Inflation's Impact: $15.00 an Hour Minimum Wage Not Enough for Job-Seekers
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:33:08 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Inflation's Impact: $15.00 an Hour Minimum Wage Not Enough for Job-Seekers
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Inflation's Impact: $15.00 an Hour Minimum Wage Not Enough for Job-Seekers  (Read 3622 times)
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 03, 2022, 10:21:33 PM »

Now they want at least $20 an hour:

$15 an hour isn't enough. Job seekers want at least $20, making inflation fight harder


Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2022, 10:57:14 AM »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason. 
Logged
Orwell
JacksonHitchcock
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,413
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2022, 04:06:19 PM »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason. 

If we just tied the minimum wage to inflation in 1938 the current minimum wage would be 5.26, I think the idea of the ever-rising minimum wage is stupid.
Logged
PSOL
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,981


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2022, 04:26:21 PM »

The average productivity of the American worker is $33/hr, therefore that should be the average wage we should strive for.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2022, 08:54:40 PM »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason.  

Zero economists would agree with your first sentence. First off, it's basically contradictory - we cannot separate "government stimulus" from "tight labor markets". Basically all economists critical of the American Rescue Plan are critical of it because they think it caused the economy to "overheat" and this term is intimately related to labor market tightness. Second, what you're saying is totally unmoored from empirical evidence. It is extremely hard to argue that we are in a "wage-price" spiral when the best measures of wages available (Employment Cost Index) show total compensation rising significantly more slowly than the price index.

The reason why it's important to ignore bluster like the above post is that snake-oil of this variety is usually to forward an agenda. Here, it is being used to argue that the minimum wage increasing would "fuel inflation". I think that's a topic worth studying but I don't think there's an obvious answer here. Since not all employers would find the minimum wage to be "binding", employers with a lower wage workforce couldn't simply pass on price increases to consumers. They'd instead have to reduce the wage bill through cutting hiring. Alternatively, they may be able to absorb the minimum wage increase.

Empirical studies show very small employment effects from increasing the minimum wage. I'm not aware of any study linking it to inflation. Certainly, in a low inflation environment, we'd expect no effect. This might be different in an inflationary environment where consumer expectations have wide variance - maybe employers could actually get away with hiking prices right now. That's why I say it's worth studying. Overall though, your posting history on the economy is riddled with nonsense.

 
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2022, 03:13:19 AM »
« Edited: October 29, 2022, 03:43:27 AM by Benjamin Frank »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason.  

Zero economists would agree with your first sentence. First off, it's basically contradictory - we cannot separate "government stimulus" from "tight labor markets". Basically all economists critical of the American Rescue Plan are critical of it because they think it caused the economy to "overheat" and this term is intimately related to labor market tightness. Second, what you're saying is totally unmoored from empirical evidence. It is extremely hard to argue that we are in a "wage-price" spiral when the best measures of wages available (Employment Cost Index) show total compensation rising significantly more slowly than the price index.

The reason why it's important to ignore bluster like the above post is that snake-oil of this variety is usually to forward an agenda. Here, it is being used to argue that the minimum wage increasing would "fuel inflation". I think that's a topic worth studying but I don't think there's an obvious answer here. Since not all employers would find the minimum wage to be "binding", employers with a lower wage workforce couldn't simply pass on price increases to consumers. They'd instead have to reduce the wage bill through cutting hiring. Alternatively, they may be able to absorb the minimum wage increase.

Empirical studies show very small employment effects from increasing the minimum wage. I'm not aware of any study linking it to inflation. Certainly, in a low inflation environment, we'd expect no effect. This might be different in an inflationary environment where consumer expectations have wide variance - maybe employers could actually get away with hiking prices right now. That's why I say it's worth studying. Overall though, your posting history on the economy is riddled with nonsense.

I might have the percentages and years wrong (I'm half asleep) and this isn't directly related but is food for thought, something like 3 of 5 quintiles only have higher incomes than 40 or so years ago due to increased government transfers. If the Republicans take back control of Congress and get their way in cutting social spending via threatening to shut down the government, there will be 10s of millions of Americans (not necessarily the same Americans) worse off than 40 or so years ago, despite all the increases in productivity and wealth. And somehow millions of Americans believe the lie that the Republicans are the party of the working class.

In Gallup surveys on this notion of 'quiet quitting' the numbers are eerily similar, about 50% of Americans say they are doing less in their jobs, I find it a bit hard to believe there isn't some causation between the two.  This quiet quitting also has an impact on overall productivity which likely also explains why inflation has been so persistent.

