Honestly: the minimum wage does need to go up

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

This post got me thinking.

I am firmly in favor of:

A) A higher minimum wage in the whole US, and my home state of NY
B) Honesty in politics

While the OP I linked to is not exactly dishonest, it's not exactly honest either.
And this is not to put flak upon the poster there, but it's an example of political rhetoric that is used to leverage one side of a conversation, ignoring nuance.

the graphic in the linked to OP:

1) Doesn't seem to take into account state laws that raise min wage over fed laws
2) Doesn't take into account the vast difference in housing throughout a state

My objection is more with 2 than 1. 1 is easy to take care of, but 2 is not easy.

New York City is WAYYYY more expensive than Rochester or Buffalo, NY; or a large number of other places within the state I could name. Yet, this graphic gives us a number, presumably an average. But that average is way skewed. But how else should they do it? Give us on graphic for NYC and another for the rest of NY State? That wouldn't work either, because then you'd need to break it down for other cities and so on. So what do we do?

We must talk about things in the big picture without getting bogged down in details, otherwise we will have to talk for eons before we can understand what needs to be done. So while I agree that the min wage needs to go up, across the US, I have a problem with the info-graphics created to support that argument. They lack nuance, and as such, are deceiving. Even if they don't mean to be, and are honestly doing the best they can to compile and sort the data, the inevitability of misleading data is going to doom us all.

That said.
Happy saint patty's day.
Was I drunk when I wrote this? You decide.

Comments

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

You have digressed into so much hyperbole, it's gotten difficult to take you seriously.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

perhaps i see that in other comments, but you commented on hyperbole in a fairly fact-based comment.
huh?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

You are correct, except for "But hey who needs to increase minimum wage? It might make my 8 dollar beer cost $0.02 more."

It probably would have been more effective after one of many other comments.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

wait, THAT's hyperbole?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

hahaha, i know, right!

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

"But hey who needs to increase minimum wage? It might make my 8 dollar beer cost $0.02 more."

uh, yeah!

[dwer.livejournal.com]

that's... not really hyperbole.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

And this is all your contribution for the last 2 weeks?

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

That was not hyperbole, maybe that should tell you something.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

"But hey who needs to increase minimum wage? It might make my 8 dollar beer cost $0.02 more."

It's not?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Nah, not really.
It's sorta a single example though.

But, do you really think beer at a bar is priced by it's cost to the business?
It's incredible mark-up, and paying the workers involved in producing and selling it a slightly higher wage isn't gonna reduce that mark-up enough to matter.

Also, bartenders usually make the money from tips, not from min wage, even though they count as min wage workers. I would also wonder how many beer breweries pay their workers min wage (i have no idea, but i'd be surprised it it was a high min-wage field)

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Eight dollars for a beer is not hyperbole? Seriously? I'm not a drinker and don't go into bars, but eight bucks?

I am honestly torn on the whole minimum wage/living wage debate, since in my business one pays prevailing wage, which being a trade is more than double.

The last time this was the subject of debate I used an example of how raising of the minimum wage CAN hurt a small business (actually several iirc) For years waitresses and bartenders were allowed to be paid a base that was below minimum wage (In Los Angeles) because their tips assured them of an actual wage that was much more. The City Council in it's finite wisdom decided they all had to be paid minimum wage as a base. Some small places couldn't handle it and had to lay people off, which of course affected their business. Now you stated up there (somewhere) that if a business can't afford to pay minimum wage and stay in business they shouldn't (or something like that). Let's explore this a moment: Many small eating places (for example) are family owned and mostly operated. Very few of them make people rich. Most do pay the bills and allow for a comfortable life (or else they do go out of business) but the profit margins are slim. Say I make approx $800 a week from my little diner (roughly 40K a year.....for putting in 60+ hours a week, doing something I enjoy, and has been in the family for generations...that's not as unusual as it may sound) and the gov't tells me I have to now pay my employees an extra 2.50 an hour, it doesn't take very many to make say 100 hours a week (two full time one 1/2 time) to take me down to $550 a week clear. Trust me it's a whole lot of work, working in and running a business for those kind of wages. The interesting thing is that the employees were making almost $12 an hour with tips instead of the 7.50 (example) that was minimum wage, even tho their base was $5. So while the business owner has a number of options all of them (that I see) end up costing the employees in the long run.....which is generally what happens when the gov't tries to help ;)

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

This example would make sense if the government SUDDENLY wanted you to pay your employees $2.50/hr more, but that's not how it works.

You know about the changes YEARS in advance, the changes are usually very small (maybe 30 cents at a time), and much of the time inflation absorbs most of the costs.

Where's an example that takes those facts into account? Aren't you the one being hyperbolic with that highly unrealistic scenario?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

In the anecdote given, the businesses had less than a year to comply. Unrealistic? Well since it happened I don't think so.

The city of Santa Monica has passed a "living wage law" that gave those affected a relatively short implimendation period.
L.A. was working on a similar law, which again would only affect singled out businesses. (I don't know what ever happened since I moved out of L.A. County a long time ago)..

In theory I wouldn't argue against a minimum or living wage law (altho I'm personally in favor of the idea of a prevailing wage, but that can be nebulous) however in RL it can be very difficult to impliment FAIRLY.
Several points: Most (that I know of) minimum wage jobs are entry level jobs. If I understood all the numbers bounced around thru this post 3% of people working minimum wage support families, now here is where it gets tricky, assuming that the majority aren't people that have lost their jobs and aren't marking time (since unemployment will pay more than you can get on minimum wage if you have been working at a substancial job) I find it difficult to believe that someone who is content with a minimum wage job would start a family...that being said I do know families who have bought homes with 3-4 members all working minimum or slightly more, jobs. (That takes in other factors that could come off xenophobic, and I don't want to side track at the moment). And having run two businesses, I can see how a mandantory pay raise (even only) 30cents an hour can make a big enough difference in the bottom line as to make it not worth it. I could leave the family business right now and generate a larger bottom line than I am right now (with less effort) however if the economy gets better I would be sorry, not to mention I am too close to retiring :D

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

I believe that your numbers are grossly under-estimated.

It is way higher than 3% who are supporting families. I'll go find you a citation.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Parents with Children
o Of Pennsylvania workers age 16 or older, 18 percent of those affected by an increase in the minimum wage are parents with children at home.
o Of Pennsylvania workers age 18 to 64, 22 percent of those affected by an increase in the minimum wage to 7.15 are parents with children at home.

- http://www.pahouse.com/cohen/minimumwage/minimum_wage_facts_PA_data.htm

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

I will admit. This data is dated, but it's something.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

This is a much more comprehensive report: http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2010.htm

specific note: Never-married workers, who tend to be young, were more likely than married workers to earn the Federal minimum wage or less (about 11 percent versus about 3 percent)

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Well you did take him serious after all. Wasn't too hard, was it?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

If that small increase, let's say in line with inflation, affects your bottom line then your business is actually failing, and you've had to stifle the real wages of your workers in order to keep it afloat. I'm not really sympathetic.

There are legitimate concerns over what constitutes a living wage and where, but this weird argument about breaking the company's back with it is a myth. It just doesn't occur in reality. Wages are a vanishingly small portion of overall business costs, especially so if you're only paying them minimum wage.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

"If that small increase, let's say in line with inflation, affects your bottom line then your business is actually failing, and you've had to stifle the real wages of your workers in order to keep it afloat. I'm not really sympathetic."

We are kind of talking past each other, and it is my fault since I did kind of shift the goal posts.
Since my anecdotal example of where the minimum wage law being applied did break the back of a small successful business it is not a myth....I think that's what I am objecting to. I would tend to agree that a major company who see's it coming is probably not going under, and if that is what you are limiting it to, then you are correct. My perceptions of your hyperbole are due in large part to your refusal to aknowledge any argument that there is a possibility that there are no exceptions. I am well enough aware of my lack of articulateness in writing to be able to sway you, So I will bid you a good evening :)

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

in NYC an 8 dollar beer is not terribly shocking, at a bar or restaurant.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

No.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

So, other than a sport's arena where would beer cost $8?? (Serious question, the last time I bought a beer was in 1970...long story)

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I've been to a few clubs. At the sapphire in vegas they cost 12 for coors.