Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (785996)	5/22/2014 6:00:50 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1583332

dup

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (785996)	5/22/2014 6:03:18 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1583332

"if you got rid of the minimum wage entirely, not much will happen to wages as a result because, for the most part, the free market already dictates what wages should be" I think this assumption is wrong. I think the "free market" would immediately begin testing lower wages, especially in places where unemployment is high. Let's not test it, OK?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (785996)	5/22/2014 7:00:10 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1583332

>> In reality, the "ideal" minimum wage would be in between those two extremes, of course. But it would probably be closer to #2 than to #1, because IMO the minimum wage should only set a floor on wages. It should not represent a "living wage" because (a) there is no limit to what is included in such a "living wage," and (b) not everyone needs a job that pays a so-called "living wage." I could live with that, although I can see no reason that a person who wants to work for $3/hour (or even free, as they did for liberal Slate magazine, until they were criticized for it) to get experience ought not be able to do so. There are a very small number of people who are currently making minimum wage; it is more of an ideological wedge than anything else.