Would we be better off without a minimum wage?

dorkacle

dorkacle wrote: »

I argue low or no minimum wage leads to poor service as people - as in the the US - expect a tip, regardless of the level service, to supplement their wages or lack there of...

And we expect a minimum wage regardless of the service we provide so there is no incentive to be nice.

Gauss

dorkacle wrote: »

bluewolf wrote: »

You argue that having a minimum expectation of pay ensures bad service and then go on to conclude that we should have a minimum expectation of pay.

I argue that low or no minimum wage leads to poor service, as people - as in the the US - expect a tip, regardless of the level service, to supplement their wages or lack there of...

Are you saying the level of service in Ireland is better than the US?

dorkacle

bluewolf wrote: »

And we expect a minimum wage regardless of the service we provide so there is no incentive to be nice.

By paying a minimum wage employers can expect and ensure a certain standard of service. Look at Mc Donalds, I'm aware its a different environment to that of a conventional restaurant that may not lend itself to 'tipping' but even in the US their workers are not allowed to take tips. Mc Donalds expect a certain level of service and pay a minimum wage accordingly.

Not to mention the majority of people would give a certain level of dedication to their job if they are being payed accordingly... I can't however speak for everybody.

StudentDad

What a great idea! Not! People on minimum wage who are currently struggling to pay bills etc would love a massive pay cut so their employers can reduce wage bills.
Why not get rid of employee protection laws while you're at it?

dorkacle

dorkacle wrote: »

By paying a minimum wage employers can expect and ensure a certain standard of service.

Employers expect this anyway. It's kind of part of having a job
If you don't do it, you get warnings & fired.

Look at Mc Donalds, I'm aware its a different environment to that of a conventional restaurant that may not lend itself to 'tipping' but even in the US their workers are not allowed to take tips. Mc Donalds expect a certain level of service and pay a minimum wage accordingly.

If you're over 19 and have a few years of experience, otherwise you get less than min wage

Not to mention the majority of people would give a certain level of dedication to their job if they are being payed accordingly... I can't however speak for everybody.

They give dedication if they want to keep the job and get anywhere with it
Plenty of messers in McD who earned min wage+ as well. Nothing to do with anything
It's definitely not a contender for a min wage argument

dorkacle

Gauss wrote: »

Are you saying the level of service in Ireland is better than the US?

I would say in General, yes. In my opinion of course.
I'm not saying service everywhere in Ireland is great or that service everywhere in america is rubbish either....

Slurryface

StudentDad wrote: »

What a great idea! Not! People on minimum wage who are currently struggling to pay bills etc would love a massive pay cut so their employers can reduce wage bills.
Why not get rid of employee protection laws while you're at it?

Sorry Bubba, but the world doesn't owe you a living , and all your employer should owe you, in financial terms, is the market rate for the job.
Looks like you are suffering from entitled-itis.

anncoates

At least make a better effort to paint this idea as socially beneficial rather than naked self interest on the behalf of employers.

Gauss

anncoates wrote: »

At least make a better effort to paint this idea as socially beneficial rather than naked self interest on the behalf of employers.

Have a read below.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/the-minimum-wage-good-intentions-bad-results/

Markcheese

mikemac1 wrote: »

A lot of the minimum wage jobs are in the hotel industry and you'd be struggling to find union members in there.

Not many union jobs ( most of the unionised hotels went bust or were sold off during the boom) but there are or were the JLC rates... Which were always a bit of a joke ...

dorkacle

bluewolf wrote: »

Employers expect this anyway. It's kind of part of having a job
If you don't do it, you get warnings & fired.

If you're over 19 and have a few years of experience, otherwise you get less than min wage

They give dedication if they want to keep the job and get anywhere with it
Plenty of messers in McD who earned min wage+ as well. Nothing to do with anything
It's definitely not a contender for a min wage argument

Yes but why do you work? What motivates you to actually go get a job? I'd imagine 99% of people do for their weekly/monthly pay! Some people do have to luxury of a job they just love but most people are motivated by money! So they can afford to live. If you pay well I would say you get better motivated/dedicated employees. To put simply, you get what you pay for really, and that counts for people as far as I'm concerned.

