Minimum wage discussion

[Dessicant]

You are wrong. The idea would be sound if there was equal negotiation power. But there is not. There are all sorts of rules that prevent labor from fairly negotiating with management. Managements ability to manipulate the labor pool, the basic cost of living, and successfully petition government for assistance when they are financially hurt by labor, constitutes a much larger redistribution program than minimum wage.

Abolish government corporate subsidies, institute a tariff on all imported goods, and remove all the varied union breaking rules, we could consider removing the minimum wage. But of course if you did that wages would be much higher than the minimum wage anyway.

We will know when the negotiation power is equalized when corporations makes no more profit than their employees.

Here is how you fairly negotiate: Observe what the market is paying other workers with skills similar to yours. Ask for that wage, and if it is given, begin working. If you don't like the wage, don't take the job. If no available job pays you what you want, then you need to make yourself better.

You are not worth what you want to be paid or what you need to be paid. You are worth what your level of talent and experience are getting paid to other similar workers.

It's totally fair. You don't have a right to coerce someone to pay you more than they want to. That is called slavery.

As far as abolishing government subsidies, yes, I agree with that 100%. As far as tariffs? No go. Tariffs stifle competition and reward inefficiency and incompetence. I don't care where something is made, I only care how well it is made. I don't need my fellow citizens thwarting trade to protect domestic mediocrity.

As far as union breaking rules, I am in favor of no union rules at all. Unions should not be allowed to coerce anyone into joining or paying dues. If a union can convince a bunch of workers to join for purposes of collective bargaining on a purely voluntary basis, I am good with that. But NO LEGAL PROTECTIONS. No mandatory dues. Either it is voluntary and free or I don't want it.

The minimum wage is coercive labor cost price fixing backed by the police power of the state. That's wrong.

If someone wants higher wages, they need to make themselves a better person. No one deserves to be paid well to do a common or menial task that anyone can do. Common skills don't pay well, so you have to make yourself a little bit more uncommon to expect high pay. That is fair, logical, moral, rational, and just.

 

[PingviN]

Whatever reason $50 pet hour is not a good idea for the minimum wage is the exact same reason $___ per hour is not a good idea. They both have the same net effect, nothing.
Even at $50/hr, the minimum wage would still not be a living wage.

Assuming salaries shift across the board. Increasing minimum wage does not automatically mean you increase all wages.

Minimum wage (we don't have one set by law, but the concept is the same) is a living wage in all Nordic countries.

 

[Craig234]

Whatever reason $50 pet hour is not a good idea for the minimum wage is the exact same reason $___ per hour is not a good idea. They both have the same net effect, nothing.
Even at $50/hr, the minimum wage would still not be a living wage.

I don't mean this to be insulting, but that is very ignorant. The point about a higher wage.

It's just extremism without any rationality.

Take the opposite - why not pay one cent a year? Any wage you say is 'too high' like a million dollars a year applies to any wage, by your logic.

The issues with going from $7 to $15 are not the same as $7 to $50, as you claim.

Yes, huge increases would be inflationary, and mean nothing because the money would be worth less. But that doesn't apply to more moderate increases.

You need to learn about when things are too far the other direction - low wages - and how increasing in that case can have good effects without such harms.

I think there should be a certain range for distribution of wealth. Extreme inequality causes all kinds of problems - it's oligarchy and therefore oppression.

As I've quoted Justice Louis Brandeis before, 'you can have extreme concentration of wealth, or you can have democracy, but you cannot have both.'

We've been seeing democracy in the US erode as a result, as the concentrated wealth has 'bought' a Supreme Court that allows more and more money in our elections.

'Speech' has strong constitutional protections for democracy, so the claim 'money is speech' is a diabolical strategy to usurp the speech protections to let money rule the society.

Raising wages is one small part of addressing the problem of extreme inequality, which has many benefits - to almost everything, except the level of oligarchy.

The 'market' does not solve the issue. Organized labor helped the issue in the market - which is why it's under such attack by the right, where unions are now a small minority.

Now the 'race to the bottom' is being used where 'Right to work (for less) 'states are competing with union states, creating a downward pressure on wages.

 

[cabri]

Organized labor skewed the market - imposed an artificial floor - no different than minimum wage.

People should be able to negotiate the wage that they are willing to work; an employer should also be able to decide the price of labor for a given skill set / value that they are willing to pay.

If either does not like it; they do not have to accept the agreement.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Here is how you fairly negotiate: Observe what the market is paying other workers with skills similar to yours. Ask for that wage, and if it is given, begin working. If you don't like the wage, don't take the job. If no available job pays you what you want, then you need to make yourself better.

Once again this would only work if individuals were negotiating with other individuals. They are not. Individuals are competing against large corporate conglomorates that hold huge power to manipulate the labor market.
Let me give you an example.

Lets say there is a company that employees a large number of fairly specialized and skilled employees in a geographic region. This company decides they want to pay their people less. So, they lay off almost all of these specialized employees.

There are a few other companies in the region that uses these skills and those companies see an opportunity. They wait a few weeks, then start to hire up these employees at a much discounted rate. Many of the displaced employees decide to hold out for better pay, others take the job thinking that they will swich jobs later when the market realigns.

A month or two has passed now and the displaced employees are starting to get desperate because no one likes being unemployed, and others are starting to snach up the limited jobs in the field. They start to think they should take one of these low paying jobs, just for now.
The original company now starts to hire people back, but at 1/3 the original pay. Other companies are paying more, but they don't really need that many of these skilled workers. But the opportunity is just too good to pass up getting these people cheap, so what do they do? They lay off their high paying employees and start to hire skilled workers at just above 1/3 the old pay. People take these jobs because it is not the going rate for this job.
One large company has managed to manipulate the entire local job market. Sure, people can move to another location, but that takes capital that many won't have, it takes other companies wanting to hire them, which is only a maybe, and to get hired those people will probably take less money than they would have otherwise, which causes the wage depression to spread.

Finally, seeing this work on a local scale, compaines nation wide decide to follow suit, and use the same tactic.

This is the job market of the late 1990 to present in a nutshell. This is why profits have soared while pay for the bottom 90% has stagnated.

You are only worth what a company will pay you. If they simply decide to pay you little, you make little. Without collective bargaining you have no real power to change this. No matter your skill set.

Market economy philosophy does not work in the real world because it has the wrong premise that competition is a more powerful force than cooperation.

 

[inachu]

Once again this would only work if individuals were negotiating with other individuals. They are not. Individuals are competing against large corporate conglomorates that hold huge power to manipulate the labor market.
Let me give you an example.

Lets say there is a company that employees a large number of fairly specialized and skilled employees in a geographic region. This company decides they want to pay their people less. So, they lay off almost all of these specialized employees.

There are a few other companies in the region that uses these skills and those companies see an opportunity. They wait a few weeks, then start to hire up these employees at a much discounted rate. Many of the displaced employees decide to hold out for better pay, others take the job thinking that they will swich jobs later when the market realigns.

A month or two has passed now and the displaced employees are starting to get desperate because no one likes being unemployed, and others are starting to snach up the limited jobs in the field. They start to think they should take one of these low paying jobs, just for now.
The original company now starts to hire people back, but at 1/3 the original pay. Other companies are paying more, but they don't really need that many of these skilled workers. But the opportunity is just too good to pass up getting these people cheap, so what do they do? They lay off their high paying employees and start to hire skilled workers at just above 1/3 the old pay. People take these jobs because it is not the going rate for this job.
One large company has managed to manipulate the entire local job market. Sure, people can move to another location, but that takes capital that many won't have, it takes other companies wanting to hire them, which is only a maybe, and to get hired those people will probably take less money than they would have otherwise, which causes the wage depression to spread.

Finally, seeing this work on a local scale, compaines nation wide decide to follow suit, and use the same tactic.

This is the job market of the late 1990 to present in a nutshell. This is why profits have soared while pay for the bottom 90% has stagnated.

You are only worth what a company will pay you. If they simply decide to pay you little, you make little. Without collective bargaining you have no real power to change this. No matter your skill set.

Market economy philosophy does not work in the real world because it has the wrong premise that competition is a more powerful force than cooperation.

Nobody wants to hire an american who has 20 years experience at a job and was outsourced so he was let go because he will cost too much.

Go after H1B and L1 transfers and half of this argument would be settled.

Trying to argue against someone who wants to work in the real world VS the fake artificiality of contractors and law firms who teach others on how not to hire americans. This slight of hand which is vaguely racist because when a company only hires from India then you know things are shady.

It was right when Vladimir Putin said that outsourcing is equal to industrial espionage and it has happened!

The only next step to which contracting companies are now fighting for is for employment for under age children on USA soil. USA is fighting against this but I fear that the contractors will win in the end because of the top %1 greed for money will win out and your future co worker will be an 8 year old girl taking your trash out and cleaning your windows.

 

[zanejohnson]

I'm an IT security/infrastructure consultant, worked my way up from just working as a tech in a small town computer repair store, to eventually buying out the company as the owner went on to bigger and better things, i inherited it a few really good service contracts, and then gained more over the years,


nowdays i only work mostly with very large corporate entities, save a few of my very loyal clientele thats been with me from the beginning, a couple doctors offices, a small water/utility company, and a vet clinic (they've been with me since the VERY BEGINNING, When i was just a tech walking into their office to change toner cartrdges, manage their active directory what nots, to now, when i just send a guy to do it, or if i'm feeling froggy cruise on over myself to drop things off, etc, etc...

anyway, what' i'm getting to, is that right now i have a very large contract with a very famous casino (actually the largest in the world) (it's really not the largest in the world SIZE wise, but they way they measure these things int he casino biz is by number of machines on the floor, this casino has the most machines on the floor of any Casino, on the planet. the second largest is a casino in Dubai.

There is a new convention center/amphitheatre going in at one of their locations and i'm overseeing everything from the cable pulling to the server setups/installs, the automation (lights), and sound equipment..... i work side by side with regular employees everyday.

now let me tell you, these people that work at this entitiy make barely over minimum wage, 10-12 dollars and hour.... they get good benefits actually, great benifits, but even with that, 10-12 bucks wont cut it, even in small town, N Texas, where most of the employees live.


AND GET THIS, this is the best option for employment for the unskilled in this area unless you work IN the immediate DFW area.... it's sad really.

i see MANY seniors working jobs in this casino, and i just know how hard they must have to scrimp and save, and watch every penny just to make enough to get to work and back...

what's horrible too, is that corporate greed has caused them to setup some reallly weird hiring practices from what i've heard from employees i work side by side with.... it seems they hire in 3 "teirs."

they have a part time 28 hour gaurtanteed teir (which gets no insurance) (these folks use ACA to get insurance, and usually make on the higher end of the scale pay hourly ~$12

a 38 hour "part time," teir, who gets insurance, but not as sweet of a deal as the "top" teir hires, they usually make ~$10-$11, i think they may have an option for a 401k plan...not sure on that, it may just be the top teir that gets that.


and the 42 hour "TOP teir" hires, who actually make the LEAST of anyone, hourly, usually $9-$10, but they get great benifits, and 401k..


i mean, this is UNSKILLED labor technically, but it's a casino, i think they could pay a little better... 12 bucks an hour is barely enough to survive on in this area, much less with kids...

anyway, my whole point is, YES, min wage should be much higher, like 15 bucks at least! especially if these huge entities are going to pinch every single penny and fuck over their employees every chance they get!!! (a part time 28 hiring teir! to avoid having to provide a REAL health insurance plan! GET OUT OF TOWN!")


anyway..... i gotta go, going there now, bringing a soundstage backend server online today... i'll check in on this thread throughout the day...

 

[Dessicant]

I'm an IT security/infrastructure consultant, worked my way up from just working as a tech in a small town computer repair store, to eventually buying out the company as the owner went on to bigger and better things, i inherited it a few really good service contracts, and then gained more over the years,


nowdays i only work mostly with very large corporate entities, save a few of my very loyal clientele thats been with me from the beginning, a couple doctors offices, a small water/utility company, and a vet clinic (they've been with me since the VERY BEGINNING, When i was just a tech walking into their office to change toner cartrdges, manage their active directory what nots, to now, when i just send a guy to do it, or if i'm feeling froggy cruise on over myself to drop things off, etc, etc...

anyway, what' i'm getting to, is that right now i have a very large contract with a very famous casino (actually the largest in the world) (it's really not the largest in the world SIZE wise, but they way they measure these things int he casino biz is by number of machines on the floor, this casino has the most machines on the floor of any Casino, on the planet. the second largest is a casino in Dubai.

There is a new convention center/amphitheatre going in at one of their locations and i'm overseeing everything from the cable pulling to the server setups/installs, the automation (lights), and sound equipment..... i work side by side with regular employees everyday.

now let me tell you, these people that work at this entitiy make barely over minimum wage, 10-12 dollars and hour.... they get good benefits actually, great benifits, but even with that, 10-12 bucks wont cut it, even in small town, N Texas, where most of the employees live.


AND GET THIS, this is the best option for employment for the unskilled in this area unless you work IN the immediate DFW area.... it's sad really.

i see MANY seniors working jobs in this casino, and i just know how hard they must have to scrimp and save, and watch every penny just to make enough to get to work and back...

what's horrible too, is that corporate greed has caused them to setup some reallly weird hiring practices from what i've heard from employees i work side by side with.... it seems they hire in 3 "teirs."

they have a part time 28 hour gaurtanteed teir (which gets no insurance) (these folks use ACA to get insurance, and usually make on the higher end of the scale pay hourly ~$12

a 38 hour "part time," teir, who gets insurance, but not as sweet of a deal as the "top" teir hires, they usually make ~$10-$11, i think they may have an option for a 401k plan...not sure on that, it may just be the top teir that gets that.


and the 42 hour "TOP teir" hires, who actually make the LEAST of anyone, hourly, usually $9-$10, but they get great benifits, and 401k..


i mean, this is UNSKILLED labor technically, but it's a casino, i think they could pay a little better... 12 bucks an hour is barely enough to survive on in this area, much less with kids...

anyway, my whole point is, YES, min wage should be much higher, like 15 bucks at least! especially if these huge entities are going to pinch every single penny and fuck over their employees every chance they get!!! (a part time 28 hiring teir! to avoid having to provide a REAL health insurance plan! GET OUT OF TOWN!")


anyway..... i gotta go, going there now, bringing a soundstage backend server online today... i'll check in on this thread throughout the day...

A real health insurance plan belongs in the private market. Really good wages belong to those who do what you did. Become good enough to deserve them. Low end jobs offer low end pay because they demand no special talent, expertise, or virtue. They are mechanical in nature and anyone can do them with minimal training.

No one should be forced by the police power of the state to overpay someone because he or she needs more money. Compulsory labor price fixing is not the answer.

There is no right to a job, no right to any specific wage, no right to a retirement check, and no right to health care. All of these must be paid for and earned by individuals, and should not be provided by companies or governments.

The minimum wage is price fixing and a perversion of the free market. It accomplishes nothing because the artificially high labor costs are passed through, and price levels for everything rise in response to the market perversion. However, it is not wrong because it does not work. It is wrong because it is immoral.

Minimum wage equals perversion of the market and oppressive price fixing. It has no place in a free economy or a free society.

It is not only economically wrong, it is morally and ethically wrong, as it is based on the premise that one should be allowed to take what he cannot earn because he needs it.

It is a form of wealth confiscation and redistribution, more simply and correctly identified as theft, and should be repealed based on ethics.

 

[Paul98]

All I see against this are purely ideological arguments, arguments that don't work in the real world, and have nothing to do with the world we live in.

 

[sm625]

There are some valid arguments for raising the minimum wage. However your OP did not raise any such arguments. Forcing wages above what the market is willing to pay will not affect the quantity of money in reserve. All it does is force jobs to be combined, outsourced, or outright cut.

It is very common for people to be in favor of the idea of increasing the minimum wage. It is one of those populist notions that everyone can get behind. But the reality is that minimum wages do very little to help an economy. The US would not shrivel into nothingness if minimum wages were set to $3. What would happen is that we would triple the number of jobs created each month. Our workforce would become much more skilled overall, and the costs of goods and services would decrease. This would close our trade deficit.

When examining the efficacy of the concept of a minimum wage, you have to look at things such as the trade deficit, to see how minimum wages play a role in that. Wages set above the market price will force imports higher and exports lower. Which is exactly the situation we have. And it is clearly unsustainable, just from looking at the trade deficit.

