Raising the minimum wage

[demopublican]

http://www.gazette.net/article/20130...mplate=gazette

Legislation that would raise Maryland’s minimum wage to $10 by 2015 from $7.25 would hurt restaurants and other businesses, business officials said this week.

Senate Majority Leader Robert J. Garagiola (D-Dist. 15) of Germantown and Del. Aisha N. Braveboy (D-Dist. 25) of Mitchellville outlined their proposal this week at a news conference in Annapolis. They said they plan to file legislation, which would raise the minimum wage to $8.25 in July, $9 in July 2014 and $10 in July 2015, in the House and Senate within the next week.
The minimum wage for employees who rely on tips also would rise, to 70 percent of the minimum wage from 50 percent.
The Restaurant Association of Maryland’s government affairs committee has concerns about raising labor costs “at a time when we’re still trying to understand what the health care law mandates will mean, food costs are increasing and the economy remains sluggish,” said Melvin R. Thompson, senior vice president of government affairs and public policy.

I never understand why they don't just make it $500/hr. That way we could all be rich

[Spot72]

http://www.gazette.net/article/20130...mplate=gazette





I never understand why they don't just make it $500/hr. That way we could all be rich

Sarcasm much? Let me try. Phasing in an increase in the minimum wage makes perfect sense, and even at $10/hr. wages would be far below the indexed "living wage", which is nearly $14/hr. in central Maryland. For employers who worry that raising wages will hit their pockets hard, they need to factor in the high cost of employee turnover, which increases as payscales lower. The other, more universally accepted upside of a rise would be that that increased pay would likely circulate and stimulate job growth elsewhere, if we understand that even at $10/hr. people won't be making enough to save in today's economy - they will simply have more to spend and rely a bit less on the "public dole". The only exception i might offer would be a lower rate for youth under 18 years of age.

[octoburn]

The minimum wage is usually considered an entry~level wage, and even then it is usually for largely unskilled workers. Raising it with all the uncertainties in a slow economy will hurt businesses and workers alike, because hours will be cut and so will the number of available jobs to low~skill level jobseekers. Smaller businesses that are already struggling will either have to absorb he additional costs or pass them on to their customers. There comes a point when they will simply not be competitive or could decide the costs are not worth the effort or rewards to those who actually create jobs.

It's not unusual for people to work more than one job when they are starting in the work force and building their own work records and skill sets so they can advance. Minimum wage jobs are not meant to be life~long career choices. Moving on to better~paying jobs should be the norm as one develops in the workplace if their particular skills are in demand.

[Informed Thinker]

It is at times like this we all have to step back and wonder how much of a clue people have about job creation and most importantly how business and competition work. A large number of restuarants fail and increasing their operating cost will just exacerbate that. The reason people take the risk to form a business is personal gain in addition to other goals. Some times these goals are community betterment and they may be willing to forgo their kids college fund to pay their employees more than market rates. Yes market rates a novel idea. If as previously noted if you have the skills and perform well you move on to a better paying position. If you don't you can find yourself in a rut until you get a clue yourself.

[Informed Thinker]

Sarcasm much? Let me try. Phasing in an increase in the minimum wage makes perfect sense, and even at $10/hr. wages would be far below the indexed "living wage", which is nearly $14/hr. in central Maryland. For employers who worry that raising wages will hit their pockets hard, they need to factor in the high cost of employee turnover, which increases as payscales lower. The other, more universally accepted upside of a rise would be that that increased pay would likely circulate and stimulate job growth elsewhere, if we understand that even at $10/hr. people won't be making enough to save in today's economy - they will simply have more to spend and rely a bit less on the "public dole". The only exception i might offer would be a lower rate for youth under 18 years of age.

It doesn't make a lot of sense when weighs the profit motive which is why most people take the risk of losing capital to form a business in the first place. Yes folks do and can lose a chunk of change when their business fails. Will you be taking a collection for them? Suggesting government help them keep their home etc etc etc.