I think we are talking about general minimum wage here, under 18's in Ireland are not guaranteed the same minimum rate either, but they are also only allowed work certain hours too, and a maximum per week to prevent them being exploited.

Mc Donalds generally isn't a job people would be very dedicated to, true. Which is probably why they pay a minimum wage to ensure a certain standard....

Dravokivich

Slurryface wrote: »

Sorry Bubba, but the world doesn't owe you a living ,

I don't recall anyone indicating as such. If anything, that's an argument against social welfare. Not regulation regarding basic wages.

Slurryface wrote: »

and all your employer should owe you, in financial terms, is the market rate for the job.

Market rate... how exactly is this determined then? People constantly underselling themselves will not improve anything.

Slurryface wrote: »

Looks like you are suffering from entitled-itis.

I personally like the idea of having workers rights. ya know... the kind of thing they don't have in China, which we are all so ready to get up in arms about.

V_Moth

Slurryface wrote: »

Sorry Bubba, but the world doesn't owe you a living , and all your employer should owe you, in financial terms, is the market rate for the job.
Looks like you are suffering from entitled-itis.

You are really starting to piss me off. This kind of "I'm all right jack" attitude is what got this country into this mess - mainly by the sheer unadulturated greed in the financial industries.

As for Entitled-its - in fact we expect far too little from our government and the service industry. People should feel entitled to good service from both for the usually outrageous amounts they are forced to pay.

Markcheese

What's missing on this thread is balance, everyone raving their left or right wing views ( I know raving almost obligatory on A.H.) Usually truth lies somewhere in the middle...... Oommhhh....
No minimum wage or too low=exploitation
High minimum wage= equals high cost if living and stifling of employment growth...

If you drop minimum wage a lot of employers will benefit... Some won't go bust... If there's no benefit to employing someone why would you do it...

Any how back to my right wing ranting ....

Pride Fighter

Markcheese wrote: »

Not many union jobs ( most of the unionised hotels went bust or were sold off during the boom) but there are or were the JLC rates... Which were always a bit of a joke ...

There is still plenty of Unionised or Union friendly hotels around. Wynns Hotel in town is Unionised. SIPTU have a campaign called the fair hotel campaign. They say which hotels around Ireland have partially or fully Unionised staff, with the non-unionised staff given the same terms of employment. The website is fairhotels.ie if you want to check it out.

Galwayguy35

I wonder would the people here who want to scrap the minimum wage be members of society who would be in higher paid/middle class jobs themselves.

anncoates

Gauss wrote: »

Have a read below.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/the-minimum-wage-good-intentions-bad-results/

Cheers.

The Montana Conservative Alliance is always my first port of call for objective views ion social equity.

Not sure how I missed that one.

StudentDad

Slurryface wrote: »

Sorry Bubba, but the world doesn't owe you a living , and all your employer should owe you, in financial terms, is the market rate for the job.
Looks like you are suffering from entitled-itis.

You're wrong mate. Simple as. The employer gains by having a workforce - no workforce - no business. It is in the employers best interest to have employees that are able to survive in economic terms. By that I mean, pay bills, live etc.

By having a minimum wage it is a simple statement that your employee needs x amount to live. If an employer is unwilling to acknowledge the worth of their employees by not paying them a decent salary then frankly that employer does not deserve employees.

The minimum wage in this country is hardly exorbitant. If a business is that hard up the owner needs to consider whether remaining is business is a viable option.

SD

Slurryface

V_Moth wrote: »

You are really starting to piss me off. This kind of "I'm all right jack" attitude is what got this country into this mess - mainly by the sheer unadulturated greed in the financial industries.

As for Entitled-its - in fact we expect far too little from our government and the service industry. People should feel entitled to good service from both for the usually outrageous amounts they are forced to pay.

So I'm "pissing you off"-tough titty bubba.
I take you are one those who believe that the best economic policies are the ones where you you give give give and expect the sme sector to pay for it all!
Get real, creating a false market based upon artificially set wage rates and entitlements is never going to get us out of the mess that the chattering classes created with their "I'm entitled" attitude.

dorkacle

dorkacle wrote: »

Yes but why do you work? What motivates you to actually go get a job? I'd imagine 99% of people do for their weekly/monthly pay! Some people do have to luxury of a job they just love but most people are motivated by money!

How am I going to get money if I do such a piss poor job I get fired? Minimum standards of job performance are required regardless of pay.
If I do well enough, maybe I get a promotion and more pay.
I'd like to point out you were the one pointing out job dedication and associating it with minimum wage, not me.

So they can afford to live. If you pay well I would say you get better motivated/dedicated employees.

You get exactly the same employees who think they're entitled to the higher pay and will work the same as ever.

I think we are talking about general minimum wage here, under 18's in Ireland are not guaranteed the same minimum rate either, but they are also only allowed work certain hours too, and a maximum per week to prevent them being exploited.

Only the same max hours as apply to everyone else.

Mc Donalds generally isn't a job people would be very dedicated to, true. Which is probably why they pay a minimum wage to ensure a certain standard....

They don't pay a minimum wage, they pay less unless you have experience. They ensure certain standards by having mystery customers and supervising managers. If you do well, then you get better pay.

Throwing money at people in the hope they might take inspiration to do better work without any other procedures is ridiculous and will get you nowhere.

Crucifix

hate that phrase, "job creators"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=019sL5ltjCA

Slurryface

StudentDad wrote: »

You're wrong mate. Simple as. The employer gains by having a workforce - no workforce - no business. It is in the employers best interest to have employees that are able to survive in economic terms. By that I mean, pay bills, live etc.

By having a minimum wage it is a simple statement that your employee needs x amount to live. If an employer is unwilling to acknowledge the worth of their employees by not paying them a decent salary then frankly that employer does not deserve employees.

The minimum wage in this country is hardly exorbitant. If a business is that hard up the owner needs to consider whether remaining is business is a viable option.

SD

Sorry Bubba, you are wrong.
I have reduced the number of overpaid staff I employ by outsourcing work to the UK, Pakistan, and China.
The NMW and other assorted freebies demanded by the likes of you has, and is costing jobs to this country. Simple as.
Maybe we employers should take your advice and consider whether it is viable to continue to employ high cost Irish labour, and then maybe you and your likes can try creating your own jobs instead of sitting about whinging about the big bad employers!

StudentDad

StudentDad wrote: »

You're wrong mate. Simple as. The employer gains by having a workforce - no workforce - no business. It is in the employers best interest to have employees that are able to survive in economic terms. By that I mean, pay bills, live etc.

By having a minimum wage it is a simple statement that your employee needs x amount to live. If an employer is unwilling to acknowledge the worth of their employees by not paying them a decent salary then frankly that employer does not deserve employees.

And if they don't offer what people are willing to take up, they won't get the employees. So nobody is going to be paid too-low rates.
So then they offer more, and they will get some employees. Bam, market in action.

Usefulness to everyone else? People with lower skills can get a foot in the door, develop skills, and then start commanding higher wages, instead of sitting around with no work because they're not worth the minimum wage yet.
It beats places going out of business and reduced competition due to too-high barriers to entry for both a new business and to the low-skilled unemployed.



http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2009/06/economics-22062009-unemployment-social.html

http://www.businessandfinance.ie/bf/2010/4/intsandfeatsapril2010/minimumwagelivingbeyondourmean

StudentDad

Slurryface wrote: »

Sorry Bubba, you are wrong.
I have reduced the number of overpaid staff I employ by outsourcing work to the UK, Pakistan, and China.
The NMW and other assorted freebies demanded by the likes of you has, and is costing jobs to this country. Simple as.
Maybe we employers should take your advice and consider whether it is viable to continue to employ high cost Irish labour, and then maybe you and your likes can try creating your own jobs instead of sitting about whinging about the big bad employers!

Ah yes spoken like a true free marketeer - if you feel your profit margins are not high enough and you have to screw over your employees to hit whatever target you like - move to China and/or Pakistan!

The simple fact of the matter is that employees are worth more than you are willing to pay.

What will you do when the likes of China and Pakistan workers say 'hang on, this pay level is crap, we want more?'

