tools, equipment, square footage, and general distraction.

So having 9 employees might be cheaper than 10 even if the total wages are higher.

--

In addition of course, a minimum wage teenager's 40 hours productivity might easily be replaced by a more senior employee in 20 hours. That's why we pay the senior employee more per hour.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[gontleman 0]

Quote

Quote

Yes, it did. In case you aren't aware, there are expenses associated with every employee that are called "fixed".

I'll go even further. There are additional marginal costs associated with simply having another human being around: paper work, personnel management time, desks, tools, equipment, square footage, and general distraction.

So having 9 employees might be cheaper than 10 even if the total wages are higher.

Cheaper is not always better. Like I mentioned above... you have to walk the line between overworking and overpaying your employees carefully.

Quote

In addition of course, a minimum wage teenager's 40 hours productivity might easily be replaced by a more senior employee in 20 hours. That's why we pay the senior employee more per hour.

If you are a fast food restaurant you have a set number of hours in the work day that need to be filled. You can't just replace 2 people with 1 and work that one less hours for higher pay and magically have your problems go away. You still need people there from 10am to 11pm or whatever.

The only industry that's going to be directly hit by a minimum wage hike is an industry which exploits purely teenage labor or adults who can't/don't move up to other forms of employment.

Fast food is a prime example of this and the businesses labor hour model for all of the business in that industry are pretty much subject to the same rules.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

If you are a fast food restaurant you have a set number of hours in the work day that need to be filled.

Some labor is of that sort and other labor isn't. I suspect you know that.

Work of the sort you describe is usually filled by the cheapest available personnel that will accomplish the task. I've never hired that sort of employee myself.

I've been fortunate to never be squeezed for a dollar here or there to pay my employees, but I can easily imagine it. Unfortunately many voters -- and legislators -- cannot.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[gontleman 0]

Quote

Quote

If you are a fast food restaurant you have a set number of hours in the work day that need to be filled.

Some labor is of that sort and other labor isn't. I suspect you know that.

You addressed that when you mentioned the labor associated with managing that employee (paper work, work space, etc) and I agree.

Regardless... the whole flipside to the minimum wage increase is supposed to be tax benefits for those benefits that negate the minimum wage hike.

Of course everyone can dig out their tin foil hat and show how this is yet another stealthy way of giving tax cuts to business which make Neo-cons more popular. I believe the tax cut portion of the minimum wage hike was tossed in there by conservatives if I remember correctly. Besides it wouldnt make sense for those crazy "tax and spend" liberals to give business tax breaks. Right?

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Yes, it did. In case you aren't aware, there are expenses associated with every employee that are called "fixed".

I'll go even further. There are additional marginal costs associated with simply having another human being around: paper work, personnel management time, desks, tools, equipment, square footage, and general distraction.

So having 9 employees might be cheaper than 10 even if the total wages are higher.

Cheaper is not always better. Like I mentioned above... you have to walk the line between overworking and overpaying your employees carefully.

Quote

In addition of course, a minimum wage teenager's 40 hours productivity might easily be replaced by a more senior employee in 20 hours. That's why we pay the senior employee more per hour.

If you are a fast food restaurant you have a set number of hours in the work day that need to be filled. You can't just replace 2 people with 1 and work that one less hours for higher pay and magically have your problems go away. You still need people there from 10am to 11pm or whatever.

The only industry that's going to be directly hit by a minimum wage hike is an industry which exploits purely teenage labor or adults who can't/don't move up to other forms of employment.

Fast food is a prime example of this and the businesses labor hour model for all of the business in that industry are pretty much subject to the same rules.

Our business was far from a fast-food operation. Presses, shears, welders, torches, etc. create a work environment that insurance companies just love to rape, not to mention workers comp payments. I can only wish our fixed costs per employee had been anywhere near a McDs.

[willard 0]

Not all min wage hikes come with tax breaks, and the tax breaks that small businesses are supposed to get are rarely what they seem.

[gontleman 0]

Your work environment is also not one comprised of minimum waged employees either, I imagine.

But regardless... like I alluded to in my first post... if the goverment would stop pissing money away on the Middle-East... that would mean a lot more money available for supporting our own country before we buckle/implode under our own weight.

Not that I've analyzed the pros and cons regarding the subject, but more government subsidization for employer insurance, at the surface, doesn't look like a bad idea at all.

EDIT: Subsidized insurance = cheaper premiums for employers AND employees.

[gontleman 0]

Quote

Not all min wage hikes come with tax breaks, and the tax breaks that small businesses are supposed to get are rarely what they seem.

Much like the tax breaks to people who make under $100k per year (and lack huge amounts of business assets and investment shares) are rarely what they seem. Doesn't stop Cletus from falling down at the feet of our current administration.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Gov controlled minimum wage - good. Gov controlled minimum wages at the levels they are at now - bad.

So you do not see that raising the min wage does more harm than good?

Of course I do realize that evil business have to be told what to do.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln