The point of a minimum wage is to prevent downward pressure on wages to create a floor so that wages don't fall through it.
That floor already exists, it's called the market. So it's not about that, it's about something else, most often an arbitrary concept of "fair."
I also don't buy the argument that teens don't need a living wage. A lot of teens need a living wage to support their families.
Thus the need to see those statistics and see how we know that it's really not actually the case.
I don't buy the argument that certain people deserve living wages while other people do. We don't base CEO pay based on whether or not they deserve a living wage.
No, we base CEO pay on market values for their work. We don't do that for minimum wage, as it isn't based on market values, but arbitrary political and social desires.
This sounds like an argument by someone in a privileged position that hasn't or does not know anyone that had to support their families growing up. This just sounds like a bunch of privilege talking.
The argument of the desperate.
They don't just become wealthy, and it's not an indicator that they eventually become wealthy. But it absolutely keeps wages afloat.
And the evidence for this?
What harm has it done?
Reduced employment, increased prices, distorted wages and prices along the way.
I know libertarians believe that wage is a stick you can beat people with to make them improve and learn but that's not how people function
Your words, not anyone else's.
Eliminate the minimum wage and give someone $3/hr for something and they can't get any job that pays better, that doesn't teach them anything, it's just depressing and they have to spend their entire time working instead of improving themselves.
If that's what the job is actually worth, why should they be paid more than that?
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 03:58 (UTC)That floor already exists, it's called the market. So it's not about that, it's about something else, most often an arbitrary concept of "fair."
I also don't buy the argument that teens don't need a living wage. A lot of teens need a living wage to support their families.
Thus the need to see those statistics and see how we know that it's really not actually the case.
I don't buy the argument that certain people deserve living wages while other people do. We don't base CEO pay based on whether or not they deserve a living wage.
No, we base CEO pay on market values for their work. We don't do that for minimum wage, as it isn't based on market values, but arbitrary political and social desires.
This sounds like an argument by someone in a privileged position that hasn't or does not know anyone that had to support their families growing up. This just sounds like a bunch of privilege talking.
The argument of the desperate.
They don't just become wealthy, and it's not an indicator that they eventually become wealthy. But it absolutely keeps wages afloat.
And the evidence for this?
What harm has it done?
Reduced employment, increased prices, distorted wages and prices along the way.
I know libertarians believe that wage is a stick you can beat people with to make them improve and learn but that's not how people function
Your words, not anyone else's.
Eliminate the minimum wage and give someone $3/hr for something and they can't get any job that pays better, that doesn't teach them anything, it's just depressing and they have to spend their entire time working instead of improving themselves.
If that's what the job is actually worth, why should they be paid more than that?