The race to the bottom is not pretty and frankly if your costs are so bloody high you need to re-consider your own pay packet.

SD

Markcheese

Pride Fighter wrote: »

Markcheese wrote: »

Not many union jobs ( most of the unionised hotels went bust or were sold off during the boom) but there are or were the JLC rates... Which were always a bit of a joke ...

There is still plenty of Unionised or Union friendly hotels around. Wynns Hotel in town is Unionised. SIPTU have a campaign called the fair hotel campaign. They say which hotels around Ireland have partially or fully Unionised staff, with the non-unionised staff given the same terms of employment. The website is fairhotels.ie if you want to check it out.

Worked in a unionised hotel, years ago and in many non unionised hotels/restaurants. Same minimum JLC rates.. Being unionised wouldn't tempt me to stay in a hotel over a non unionised one ...

StudentDad

StudentDad wrote: »

The simple fact of the matter is that employees are worth more than you are willing to pay.
SD

Well, based on what? The value/worth of any skill or product is surely based on what people are willing to pay. Houses aren't worth 1million if nobody is willing to pay that, for example. A load of bread is "worth" 1.90 because people are willing to pay it and the shop thinks that's what the worth is to them.

V_Moth

Slurryface wrote: »

So I'm "pissing you off"-tough titty bubba.
I take you are one those who believe that the best economic policies are the ones where you you give give give and expect the sme sector to pay for it all!
Get real, creating a false market based upon artificially set wage rates and entitlements is never going to get us out of the mess that the chattering classes created with their "I'm entitled" attitude.

You are wrong. The only thing which will solve the current crises is a thorough reform of the Financial Sector, including an end to legal/illegal tax evasion. Changing the wage rates at the lower end of the scale will achieve absolutely nothing, in fact it will probably make things a lot worse by reducing the amount of money people have to spend.

Currently, it is the spending power of the lower income earners which is keeping the SME sector from collapsing completly.

A good place to look in history for our current crises is the end of Weimar Republic. Back then, a weak central government allowed itself to be bullied by various extremist ideologies. Similarly, today a weak government is also being bullied by extremist ideologies (Neo-Marxism and Libertarianism). Adopting either would be disastrous.

RADIUS

Here's my 2 cents;

The problem here isn't the min wage alone. The first thing that has to go is the high rent allowance that is placing an artificial floor under the housing market.

If there was no rent allowance landlords would be forced to lower rent or many people wouldn't be able to afford it.

A landlord is never gonna offer their rental property for less then they can get via a rent allowance tenant. So even the worst kip will still be 500 or 600 a month as the government are essentially guaranteeing this by having rent allowance so high. This pushes the rent up for workers in contrast.

Drop rent allowance in significant increments. Let the market settle then drop the dole itself in increments.

Finally drop the min wage to an amount that is still appealing when compared to the dole.

If this is done over a sufficient period of time and the law of supply and demand is allowed to take it's natural course, then the cost of living should come down in line with the property markets, the welfare and the salary's.

It's not a perfect plan by any means but we really cannot afford to sustain this country as it currently stands.

We need to let the air out of this over inflated balloon bit by bit.

I believe we should aspire to a more European model of welfare and salary, rather then a British Isles model. People need to feel the need to work. It is far to easy to idle on the dole here for years on end. In my opinion this is why Ireland, UK and France have such high levels of antisocial behavior when compared to many other countries in the EU.

Bored people with no need to drive them who have it too easy. Think Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

In many countries in Europe the dole is payed for a temp period that decreases over time until it is zero. This makes people want to work but gives them time to get themselves sorted.

Gauss

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I wonder would the people here who want to scrap the minimum wage be members of society who would be in higher paid/middle class jobs themselves.

That really is irrelevant as I'm arguing that we'd all be better off with the minimum wage scrapped.

The total economic output would increase. Say goodbye to rip off Ireland.

It makes sense for our economy and our own interests that we don't pay for something more than it's worth.

Whether it's houses, labour, raw materials etc. our economy would be much more productive using our resources efficiently.