"Quiet quitters" make up at least 50% of the U.S. workforce -- probably more, Gallup finds.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/398306/quiet-quitting-real.aspx

I don't expect large cuts in transfers. If the Congressional Democrats were smart they'd finally either eliminate the debt ceiling in the lame duck session or raise it to virtual infinity, however, I except President Biden would call the Republicans bluff if they did threaten to shut down the government otherwise.

Still, it would be interesting if government transfers were cut significantly. Would these large numbers of negatively impacted Americans finally get radicalized in a collective way and stage mass job walkouts? Would they finally realize the Republican Party not only doesn't care about them but is actively undermining their lives to benefit the 'haves and have mores'?
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,417
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 30, 2022, 11:04:18 PM »
« Edited: October 30, 2022, 11:07:24 PM by All Along The Watchtower »

I might have the percentages and years wrong (I'm half asleep) and this isn't directly related but is food for thought, something like 3 of 5 quintiles only have higher incomes than 40 or so years ago due to increased government transfers. If the Republicans take back control of Congress and get their way in cutting social spending via threatening to shut down the government, there will be 10s of millions of Americans (not necessarily the same Americans) worse off than 40 or so years ago, despite all the increases in productivity and wealth. And somehow millions of Americans believe the lie that the Republicans are the party of the working class.

Besides the obvious cultural flashpoints (“Wokeness”, guns, abortion, etc., and the suspicion that Democrats fundamentally don’t respect most “normal” Americans who don’t have a college degree), there are understandable reasons for why plenty of people who aren’t rich or even upper middle class are attracted to Republicans—or at least, the vulgar “populist” style ascendant under Trump based on crime, immigration, trade, taxes, and generalized distrust toward the government and increasingly, “globalism.” More specifically, there are plenty of working class Americans in “old economy” jobs who see their livelihoods and security as being threatened by Democratic advocacy of environmental and other forms of regulation. And the pandemic hasn’t helped either—a lot of people don’t like wearing masks or being told what to do by the government, especially a government that is (unfairly IMO but that’s irrelevant) perceived by many to side with anti-police rioters over themselves!

Taken together, it’s easy to see how the above can persuade millions of Americans who don’t benefit from, and are indeed, actively threatened by Republican policies on the social safety net and so forth, to support the GOP. Doubly true when Democrats seem to be at once too radical on more controversial issues and too timid on broadly popular economic policies that would benefit most Americans.  
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 31, 2022, 12:43:53 AM »

Not that I doubt the conclusion too much but this is based on some kind of flawed methodology. It sounds like it's based on online job seekers who are looking for at least $20/hour.

Well of course online job seekers are looking for jobs with higher wages. If you're fine with under $20/hour, you can just walk over to the nearest McDonald's or retail outlet with a "help wanted" sign...don't have to look too for one of those. Why post a resume on Indeed and apply when you can just walk into a store and do a quick application and probably start in a week?
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 31, 2022, 04:29:55 PM »

I know I’m looking for more. Aren’t you?
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,019


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 03, 2022, 11:16:39 AM »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason. 

So you think the trillions of free loans/stimulus given out during Covid (a lot of it to people and businesses that didn't need it) and supply chain issues have had no impact on inflation whatsoever? How did you come to that conclusion?
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2022, 01:44:56 PM »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason. 

So you think the trillions of free loans/stimulus given out during Covid (a lot of it to people and businesses that didn't need it) and supply chain issues have had no impact on inflation whatsoever? How did you come to that conclusion?
He didn't say they had no impact whatsoever, just that they weren't the #1 driver of it.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2022, 07:40:05 PM »

The #1 driver of inflation hasn't been government stimulus or supply chain issues, it's been a tight labor market that has driven-up wages.

Unskilled workers may be able to demand $20/hour now, but that won't last through the next recession.  Higher minimum wages elongate and weaken job recoveries, for this reason. 

So you think the trillions of free loans/stimulus given out during Covid (a lot of it to people and businesses that didn't need it) and supply chain issues have had no impact on inflation whatsoever? How did you come to that conclusion?

There was a world wide study that showed that supply chain issues caused about 3/4 of the inflation and excess money printing caused about 1/4. 
Logged
buffalobillsfan4444life
Rookie
**
Posts: 27
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 07, 2022, 05:42:48 PM »

$15 minimum wage is way too much. Supply and Demand should decide wages not the government
Logged
Crackerjack McJohnson
CrackerjackMcJohnson
Rookie
**
Posts: 183
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2022, 08:54:09 AM »

$15 minimum wage is way too much. Supply and Demand should decide wages not the government

This is a bad post.  I went yesterday to Target to get deoderant and soap and it cost SIXTEEN dollars.  Costs are high. 