[OldBay]

It doesn't make a lot of sense when weighs the profit motive which is why most people take the risk of losing capital to form a business in the first place. Yes folks do and can lose a chunk of change when their business fails. Will you be taking a collection for them? Suggesting government help them keep their home etc etc etc.

The government (read we taxpayers) already helps. The working poor qualify for public assistance and tax credits. The earned income tax credit and social programs like various food stamp assistance are tied to income. The income limits for these programs increase every year and include more people in a climate of stagnant and falling wages.

I can see both sides of this issue. Yes, the owner of a business needs to minimize his expenses. But on the other hand, his low labor costs are subsidized by taxpayers.

[demopublican]

People earn what they are worth. If you don't bring $10 of value every hour you will not keep your job. Well, unless you work at social security or something like that.

[octoburn]

The government (read we taxpayers) already helps. The working poor qualify for public assistance and tax credits. The earned income tax credit and social programs like various food stamp assistance are tied to income. The income limits for these programs increase every year and include more people in a climate of stagnant and falling wages.

I can see both sides of this issue. Yes, the owner of a business needs to minimize his expenses. But on the other hand, his low labor costs are subsidized by taxpayers.

There is no "on the other hand" other than the demand for certain skills that people have directs their earning power. And even if someone goes to school to pursue a career in a particular field knowing what that field pays, it is still their choice to stay, leave, or change their area of work when costs become too high.

Just ask an OB/GYN, or more precisely ~ an ex~OB/GYN. The same principle applies to smaller business owners.

[OldBay]

There is no "on the other hand" other than the demand for certain skills that people have directs their earning power. And even if someone goes to school to pursue a career in a particular field knowing what that field pays, it is still their choice to stay, leave, or change their area of work when costs become too high.

Just ask an OB/GYN, or more precisely ~ an ex~OB/GYN. The same principle applies to smaller business owners.

True but also irrelevant to my post about the subsidy provided to employers who pay less than the limits for social services and tax credits.

[demopublican]

True but also irrelevant to my post about the subsidy provided to employers who pay less than the limits for social services and tax credits.

That is a load of crap. People need to develop marketable job skill. If they do not that is not the employers fault. If society chooses to help them that is great. But don't blame the employer.

[OldBay]

That is a load of crap. People need to develop marketable job skill. If they do not that is not the employers fault. If society chooses to help them that is great. But don't blame the employer.

Did I say anything was any employer's fault? Or blame any employer? Do try to keep up. "Society" does not choose to subsidize employers. Since when do taxpayers who fund these social services programs or fund tax credits have a choice?

[OldBay]

We will always have the working poor. Sure, it is the employee's obligation to develop marketable skills, etc. but that is the answer to a different question.
If we defend the employer's right to offer the lowest pay, then we cannot complain about the taxes that are used to fund the social services for these working poor. If we raise minimum wages, we'll pay more for some goods and services but in theory at least, pay less into the social services programs and tax credits, since fewer will qualify.

The cost, in theory is the same. It is how the cost is apportioned between the cost of goods or services and the cost of taxes. Business owners here don't like to hear that they are subsidized, but it is the truth.

[demopublican]

We will always have the working poor. Sure, it is the employee's obligation to develop marketable skills, etc. but that is the answer to a different question.
If we defend the employer's right to offer the lowest pay, then we cannot complain about the taxes that are used to fund the social services for these working poor. If we raise minimum wages, we'll pay more for some goods and services but in theory at least, pay less into the social services programs and tax credits, since fewer will qualify.

The cost, in theory is the same. It is how the cost is apportioned between the cost of goods or services and the cost of taxes. Business owners here don't like to hear that they are subsidized, but it is the truth.

What a load of socialist crap. In the world of bailouts and corporate welfare there are certainly businesses that are subsidized. But not because some employees take additional services from Govt.
Unskilled and entry level jobs are not intended to support families. If you want a family learn a job skill. Or start at the bottom and work your way up.
The Govt itself has jobs that do not pay mush more than minimum wage.