StudentDad

bluewolf wrote: »

Well, based on what? The value/worth of any skill or product is surely based on what people are willing to pay. Houses aren't worth 1million if nobody is willing to pay that, for example. A load of bread is "worth" 1.90 because people are willing to pay it and the shop thinks that's what the worth is to them.

A minimum wage is a 'minimum' - enough to get by on level of pay - canibalising your own business by cutting the lifeblood of that business is ultimately self defeating - if you pay peanuts - you get monkeys.

SD

Markcheese

StudentDad wrote: »

Slurryface wrote: »

Sorry Bubba, you are wrong.
I have reduced the number of overpaid staff I employ by outsourcing work to the UK, Pakistan, and China.
The NMW and other assorted freebies demanded by the likes of you has, and is costing jobs to this country. Simple as.
Maybe we employers should take your advice and consider whether it is viable to continue to employ high cost Irish labour, and then maybe you and your likes can try creating your own jobs instead of sitting about whinging about the big bad employers!

Ah yes spoken like a true free marketeer - if you feel your profit margins are not high enough and you have to screw over your employees to hit whatever target you like - move to China and/or Pakistan!

The simple fact of the matter is that employees are worth more than you are willing to pay.

What will you do when the likes of China and Pakistan workers say 'hang on, this pay level is crap, we want more?'

The race to the bottom is not pretty and frankly if your costs are so bloody high you need to re-consider your own pay packet.

SD

SD , if all the greedy employers stop employing in ireland. And the loser self employed stop wasting their time doing long days for f all.. Then who's paying for the public sector , welfare , pensions ..
Apart from the money we're borrowing ...

Pride Fighter

Markcheese wrote: »

Worked in a unionised hotel, years ago and in many non unionised hotels/restaurants. Same minimum JLC rates.. Being unionised wouldn't tempt me to stay in a hotel over a non unionised one ...

True enough, but a lot of hotels dont even give the basic JLC rates. Hence the campaign.

Blowfish

V_Moth wrote: »

A good place to look in history for our current crises is the end of Weimar Republic. Back then, a weak central government allowed itself to be bullied by various extremist ideologies. Similarly, today a weak government is also being bullied by extremist ideologies (Neo-Marxism and Libertarianism). Adopting either would be disastrous.

Aside from the fact that the current governments are anything but weak, that's a pretty bizarre comparison, given that it's the Libertarians who are the ones opposing QE, precisely for the reason of preventing a reoccurrence of the Weimar Republic.

Logical Fallacy

Gauss wrote: »

didn't notice that, it was a mistake.

To clarify, if there were no minimum wage there'd be fewer unemployed.

Gauss, you are aware that both minimum wage and the social welfare are tied to the cost of living right? If you want to see either of them lowered you need to find a way to lower the cost of living first.

StudentDad

Markcheese wrote: »

SD , if all the greedy employers stop employing in ireland. And the loser self employed stop wasting their time doing long days for f all.. Then who's paying for the public sector , welfare , pensions ..
Apart from the money we're borrowing ...

Public sector? Welfare? Pensions? Talk about a tangent. This discussion is about minimum wage. Not high end public employees in the health services, civil service etc etc who are on overly inflated salaries.

The problem in Ireland won't be solved by screwing over the people at the bottom of the pyramid.

SD

sbsquarepants

Slurryface wrote: »

Sorry Bubba, you are wrong.
I have reduced the number of overpaid staff I employ by outsourcing work to the UK, Pakistan, and China.
The NMW and other assorted freebies demanded by the likes of you has, and is costing jobs to this country. Simple as.
Maybe we employers should take your advice and consider whether it is viable to continue to employ high cost Irish labour, and then maybe you and your likes can try creating your own jobs instead of sitting about whinging about the big bad employers!

Spoken like a true greedy employer. If your business can't function paying people 8.65 an hour, then i'd have to question it's viability. If it can survive then what is behind your decision to outsource to pakistan other than your desire to maximise profits, nothing wrong with that either, but there are ways and means - but by begrudging your employees an extremely meagre wage you're really showing your true colours.
That company of yours sounds like a dickensian work house - you must be so proud!