I do not think policy should be decided by how we should best pay tribute to The Invisible Hand.  If it's invisible it can do what it wants and it shouldn't care what we think of it.  The minimum wages should be enough for people to pay for things and live a life with some degree of dignity.  I've met people who like to see other people suffer to get their jollies and I just think there's too much of that.  If you can question whether or not I care about how the minimum wage affects the economy I can certainly question whether or not you ACTUALLY DO want to see people in servitude.  Look at all the Youtube videos of people screaming at kids working the register at Taco Bell.  People can be really bad people. 
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2022, 08:07:52 AM »

$15 minimum wage is way too much. Supply and Demand should decide wages not the government

This is a bad post.  I went yesterday to Target to get deoderant and soap and it cost SIXTEEN dollars.  Costs are high. 

I do not think policy should be decided by how we should best pay tribute to The Invisible Hand.  If it's invisible it can do what it wants and it shouldn't care what we think of it.  The minimum wages should be enough for people to pay for things and live a life with some degree of dignity.  I've met people who like to see other people suffer to get their jollies and I just think there's too much of that.  If you can question whether or not I care about how the minimum wage affects the economy I can certainly question whether or not you ACTUALLY DO want to see people in servitude.  Look at all the Youtube videos of people screaming at kids working the register at Taco Bell.  People can be really bad people. 

Best policy would be a form of UBI (or BI) as it wouldn't impare business hiring. However, unfortunately politics usually doesn't allow for best policies.
Logged
The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ
laddicus finch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,833


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2022, 11:13:08 PM »

$15 minimum wage is way too much. Supply and Demand should decide wages not the government

This is a bad post.  I went yesterday to Target to get deoderant and soap and it cost SIXTEEN dollars.  Costs are high. 

I do not think policy should be decided by how we should best pay tribute to The Invisible Hand.  If it's invisible it can do what it wants and it shouldn't care what we think of it.  The minimum wages should be enough for people to pay for things and live a life with some degree of dignity.  I've met people who like to see other people suffer to get their jollies and I just think there's too much of that.  If you can question whether or not I care about how the minimum wage affects the economy I can certainly question whether or not you ACTUALLY DO want to see people in servitude.  Look at all the Youtube videos of people screaming at kids working the register at Taco Bell.  People can be really bad people. 

Best policy would be a form of UBI (or BI) as it wouldn't impare business hiring. However, unfortunately politics usually doesn't allow for best policies.

There are political drawbacks, but there is also a massive fiscal issue with UBI, at least in the current economy - in a futuristic, mostly automated economy, I think it would make sense, but currently you're talking about an enormous undertaking.

A proper, genuine, across-the-board UBI would be extremely expensive compared to just about anything else the government spends on. Let's say $1500/month for every American of working age, doing some back of the napkin math here, you'd be looking at just under $4.88 Trillion per year. For context, total federal government spending is $6.27 Trillion in FY 2022. Even with claw backs (for example phasing out food stamps), as well as potential savings in other aspects like healthcare and public safety, you're still talking about an enormous undertaking that would require massive tax increases on a permanent basis.

Now actual UBI advocates aren't as generous as I was, Yang advocated for $1000, and a lot of UBI (or BI as you rightly differentiated) advocates want a different program that isn't universal but gets clawed back with income. You're probably familiar with the pilot project Ontario did under Kathleen Wynne, it was $1500 phased out at a 50% of income ratio after a certain cutoff. That does bring down costs - the PBO estimated that, extrapolating the Ontario UBI proposal to the national level, as of 2020, would cost $46B CAD over a six-month period, so really, $92B a year, in Canada, on a permanent basis, and ideally rising with inflation.

That helps on the cost front, but it takes away from the universality aspect, and it's still bloody expensive. In other words, a means-tested Guaranteed Income takes away the unique benefits of UBI and just makes it a generic, means-tested welfare program. The more means-tested it is, the more it takes away from the unique benefits of UBI - the less means-tested it is, the less financially feasible it is.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2022, 06:54:53 PM »

$15 minimum wage is way too much. Supply and Demand should decide wages not the government

This is a bad post.  I went yesterday to Target to get deoderant and soap and it cost SIXTEEN dollars.  Costs are high. 

I do not think policy should be decided by how we should best pay tribute to The Invisible Hand.  If it's invisible it can do what it wants and it shouldn't care what we think of it.  The minimum wages should be enough for people to pay for things and live a life with some degree of dignity.  I've met people who like to see other people suffer to get their jollies and I just think there's too much of that.  If you can question whether or not I care about how the minimum wage affects the economy I can certainly question whether or not you ACTUALLY DO want to see people in servitude.  Look at all the Youtube videos of people screaming at kids working the register at Taco Bell.  People can be really bad people. 

Best policy would be a form of UBI (or BI) as it wouldn't impare business hiring. However, unfortunately politics usually doesn't allow for best policies.