But there is also the national debt to consider. Forced wages result in job losses. If you overlay a chart of the minimum wage vs the employment population ratio, you get something that does correlate. Is it causal? That's a big debate, but there's a correlation. I believe it is causal, and can argue it all day long. It is difficult to produce data that shows direct causation. But one thing I can say for sure is that our employment to population ratio MUST increase if we are to service a national debt of this size. That will not happen if minimum wages rise or even stay the same.

Wages set above the market price will also lead to a loss in the velocity of money. We saw this happen in 2008/2009. The market response to a credit event like 2008/2009 is an extreme drop in wages. Because this government did not allow wages to drop, the economy instead lost a great deal of monetary velocity in addition to a lot of jobs. The role of monetary velocity is critical to an economic recovery. When the market price of a good or service falls below the price controls set by the government, those goods and services simply cease to trade. That leads to deflation. This is I believe the most critical part. The dynamism that the economy loses cannot be overstated. If you cannot get a job for $4 an hour, then you cannot get your foot in the door and you cannot gain the skillset that justifies being paid $20-$40 an hour. All you end up with is a $50-$200K student loan debt and zero opportunity to obtain real world skills because the minimum wage is set so damn high that no one will hire for a learning position.

By enacting policies that stoke deflation, the banking syndicate is able to justify the creation of new money to counteract that deflation. They print the new money, give it to themselves, and in the process we get some token level of price inflation. In reality, the economy is in deep deflation. We just have this thin veneer of debt bubbles combined with new wealth given to the top 1% which serves to paper over the giant hole in the economy that still exists. Some people call this ponzi growth. When that veneer tears open, low wages are the only thing that will fill it and make a strong foundation for real economic growth.

 

[Nashemon]

A real health insurance plan belongs in the private market. Really good wages belong to those who do what you did. Become good enough to deserve them. Low end jobs offer low end pay because they demand no special talent, expertise, or virtue. They are mechanical in nature and anyone can do them with minimal training.

No one should be forced by the police power of the state to overpay someone because he or she needs more money. Compulsory labor price fixing is not the answer.

There is no right to a job, no right to any specific wage, no right to a retirement check, and no right to health care. All of these must be paid for and earned by individuals, and should not be provided by companies or governments.

The minimum wage is price fixing and a perversion of the free market. It accomplishes nothing because the artificially high labor costs are passed through, and price levels for everything rise in response to the market perversion. However, it is not wrong because it does not work. It is wrong because it is immoral.

Minimum wage equals perversion of the market and oppressive price fixing. It has no place in a free economy or a free society.

It is not only economically wrong, it is morally and ethically wrong, as it is based on the premise that one should be allowed to take what he cannot earn because he needs it.

It is a form of wealth confiscation and redistribution, more simply and correctly identified as theft, and should be repealed based on ethics.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

A job is getting paid to work, not getting paid to live. A bit off topic, but prices have gone up since women have began working. A two income family has an easier time affording things with today's pricing. Employers should not have to pick up the slack if their employee's relationship falls apart. If an employer is forced to pay more in order to support the lifestyle of their employees, the business owner should be able to claim the worker and their family as dependents. :awe:

 

[zanejohnson]

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

A job is getting paid to work, not getting paid to live. A bit off topic, but prices have gone up since women have began working. A two income family has an easier time affording things with today's pricing. Employers should not have to pick up the slack if their employee's relationship falls apart. If an employer is forced to pay more in order to support the lifestyle of their employees, the business owner should be able to claim the worker and their family as dependents. :awe:

i agree too, after reading his post...

what i think may be the answer, is a basic income gaurantee system, and doing away with the current "welfare," system, like some euro/slavic countries use...

only for legal citizens, and EVERYONE gets it.

it should be enough to cover a single person's rent/utilities and that's it.


that way, it would take the burden of trying to use weird hiring teir systems away from the "job creators." Also, it would give American citizens, and immigrants who came here the legal way, an advantage over the illegals who get paid under the table and skirt paying taxes.... that way, these unskilled workers would at least have the basic income to supplement the low wages offered by said large corp entities...

any thoughts on this?