StudentDad

StudentDad wrote: »

A minimum wage is a 'minimum' - enough to get by on level of pay - canibalising your own business by cutting the lifeblood of that business is ultimately self defeating - if you pay peanuts - you get monkeys.

SD

I already answered this earlier by pointing out that if you get no employees on a rate, you'll raise it. No "minimum" required, only the market.
If you get no skilled employees on a rate above that, you'll raise it again. Which is what already happened. No "minimum" required there either, only the market.

I don't understand how firing soundbites at me answers my question on where you get "an employee is worth..." from.

K3lso

StudentDad wrote: »

A minimum wage is a 'minimum' - enough to get by on level of pay - canibalising your own business by cutting the lifeblood of that business is ultimately self defeating - if you pay peanuts - you get monkeys.

SD

Nonsense.. Look around in restaurants, waiters are not on the minimum wage. They earn above it. Why? Because the owner has recognised their worth and values their labour more than someone else. The minimum wage doesn't even enter the equation.

However, what it is doing is stopping competition from entering the work force.

StudentDad

bluewolf wrote: »

I already answered this earlier by pointing out that if you get no employees on a rate, you'll raise it. No "minimum" required, only the market.

I don't understand how firing soundbites at me answers my question on where you get "an employee is worth..." from.

If the market was that flexible the minimum wage would not have been introduced in the first place.

SD

Dravokivich

bluewolf wrote: »

Usefulness to everyone else? People with lower skills can get a foot in the door, develop skills, and then start commanding higher wages, instead of sitting around with no work because they're not worth the minimum wage yet.

The people in low skilled jobs would be as an example floor cleaners. All they'll experience day in and out is cleaning floors.There's very little skill development avail there. And seeing as all they've to do is the simple task of cleaning a floor, how about we pay'em a pittance? Cut down on the overheads, sure if they don't like it someone else can come and clean the floor.

Bit of an extreme, but it's an example of how low/non skilled workers, generally won't be the type of people to seek skills. With no proper regulation on min wage, they become for lack of a better word, disposable.

Logical Fallacy

K3lso wrote: »

Nonsense.. Look around in restaurants, waiters are not on the minimum wage. They earn above it. Why? Because the owner has recognised their worth and values their labour more than someone else. The minimum wage doesn't even enter the equation.

However, what it is doing is stopping competition from entering the work force.

I wouldn't agree with that, not saying it is not a factor, but the way you have phrased it implies it is the ONLY factor.

There are many issues facing someone trying to set up a business right now...off the top of my head the big two would be the unwillingness of banks to lend money and the unwillingness of landlords to reduce rates on suitable units for business.

StudentDad

K3lso wrote: »

Nonsense.. Look around in restaurants, waiters are not on the minimum wage. They earn above it. Why? Because the owner has recognised their worth and values their labour more than someone else. The minimum wage doesn't even enter the equation.

However, what it is doing is stopping competition from entering the work force.

No what it is doing is preventing the exploitation of employees. All it does is create a level playing field. A level of pay that isn't exploitative. If an employer wants to pay above minimum great.

SD

Logical Fallacy

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with that, not saying it is not a factor, but the way you have phrased it implies it is the ONLY factor.

There are many issues facing someone trying to set up a business right now...off the top of my head the big two would be the unwillingness of banks to lend money and the unwillingness of landlords to reduce rates on suitable units for business.

The study I linked earlier showed that it was a barrier to entry for new competition in Germany. I'm sure there are more
There might be other issues, of course, but removing one hurdle could well mean more of them entering, just not as many as would exist without the other issues also.

Dravokivich

Dravokivich wrote: »

The people in low skilled jobs would be as an example floor cleaners. All they'll experience day in and out is cleaning floors.There's very little skill development avail there. And seeing as all they've to do is the simple task of cleaning a floor, how about we pay'em a pittance? Cut down on the overheads, sure if they don't like it someone else can come and clean the floor.

Bit of an extreme, but it's an example of how low/non skilled workers, generally won't be the type of people to seek skills. With no proper regulation on min wage, they become for lack of a better word, disposable.

