Minimum Wage Increase Impact/Effect

[nosuchreality]

I still think the market should set the price.

Is there a minimum home price? A minimum car price?

I understand the social aspects of setting a minimum wage, but economically, the minimum wage will set itself depending on the job.

Plus, does minimum wage affect all those under the table jobs or cash wages?

Does that apply to pollution?  Air pollution?  Water pollution?  What about building codes and zoning?

The market cannot price some things because the costs are foisted upon many non-consumers or the products.

Paying low labor rates is just propagating a form of pollution.  People with more sustainable and beneficial plans cannot compete because others are running artificially cost structure by making non-consumers of their products shoulder some of the costs.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

I still think the market should set the price.

Is there a minimum home price? A minimum car price?

I understand the social aspects of setting a minimum wage, but economically, the minimum wage will set itself depending on the job.

Plus, does minimum wage affect all those under the table jobs or cash wages?

That doesn't work in a first world market unless you are okay a segment of the population living in second/third world conditions or wish to have the government subsidize the low wages through social services.

 

[The Motor Court Company]

even if we want to help these low end low skilled workers there are no laws to force the small business owners not to reduce hours or replace humans with automated machines. the intention is good just like ObamaCare  but it will fall short in practice.

There should be some tax incentives for the small business owners so the net effect is neutral: something like additional tax breaks based on number of employees/hours.

California leglistators almost finalize a deal to increase the minimum wage to $15. If the deal passes, this will remove it from the ballot box in November.

50% salary increase for minimum wage workers.  And how about those currently making $14.75/hr since they have a higher skillset than their $10/hr counterparts.  I bet they will only see a .25c/hr increase.

This will kill a lot of small business owners, particularly those in the restaurant industry.  Get ready for $9 fast food hamburgers and $5 large fries.  McDonalds large fries are already $3....

We own small businesses and you can bet we'll be hiking up prices to cover the overhead of this minimum wage increase. And so will every other business out there. So people better be prepared over the next few years to see their cost of living rise higher at a fairly rapid pace. And as business owners any additional businesses we would open would not be in California. So California better be prepared to see some of these businesses move out of their state = job loss. These are the benefits of a socialist movement. Feel the Bern...
Minimum wage is meant for the high school student or maybe the college student trying to make some extra $$ to pay living expenses. It was never meant to be a lifetime pay rate for a career at McDonalds. At some point people should realize that they need to acquire a skill set that would enhance their pay beyond the minimum wage range. It's called hard work, setting goals in life. We really need to stop feeding into this entitled attitude that I just deserve to increase my pay by 50% because I deserve it and am too lazy to acquire an adequate career.

That seems like a really simplistic viewpoint.  At some point, somebody will need to do the low end jobs.  You may consider a $15 minimum wage to be too high but what you consider to be a "reasonable" minimum wage is probably too high for someone else's business.  A state like California cannot pander to the lowest denominator, just like the US cannot compete with Vietnam or China for lower labor cost. 

I know it sucks for the rest of us but we should be okay to pay a little more overall to make sure the lowest end of the employment range get a living wage and who need the money a lot more than most others.  Not everyone is cut out to be a college grad or a white color worker.  We are willing to pay an extra "resort fee" for Wifi and daily newspaper but not a little more to raise the living standards of others?

Higher minimum wages also increases worker happiness and worker productivity while reducing worker turnover.  It also increases the incentives for someone who could not otherwise afford to work to get a job.

As for job loss, most of the jobs impacted by the minimum wage increase are localized jobs.  That is jobs that cannot be relocated to others states (i.e. waiters, servers, sales clerks, etc.).  You can make an automation argument but honestly, that was happening regardless of the minimum wage.

The effects of minimum wage on jobs is tricky...some say its a jobs killer, other say that it has no effect.  Also, statewide minimum wage increases are better than city wide minimum wage increases as you can't just move out to the city limits.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/undisputed-facts-minimum-wage/

 

[Irvinecommuter]

even if we want to help these low end low skilled workers there are no laws to force the small business owners not to reduce hours or replace humans with automated machines. the intention is good just like ObamaCare  but it will fall short in practice.

There should be some tax incentives for the small business owners so the net effect is neutral: something like additional tax breaks based on number of employees/hours.

I would agree with that.  I do understand and sympathize with small businesses....I think there should be some differential between employers with 10 of fewer employees, 25 or fewer employees, and those above 25 employees.

 

[nosuchreality]

even if we want to help these low end low skilled workers there are no laws to force the small business owners not to reduce hours or replace humans with automated machines. the intention is good just like ObamaCare  but it will fall short in practice.

There should be some tax incentives for the small business owners so the net effect is neutral: something like additional tax breaks based on number of employees/hours.

You mean like employee wages are considered an expense and thus revenue to cover them isn't taxable? ;-)

I think it would be interesting to see some tax incentives for businesses that maybe have a lower tax rate for businesses whose employee wages of the bottom 50% of their company is above a specific ratio of the top 1% of their company.

Small business is really a misnomer.  There's < 5 people businesses, less than 50 people small business, then there is SBA standard which as things like Oil Extraction being small business at less than 1250 people and most manufacturing operations at 1000 people.  Or housing construction being small business at $36.5 Million in revenue.

So yea, this is tough for some, particularly franchise owners and people competing in that small retail services space.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

I still think the market should set the price.

Is there a minimum home price? A minimum car price?

I understand the social aspects of setting a minimum wage, but economically, the minimum wage will set itself depending on the job.

Plus, does minimum wage affect all those under the table jobs or cash wages?

Does that apply to pollution?  Air pollution?  Water pollution?  What about building codes and zoning?

The market cannot price some things because the costs are foisted upon many non-consumers or the products.

Paying low labor rates is just propagating a form of pollution.  People with more sustainable and beneficial plans cannot compete because others are running artificially cost structure by making non-consumers of their products shoulder some of the costs.

I don't agree.

We already have a zero minimum wage environment in California because of the day laborers, undocumented kitchen help etc.

You're pulling a Trump here.

#hyperbole

 

[lnc]

I have a small business in LA and already facing minimum wage increase to $15 in a few years.  I welcome the state wide increase since I don't want the small business owners in LA the only one that got screwed. >

 

[nosuchreality]

LOL, are you trying to make my point for me?  You claiming the exploitation of illegal labor is really working out as a benefit to society?

I still think the market should set the price.

Is there a minimum home price? A minimum car price?

I understand the social aspects of setting a minimum wage, but economically, the minimum wage will set itself depending on the job.

Plus, does minimum wage affect all those under the table jobs or cash wages?

Does that apply to pollution?  Air pollution?  Water pollution?  What about building codes and zoning?

The market cannot price some things because the costs are foisted upon many non-consumers or the products.

Paying low labor rates is just propagating a form of pollution.  People with more sustainable and beneficial plans cannot compete because others are running artificially cost structure by making non-consumers of their products shoulder some of the costs.

I don't agree.

We already have a zero minimum wage environment in California because of the day laborers, undocumented kitchen help etc.

You're pulling a Trump here.

#hyperbole

 

[momopi]

IMO the issue with minimum wage is the "one size fits all" approach.  For example, if you bought a paid parking lot business and want to hire a high school kid to stand by the exit and watch out for cars for your customers exiting on to the street, it probably doesn't make sense to pay the kid $15/hr.

On the other hand, if we were to assume that everyone should be "clever" and figure out how to advance toward higher paying job, then let's draw a T-chart and list all the jobs that you think shouldn't pay a living wage in your city.  That list gets pretty long.

I'm of the opinion that if someone is willing to work hard and work full time, then that person deserves a living wage -- and/or other subsidies such as affordable housing in every city of employment that allows for roof over the head and food on the table.  Instead of having lower paid workers live further away in less expensive cities, it's better to house them closer to reduce commute/traffic and have better quality of living/productivity with time saved.  i.e. if you can save 2 hours of commuting every day, you can use the time for a side job to clean someone's house and make extra money.

However, if the person is able but simply unwilling to work, then we have no reason to house and feed them in more expensive areas.  Ship them off to depopulating rural areas with tiny house, seeds, farm tools, and a small monthly welfare check.

 

[Irvine Dream]

I'm of the opinion that if someone is willing to work hard and work full time, then that person deserves a living wage -- and/or other subsidies such as affordable housing in every city of employment that allows for roof over the head and food on the table. 

Well Said.  I am in complete agreement

 

[eyephone]

This law will force business not to hire or lay off. I predict under the table workers will surge under this law.

 

[Paris167]

This law will force business not to hire or lay off. I predict under the table workers will surge under this law.