There are political drawbacks, but there is also a massive fiscal issue with UBI, at least in the current economy - in a futuristic, mostly automated economy, I think it would make sense, but currently you're talking about an enormous undertaking.

A proper, genuine, across-the-board UBI would be extremely expensive compared to just about anything else the government spends on. Let's say $1500/month for every American of working age, doing some back of the napkin math here, you'd be looking at just under $4.88 Trillion per year. For context, total federal government spending is $6.27 Trillion in FY 2022. Even with claw backs (for example phasing out food stamps), as well as potential savings in other aspects like healthcare and public safety, you're still talking about an enormous undertaking that would require massive tax increases on a permanent basis.

Now actual UBI advocates aren't as generous as I was, Yang advocated for $1000, and a lot of UBI (or BI as you rightly differentiated) advocates want a different program that isn't universal but gets clawed back with income. You're probably familiar with the pilot project Ontario did under Kathleen Wynne, it was $1500 phased out at a 50% of income ratio after a certain cutoff. That does bring down costs - the PBO estimated that, extrapolating the Ontario UBI proposal to the national level, as of 2020, would cost $46B CAD over a six-month period, so really, $92B a year, in Canada, on a permanent basis, and ideally rising with inflation.

That helps on the cost front, but it takes away from the universality aspect, and it's still bloody expensive. In other words, a means-tested Guaranteed Income takes away the unique benefits of UBI and just makes it a generic, means-tested welfare program. The more means-tested it is, the more it takes away from the unique benefits of UBI - the less means-tested it is, the less financially feasible it is.


Yes, even the most optimal policies still have drawbacks. A UBI is, as you demonstrate, fantasy. A BI, as tested in Ontario (and before that in Manitoba years prior), puts everybody to a minimum level of income, so, does away with the need for a minimum wage.

It also removes a lot of the barriers to the receiving of income assistance. While some/many on the right would not be happy with that (although inconsistently arguing to 'trust the people' in most other circumstances) it would remove a lot of the costs of administering income assistance, though obviously there would still need to be some administration to means test it. However, that actually isn't all that costly.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2023, 08:21:13 AM »

You aren't guarantee 40 hrs unless you work during Xmas rush Halloween thru New Yrs and Unemployment says you can't quit your job just because your hrs are reduced and because they pay Holiday pay on Memorial and 4th of July and Labor Day your hrs average 25 Hrs and if you are Security or Walmart they can send you home after 4 hrs if they aren't busy so you can get 30/40 hrs but get reduced to 25 hrs this is in Uniom hand book 1 day of rest and
 24 hrs a wk
Logged
Snow Belt Republican
Ragnaroni
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,349
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: 1.74

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2023, 04:07:37 PM »

Raise it to what it should be with inflation. Not more not less.
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,114
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2023, 09:44:18 AM »
« Edited: February 16, 2023, 09:47:49 AM by °°°°uu »

Raise it to what it should be with inflation. Not more not less.
According to wikipedia that would be (in 2021) about 12.47% and a little more than that considering inflation in the last two years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States

It's interesting that inflation has been about 1000% in 60 years.

$20 seems a bit high, but something more like $17.50 would be reasonable.

It's all moot, I don't see it going up from the current $7.25 any time soon.
Logged
Snow Belt Republican
Ragnaroni
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,349
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: 1.74

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2023, 09:49:28 AM »

Raise it to what it should be with inflation. Not more not less.
According to wikipedia that would be (in 2021) about 12.47% and a little more than that considering inflation in the last two years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States

It's interesting that inflation has been about 1000% in 60 years.

$20 seems a bit high, but something more like $17.50 would be reasonable.

It's all moot, I don't see it going up from the current $7.25 any time soon.
I think a good argument would be to mention the inflation and then bring up the fact it hasn't been changed since 2009. I'm no Democrat but it isn't fair for minimum wage earner to be ed over by inflation like this...
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,035
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2023, 09:44:36 PM »

Not "they want." It's "they need."

$15 was what was needed back in 2015, almost a decade ago now.
Logged
bagelman
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,602
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2023, 07:16:20 PM »

The fight for 15 movement claims they began their movement in 2012. $15 in 2012 is $19.83 today, and $15 in 2015 is $19.21 today. The Obama economy was tight on inflation.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,035
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: March 01, 2023, 01:58:47 AM »

Thanks for looking into the details on that.


It's also worth looking into how much a person would need to make in order to meet current costs of living, average/median student loan debt & medical debt & other debt, and meet the favorite "50-30-20 rule" of financial advisors, on a 40-hour work week. THAT should be the true poverty line, adjusted according to region.

Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 11 queries.