Hm. I had my own experience in fast food in mind, where you start off on less than min wage. Then when you've proven you can deal with customers, do all the other stuff, you get more, or you then have the experience to go work in someone's shop and ask for more money. If you're starting off with zero skills/experience of any kind and nobody is going to bother taking a risk giving you even minimum wage, it is a foot in the door.
Even if it's literally just cleaning floors, the experience will show you can be reliable - maybe you can move into cleaning houses, that's always above min wage. Maybe you can move somewhere else where they just decided they preferred paying more and getting better people. Especially if there is the increased competition due to lack of min wage, as one/more studies have shown.

K3lso

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with that, not saying it is not a factor, but the way you have phrased it implies it is the ONLY factor.

There are many issues facing someone trying to set up a business right now...off the top of my head the big two would be the unwillingness of banks to lend money and the unwillingness of landlords to reduce rates on suitable units for business.

This thread is about the minimum wage. Of course there are several issues you have to factor in when looking at our economic woes. I've covered a few of them earlier in the thread. I agree with you on banks but that is so complex that it deserves a thread all on it's own. The one thing I will say is that we don't have a market in banking - it's a monopoly. In fact, it's the one area that has been debated historically in which the powers that be will not allow competition in banking...food for thought.

StudentDad wrote: »

No what it is doing is preventing the exploitation of employees. All it does is create a level playing field. A level of pay that isn't exploitative. If an employer wants to pay above minimum great.

SD

It seems magnificent doesn't it. I was like you one day, but then I studied the minimum wage and the effects on the overall economy. Trust me, I'm not some heartless bastard. It does untold damage. And it only effects those in the poorest bracket in our society, it doesn't effect the wealthy.

FF brought in a minimum wage only in 2000. Before 2000, how many people did you see starving in the streets?

Logical Fallacy

As shocking as it is to say the best way to run it would be like many States in America, where the minimum wage a company can pay is tied to the profits of the company.

It obviously helps the smaller companies get established, then bump employees pay when they reach a certain level, while stopping the bigger companies from taking unfair advantage.

Logical Fallacy

K3lso wrote: »

This thread is about the minimum wage.

Indeed it is.

StudentDad

K3lso wrote: »

It seems magnificent doesn't it. I was like you one day, but then I studied the minimum wage and the effects on the overall economy. Trust me, I'm not some heartless bastard. It does untold damage. And it only effects those in the poorest bracket in our society, it doesn't effect the wealthy.

FF brought in a minimum wage only in 2000. Before 2000, how many people did you see starving in the streets?

It's hardly magnificent. It is a floor though. Combined with social welfare and labour laws, it's just saying to employers that people have a value beyond the market place. People are more than simple economic units to be exploited at will.

SD

Blowfish

StudentDad wrote: »

No what it is doing is preventing the exploitation of employees. All it does is create a level playing field. A level of pay that isn't exploitative. If an employer wants to pay above minimum great.

SD

Ok, to break it down to it's simplest. Lets pretend you are a running a small business and calculate that there's potential to expand somewhat, but it'll involving hiring another worker. Now, being a sensible person, you calculate just how much extra this is worth to your business. After taxes, expenditure etc. you calculate that it'll generate €8.50 per hour for the business. Naturally enough since the minimum wage is at €8.65, there's no point in you hiring anyone as it'll increase your losses. Thus, the economy now has less goods produced, less taxes generated and an aditional person remaining on the Dole.

Do you genuinely think this is a better situation than being able to make the job available and allowing the labour force the choice of whether or not to work for that wage?

StudentDad

Blowfish wrote: »

Ok, to break it down to it's simplest. Lets pretend you are a running a small business and calculate that there's potential to expand somewhat, but it'll involving hiring another worker. Now, being a sensible person, you calculate just how much extra this is worth to your business. After taxes, expenditure etc. you calculate that it'll generate €8.50 per hour for the business. Naturally enough since the minimum wage is at €8.65, there's no point in you hiring anyone as it'll increase your losses. Thus, the economy now has less goods produced, less taxes generated and an aditional person remaining on the Dole.

Do you genuinely think this is a better situation than being able to make the job available and seeing if someone is willing to work for that wage?

If your margins are that meagre perhaps it would be best to remain at the current level until the market improves.

SD