I agree. And this is just one way for small business to simply survive. They will in addition cut down on the work force, figure out ways to automate, increase expenses for customers and in some businesses due to these measures the quality of service may also suffer. I agree that the minimum wage needs to increase from current levels but you cannot just increase it by 50% rapidly over just a few years and not expect businesses to take drastic measures to survive it. And ultimately for those minimum wage workers they will find the "value" of their dollar is almost the same as it currently is simply due to the increased living expenses they will face.

 

[Paris167]

California leglistators almost finalize a deal to increase the minimum wage to $15. If the deal passes, this will remove it from the ballot box in November.

50% salary increase for minimum wage workers.  And how about those currently making $14.75/hr since they have a higher skillset than their $10/hr counterparts.  I bet they will only see a .25c/hr increase.

This will kill a lot of small business owners, particularly those in the restaurant industry.  Get ready for $9 fast food hamburgers and $5 large fries.  McDonalds large fries are already $3....

We own small businesses and you can bet we'll be hiking up prices to cover the overhead of this minimum wage increase. And so will every other business out there. So people better be prepared over the next few years to see their cost of living rise higher at a fairly rapid pace. And as business owners any additional businesses we would open would not be in California. So California better be prepared to see some of these businesses move out of their state = job loss. These are the benefits of a socialist movement. Feel the Bern...
Minimum wage is meant for the high school student or maybe the college student trying to make some extra $$ to pay living expenses. It was never meant to be a lifetime pay rate for a career at McDonalds. At some point people should realize that they need to acquire a skill set that would enhance their pay beyond the minimum wage range. It's called hard work, setting goals in life. We really need to stop feeding into this entitled attitude that I just deserve to increase my pay by 50% because I deserve it and am too lazy to acquire an adequate career.

That seems like a really simplistic viewpoint.  At some point, somebody will need to do the low end jobs.  You may consider a $15 minimum wage to be too high but what you consider to be a "reasonable" minimum wage is probably too high for someone else's business.  A state like California cannot pander to the lowest denominator, just like the US cannot compete with Vietnam or China for lower labor cost. 

I know it sucks for the rest of us but we should be okay to pay a little more overall to make sure the lowest end of the employment range get a living wage and who need the money a lot more than most others.  Not everyone is cut out to be a college grad or a white color worker.  We are willing to pay an extra "resort fee" for Wifi and daily newspaper but not a little more to raise the living standards of others?

Higher minimum wages also increases worker happiness and worker productivity while reducing worker turnover.  It also increases the incentives for someone who could not otherwise afford to work to get a job.

As for job loss, most of the jobs impacted by the minimum wage increase are localized jobs.  That is jobs that cannot be relocated to others states (i.e. waiters, servers, sales clerks, etc.).  You can make an automation argument but honestly, that was happening regardless of the minimum wage.

The effects of minimum wage on jobs is tricky...some say its a jobs killer, other say that it has no effect.  Also, statewide minimum wage increases are better than city wide minimum wage increases as you can't just move out to the city limits.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/undisputed-facts-minimum-wage/

To me it isn't a simplistic view point, it's common sense. Even my father an immigrant without a high school education came to this country, started at a car wash washing cars and then moved up to ticketing, then to management, then to his own business. You have to encourage society to move up. You don't necessarily have to go to college or get a white collar job. But there is always room to move up even within the blue collar industry. That opportunity is what gives people a sense of pride, a sense of achievement and in turn enhances happiness and job satisfaction. Not just telling them to keep working the fries and society will reward them with ongoing pay increases.

I agree that minimum wage needs to increase slowly over time to keep up with inflation. But increasing it by 50% at a rapid rate is ludicrous to me. And yes someone needs to do those minimum wage jobs but those are the turn over of young kids, new immigrants, people new to the work force. Instead of providing incentives to remains at a minimum wage level we should rather be providing incentives and opportunities to move up within whatever industry they are a part of.  And we should be giving businesses that provide these opportunities for people to thrive in their work environment the tax incentives.

 

[eyephone]

This law will force business not to hire or lay off. I predict under the table workers will surge under this law.

I agree. And this is just one way for small business to simply survive. They will in addition cut down on the work force, figure out ways to automate, increase expenses for customers and in some businesses due to these measures the quality of service may also suffer. I agree that the minimum wage needs to increase from current levels but you cannot just increase it by 50% rapidly over just a few years and not expect businesses to take drastic measures to survive it. And ultimately for those minimum wage workers they will find the "value" of their dollar is almost the same as it currently is simply due to the increased living expenses they will face.