[Informed Thinker]

When in a Free Market did it become the responsibility of business to assure the social welfare? There are well paid skilled labor jobs going vacant because of a shortage of QUALIFIED applicants. So if you feel under paid increase your job qualifications like millions of other folks and get a better paying job. If you are minimum wage you have no place to go but up and the world is yours.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm
Job Openings and Labor Turnover – November 2012

There were 3.7 million job openings on the last business day of
November, unchanged from October, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
reported today. The hires rate (3.2 percent) and separations rate (3.1
percent) also were unchanged in November. This release includes
estimates of the number and rate of job openings, hires, and
separations for the nonfarm sector by industry and by geographic
region.

[demopublican]

It is an amazing perspective.
We are importing Engineers. We don't have enough mechanics, truck drivers, and other qualified workers. We have millions of able and elidgble employees collecting unemployment. And we are importing millions of people to work farm, labor, restaurant, and factory jobs illegally.
And some people think the problem is the minimum legal wage.
The problem is that many people would rather get paid not to work, many others have no marketable job skills, and others have skills that are no longer valuable.
And our schools don't teach enough vocational skills.

[Haberdasher]

http://www.gazette.net/article/20130...mplate=gazette





I never understand why they don't just make it $500/hr. That way we could all be rich

I think they should lower it to $1 an hour so the great Republican dream of income redistribution can finally be realized.

It has been going gangbusters since the 1970s, but why not speed it up?

[Informed Thinker]

It is an amazing perspective.
We are importing Engineers. We don't have enough mechanics, truck drivers, and other qualified workers. We have millions of able and elidgble employees collecting unemployment. And we are importing millions of people to work farm, labor, restaurant, and factory jobs illegally.
And some people think the problem is the minimum legal wage.
The problem is that many people would rather get paid not to work, many others have no marketable job skills, and others have skills that are no longer valuable.
And our schools don't teach enough vocational skills.

Many get caught filling out the application and presenting themselves appropriately and if they make it that far they fail the pee in a cup part. This is it in a nutshell. Do these four things and welcome to poverty city.

Drop out of school
Do drugs
Have a child out of wed lock
criminal behavior

All controllable by the individual in our society

[Informed Thinker]

We will always have the working poor. Sure, it is the employee's obligation to develop marketable skills, etc. but that is the answer to a different question.
If we defend the employer's right to offer the lowest pay, then we cannot complain about the taxes that are used to fund the social services for these working poor. If we raise minimum wages, we'll pay more for some goods and services but in theory at least, pay less into the social services programs and tax credits, since fewer will qualify.

The cost, in theory is the same. It is how the cost is apportioned between the cost of goods or services and the cost of taxes. Business owners here don't like to hear that they are subsidized, but it is the truth.

There are states, Republican in nature that are able to lower taxes and not increase social services. It is possible if the citizens of the state want. Especially the tax paying ones. They also have low minimum wage amounts

[OldBay]

What a load of socialist crap. In the world of bailouts and corporate welfare there are certainly businesses that are subsidized. But not because some employees take additional services from Govt.
Unskilled and entry level jobs are not intended to support families. If you want a family learn a job skill. Or start at the bottom and work your way up.
The Govt itself has jobs that do not pay mush more than minimum wage.

Who do you think pays the bill for these gov't services? A business that pays minimum wage is certainly subsidized by the taxpayers. When a low paid worker gets a large EITC - that money comes from those who pay the freight. Just because some corporation has received a larger subsidy does not change anything.

As the EITC income levels increase every year, we have more and more on the dole every year. Ditto for food stamp programs. If it is rational and ethical for corporations to take bailouts and agribusinesses to receive payments for crops not grown, why is it not so for the working poor?

[OldBay]

I think they should lower it to $1 an hour so the great Republican dream of income redistribution can finally be realized.

It has been going gangbusters since the 1970s, but why not speed it up?

Restaurant waiters have a federal minimum wage of 2.13 per hour, not much different than the minimum wage of 1.60 an hour (which had just gone up from 1.40) when I started unloading trucks over 40 years ago in HS. In restaurants, the money is in the tips - but there are some here who still complain about anyone other than themselves expecting to be paid anything at all for a day's work.