 

[LTC8K6]

Why Are So Many Seattle Restaurants Closing Lately?

http://www.seattlemag.com/article/why-are-so-many-seattle-restaurants-closing-lately

It could be a coincidence, and it takes this article a while to get to wages, but you have to wonder if it is related to suddenly higher labor costs and the prospect of much higher labor costs in a couple years?

Perhaps only higher end beaneries will survive?

 

[SMOGZINN]

A job is getting paid to work, not getting paid to live.

This is what you have wrong. There is no point in working for money if that money is not enough to live on. That is the simple truth. The only way a company can get people to work for less than a living wage is by force. They have just become really good at disguising that force.

 

[LTC8K6]

This is what you have wrong. There is no point in working for money if that money is not enough to live on. That is the simple truth. The only way a company can get people to work for less than a living wage is by force. They have just become really good at disguising that force.

Min wage jobs were never intended to be 20 year careers where you made a good living, bought a house, and raised kids.

The argument that you can't buy a house and raise kids while bagging groceries is silly, imo.

It can't work that way.

It will never work that way.

 

[LTC8K6]

If you pay $15/hr as a minimum wage, everything will simply reset, and $15/hr will be the same relative financial position as $7.25/hr was.

There will be a short transition period, but the status quo will return, and $15/hr will not be enough again.

 

[LTC8K6]

Why is rent $750 to $2k a month?
Why is food so expensive?
I think someone making minimum wage should be able to live..maybe with a roommate..Is that wrong?

Rent controls?

There is no way to make the minimum wage high enough, in many areas, to comfortably afford the housing prices.

You'd be talking about way more than $15/hr in much of the country.

 

[Smoblikat]

Life isnt fair or easy, but you can usually get what you want if you put in the effort. Raising minimum wage is just a way lazy people get what they want without all the hassle of "effort".

 

[SMOGZINN]

Min wage jobs were never intended to be 20 year careers where you made a good living, bought a house, and raised kids.

The argument that you can't buy a house and raise kids while bagging groceries is silly, imo.

It can't work that way.

It will never work that way.

No matter how you cut it, most jobs are going to be low skill jobs. There are only so many doctors and engineers the world needs. The corporations, along with the never ending progression of technology, are actively working to make as many jobs as possible minimum wage. It was not that long ago that we would not be considering casino workers to be unskilled minimum wage workers. The ability to quickly calculate odds in your head and pay bets would have been considered a skill. Soon, whatever you do will be considered 'no skill, minimum wage' as well. There are few jobs that will not.

 

[inachu]

Minimum wage should only be for those just entering the workforce with zero skillsets.

 

[zanejohnson]

No matter how you cut it, most jobs are going to be low skill jobs. There are only so many doctors and engineers the world needs. The corporations, along with the never ending progression of technology, are actively working to make as many jobs as possible minimum wage. It was not that long ago that we would not be considering casino workers to be unskilled minimum wage workers. The ability to quickly calculate odds in your head and pay bets would have been considered a skill. Soon, whatever you do will be considered 'no skill, minimum wage' as well. There are few jobs that will not.

This, exactly.

i'll name some other departments, who i've spoken to people in about this, who are also "non skilled workers," $10-$12 /hour

shipping/receiving.....
chefs at the restaurants....
golf course greenskeepers
casino security
hotel front desk attendents, bell hops, players services type jobs
transportation (shuttle drivers and such, i mean i assume they need a CDL to drive those things, and they are making what, $400-$500 a week?) INSANE if you ask me.


all, hired under those three hiring tiers i mentioned earlier...

those jobs should all NOT be considered "unskilled," and I personally think they should be able to make a carreer in that type of job working for a fortune 500 company.

 

[Nashemon]

This is what you have wrong. There is no point in working for money if that money is not enough to live on. That is the simple truth. The only way a company can get people to work for less than a living wage is by force. They have just become really good at disguising that force.

LTC8K6 said pretty much what I was going to say, so I'll just back up his post.

