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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (194886)	2/26/2021 1:15:13 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 356167

>> Where we differ is the definition of "major" and "screw-up." Yes, probably so. >> I don't know why anyone would bother to get out of bed in the morning and commute to work for seven bucks an hour. The answer to that question should be, "Because he's gotta eat". But the secondary reason is, "It will enable him to develop skills that will allow him to earn more over time." But it is a fact that today, even the military cannot find a job for someone with IQ lower than 93 (that figure was 83 until about 1990, and as referenced in the "McNamara's Morons" affair, it literally got them, and others, killed in Vietnam when McNamara tried to use these people to fight our wars for us.) So, we can see that employing people who aren't able to carry out a job can be dangerous for both the employee and others. But there are 2% of people who are right there in that range where they can get a job but not at $15/hour. Because they can't produce that. Still, it is better than nothing. A person who can't earn his keep at $15/hour in a tire shop might pick up enough skills to change tires at some point. But he is going to tie up a machine that needs a $15/hour person to operate it. It is really hard to find a place for that person. My dad had old black man who worked for him for $1/hour back in the 50s-60s, and that guy could not possibly have made more. But he was honest and could mop floors and clean up messes, and dad could keep him busy, yet basically unskilled and unable to develop much more than that. In a tight labor market like Trump created, you're more likely to be able to use these people effectively to at least break even productively. But in average labor markets or the disaster Biden is creating as quickly as possible, these people are sidelined, and demographically, are inordinately minorities. These people might be able to work their ways into higher paying jobs if given a chance, but you're asking employers to roll the dice on low-skilled employees who will cost the business money more than a minimum wage employee. Better off to hire a higher skilled employee at more than Minimum wage. You should keep in mind, though, that $15/hour is a pretty good wage in southeast Arkansas where you can rent a place to live for $300/month. But in NYC it obviously isn't so good. That, right there, makes a $15 federal minimum a bad choice. At the end of the day, the federal minimum wage law should be done away with, and states should set minimum wages where they deem appropriate. Or not at all if that is their choice. So, the more rational view is that the federal government has no role in the minimum wage arena and the right thing to do would be to move it entirely to the states. Setting a minimum that is too high for any demographic is destroying that demographic's opportunity to have a decent living. That is just a fact. And the people most likely to be destroyed by it are those who need work, even at lower than MW. I have never seen a case made for a federal minimum wage: What works in Seattle doesn't work in Montana. I know a boy (hell, I guess he's a man now) who works at an Amazon facility in Dallas for around $15/hour. He lives with his mom and dad, and Amazon gives him four hours of work a day. He goes in, takes two breaks (which he posts on facebook) and while working he generally walks around speaking on a megaphone about maintaining social distance. Occasionally he assists in loading a truck for delivery, but he has been told that they do not have a job for him in picking or of course, in management. That is life for some subset of people. Four hours at $15 ($60/day) is pretty good money even though he comes about 50 miles R/T daily. Amazon is doing its part. If you were to raise the minimum to $17 or $20, that guy will no longer be employed. He won't, because his labor can be replaced by a recorded announcement that costs essentially zero. What do you do with this kid (probably 36-37 years old at this point)? Minimum wage is not a solution to any problem I know of. Certainly not at the federal level which simply makes it more counterproductive than a state MW.