Also, the workers will have more responsibilities/be expected to do multiple things.

 

[qwerty]

So all business owners think they are entitled to tax incentives that the rest of have to subsidize. Nice.

Paris - I think your view is well intentioned but just not practical. Every company/society is set up like a pyramid with the low level employees at the bottom and the most valuable towards the top. What you are proposing is inverting the pyramid which will never happen. You can't get 100% of the people at the bottom to work their way to the top. I used to have that mentality (since I made it, every one else can) but those cases are generally exceptions.

 

[eyephone]

So all business owners think they are entitled to tax incentives that the rest of have to subsidize. Nice.

Paris - I think your view is well intentioned but just not practical. Every company/society is set up like a pyramid with the low level employees at the bottom and the most valuable towards the top. What you are proposing is inverting the pyramid which will never happen. You can't get 100% of the people at the bottom to work their way to the top. I used to have that mentality (since I made it, every one else can) but those cases are generally exceptions.

This law will do more harm then good. People will loose jobs and you can thank your California legislator. Technology and outsourcing of jobs will be the answer.

 

[qwerty]

So all business owners think they are entitled to tax incentives that the rest of have to subsidize. Nice.

Paris - I think your view is well intentioned but just not practical. Every company/society is set up like a pyramid with the low level employees at the bottom and the most valuable towards the top. What you are proposing is inverting the pyramid which will never happen. You can't get 100% of the people at the bottom to work their way to the top. I used to have that mentality (since I made it, every one else can) but those cases are generally exceptions.

This law will do more harm then good. People will loose jobs and you can thank your California legislator. Technology and outsourcing of jobs will be the answer.

I'm not arguing for/against the law. Just the thought that everyone can reach the top with hard work. 95% of the population is stupid and regardless of hard work they won't make it to the top.

 

[Happiness]

So all business owners think they are entitled to tax incentives that the rest of have to subsidize. Nice.

Paris - I think your view is well intentioned but just not practical. Every company/society is set up like a pyramid with the low level employees at the bottom and the most valuable towards the top. What you are proposing is inverting the pyramid which will never happen. You can't get 100% of the people at the bottom to work their way to the top. I used to have that mentality (since I made it, every one else can) but those cases are generally exceptions.

This law will do more harm then good. People will loose jobs and you can thank your California legislator. Technology and outsourcing of jobs will be the answer.

I'm not arguing for/against the law. Just the thought that everyone can reach the top with hard work. 95% of the population is stupid and regardless of hard work they won't make it to the top.

Most people at the top got there by either being born into it, or marrying into it.  Not many make it to the top through hard work.
One solution is the Communist Chinese solution, just arbitrarily declare the top 5% enemies of the people, shoot them, redistribute their money to bottom 50%, and instantly lift 300,000 million people out of poverty.

 

[momopi]

One solution is the Communist Chinese solution, just arbitrarily declare the top 5% enemies of the people, shoot them, redistribute their money to bottom 50%, and instantly lift 300,000 million people out of poverty.

Actually, it went in reverse.  The CCP tried to redistribute land in 1947 and it was a disaster.  So they made concessions with capitalists, industrialists, and landowners to assist and restore agricultural and industrial production.  Worker's unions were placed under CCP supervision and the goal was to regulate capitalism toward state owned or controlled enterprises, not destroy industry.  By 1952 the government controlled:

~100% of railways
67% of industrial production
80% of heavy industry
60% of light industry
60% of domestic shipping
90% of foreign trade (state trading companies)
90% of loans and deposits (state bank)
50% of wholesale trade
30% of retail trade

The wealthy industrialists, capitalists, and landowners who stayed were, for a time, paid off by the government in 1950's.  By the Cultural Revolution in 1960's, when the Red Guards went after the capitalists, there was really no significant industry to take and redistribute.  Plus they had already acquired the assets and know-how.  Going after "enemies of the people" was not about wealth redistribution, it was scapegoating.

 

[nosuchreality]

LOL. Oh it's too fast. Sheesh, it's $15 by 2023 for companies with 25 employees. First 50 cent increase is 2018.

Over six years it's a compound 7%.  Given we are closer to seven years out, it's really a compound 6% annual increase

Oh my. A death for our capitalists on the board