If someone wants to make a career out of minimum wage work, I'm sorry, they're not going to be able to buy a house and raise a litter of kids. However, there are ways to reduce your personal cost of living like renting a cheaper place, living with roommates and splitting the cost, not having an unlimited cell phone, not buying the next-gen xbox. Or do what people have been doing since the beginning of time: move. But who wants to make sacrifices anymore? I want the Internet in my pocket and the government to step in and force my employer to pay for my lifestyle choices.

It's not an employer's responsibility to support an employee beyond what they earn. Some do, sure, but that's why they are called the benefits of working there, and yes, as zanejohnson pointed out, they are sometimes used in order to reduce the rate of pay.

No matter how you cut it, most jobs are going to be low skill jobs. There are only so many doctors and engineers the world needs. The corporations, along with the never ending progression of technology, are actively working to make as many jobs as possible minimum wage. It was not that long ago that we would not be considering casino workers to be unskilled minimum wage workers. The ability to quickly calculate odds in your head and pay bets would have been considered a skill. Soon, whatever you do will be considered 'no skill, minimum wage' as well. There are few jobs that will not.

I can agree with that. What was once considered skilled work has slowly and will continue to become less skilled. Kid's nowadays have an automatic grasp on technology and slowly it will become a norm, I think. Computer work to a degree, will become an unskilled job, if it's not already.

 

[Nashemon]

I thought of something when SMOGZINN said I was wrong.

When arguing I've always tried to consider the other's point of view. I don't like that there has to always be someone that is right and the other is wrong. I try to see if there's some misunderstanding or communication issue. Like the blue/black dress. If you didn't learn anything about how people handle someone telling them something that is irrefutably incorrect in their eyes, you missed a great opportunity.

Perhaps the two sides of the argument are thinking of "job" in a different sense.

On the pro-increased minimum wage side, a job is thought of a means of making a living from the perspective of the employee. The person requires this amount to live so the job should pay at least that.

On the anti-increased minimum wage side, a job is thought of a means of employing someone to do a job (set of tasks). The job requires this amount of skill and should pay this much.

Thinking of them separately I can absolutely understand the arguments for each of them.

 

[zanejohnson]

It's not an employer's responsibility to support an employee beyond what they earn. Some do, sure, but that's why they are called the benefits of working there, and yes, as zanejohnson pointed out, they are sometimes used in order to reduce the rate of pay.


I can agree with that. What was once considered skilled work has slowly and will continue to become less skilled. Kid's nowadays have an automatic grasp on technology and slowly it will become a norm, I think. Computer work to a degree, will become an unskilled job, if it's not already.

Yep, your exactly right, used to, if you had some IT knowledge whatsoever, you would be a shoe in for most mid-largish sized business' IT department, from on the phone tech support type jobs, all the way to higher up analysis/design jobs...

nowdays, most companys dont NEED those types of people, they want either, to hire very qualified people and absolutely require a degree and/or certs, or they contract it out...

i'm sure there's 100 kids that work in that casino who are pretty nifty behind a keyboard, actually i KNOW they are, i sometimes see server logs with some pretty tricky stuff going on, for instance the other day, someone managed to grab a folder off of a server that contained pictures that the valet system uses (basically a car gets valet', and they have this little enclosure that they pull the car into, and cameras take pcitures of the vehicle from all angles, the system then drops these images into a folder on the server,... and then the POS system they use matches the recorded data taken by the valet personnel , to the pictures sitting in said folder....

this server is on it's own subnet (the whole valet system is), well someone with a wireless device managed to grab that folder. (HUGE SECURITY HOLE) it was probably an employee,


but what i'm getting at, is, that is some pretty nice work from a crackers perspective, but there's probably 100 kids that can do that.... 10 years ago, they'd be swooped up quick for those kind of skills, nowdays... you have to have the certs/degrees, or, like me, the certs, the degree, and most importantly the experience to even be considered... (wish i still was on that project, i'd have tracked it back to device and hired that guy )

 

[LTC8K6]

Minimum wage should only be for those just entering the workforce with zero skillsets.

It is not known what skill sets a worker has until they have been under fire for a while.

A degree is just a piece of paper.

A person that you might think would be able do a job well, may do it poorly.

A person that you might think had no skill set related to the job, may do the job very well anyway.

Which one should be paid more?

The person with the papers, or the person who can actually do the job well?