Why I think the Minimum wage argument is really a red herring

[burythehatchet]

The DFL and most dems fight hard for an increase in the minimum wage. This fight is not very relevant, if not completely useless.

The real line should be a MAXIMUM wage.

Democrats often fall into the trap of arguing for a position that is emotional and, I believe, misplaced. Remember Reagan's welfare queens? He railed against these "leeches" of society. Well consider how much the Welfare Queens of America actually cost America, in comparison to Reagan's gift to the republican base, the S&L crisis.

If you impose a fair maximum wage, it will far outstrip the gains made by a 35 cent increase in the minimum wage.

Am I off base?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. $500,000 a year? $2M? $10M?

Everthing else taxed at 100%?

[thevoice]

2. Maximum wage?

What do you think that max wage should be? Wo should decide what the max should be?
If you were to start a company, use your life savings to start it and grow it, and then it became extremely sucessful, you don't think you should be able to reap all of those rewards for your risk and your vision?

[burythehatchet]

4. NO

Because the accumulation of wealth and resources necessarily deprives a larger group of sufficient wages. What is the benefit of accumulating wealth in fewer and fewer hands?

[MercutioATC]

10. But it doesn't. It encourages enterpreneurship, which helps everybody.

We have more than adequate resources to provide our population with a livable wage and basic health care. I feel that's about all antbody is entitled to. Beyond that, you should have to earn your rewards.

[loftycity]

12. 20% of American's make over 80,000.00 a year

Earning your way is scratching your way up the tree. The 20% already have your money and just make more. That 20% is taking your 80,000.00 and shrinking it,everyday. They watch you and laugh on the way to their money managers. While we the eighty percent, earn the right to try and survive in their created world.

[MercutioATC]

14. To be fair, I have to divulge that I'm among the 20%...

I have a 401k, but aside from that I put every dime of it back into the economy. I've never had a money manager, I live in a modest house on a great lot in a fantastic suburb of Cleveland and I still watch what I spend.

I'm not laughing at anybody. I qualified for a near-full scholarship to a private high school and college because I worked hard. My father is a VP at a major national charity, but my parents were divorced and I did NOT come from a wealthy household. I now work for the government and I'm happy with my job, however it's no cushy position.

I scratched. I think that's good.

[burythehatchet]

13. No to be annoying, but

please tell me the benefit of accumulating wealth in fewer and fewer hands.

[MercutioATC]

15. I don't believe in distributing wealth, I believe in providing for people.

...and I believe we can provide for everybody without telling people they can only go so far before we stop them.

oh, and you're not annoying...

:)

[newyawker99]

16. Hi thevoice!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Radical Activist]

3. You must not make anything close to minimum wage

Its very relevant for those who do.

I'm all for class warfare, but I think people wouldn't like a maximum wage. It sounds unfair and is depressing to those who think they might get rich some day.

Pushing for a Living Wage would be more meaningful and make a big difference for millions of working poor.

[PVnRT]

6. Exactly

Said better than I did below.

[burythehatchet]

7. This is not a policy that I've been polishing for any length of time

but if you were to ever imlement it, wouldn't you maintain the minimum wage until the effects of the maximum wage manifest themselves?

[PVnRT]

5. Yes

You are off base.

(1) This will never work. Ever.

(2) Who are you to decide what people "should" make?

[Cleita]

8. Playing devil's advocate here.

Some believe if you cap income, that it will remove any incentive to work hard and compete. I have always had a different idea, but similar. What if workers shared in the company's profit that they work in? I mean eliminate the stock exchange altogther and give each employee stock in the company each year, so by the time they have gained seniority, they will be making a larger portion of the profits. Why should strangers sitting on their duffs benefit from the hard labor of others? Also, wouldn't it make people work harder, eliminate waste and invent innovation, if they thought they would directly benefit from it?

[burythehatchet]

19. In a very significant way, we are saying the same thing

[burythehatchet]

9. I have to mow the lawn but I'll be back

[rucky]

11. LIVING wage

if you work full-time, you should have enough to provide BASIC food, shelter, clothing & healthcare for your family. Cost of living is different wherever you are, but there needs to be federal living wage standards that take that into consideration. The Census Bureau can figure it out for every municipality... or we can require city/county governments to determine that. but it must be done.

[Cleita]

17. That's the way it used to be.

My first year of college, I worked part time (24 hours or three full shifts a week) on the swing shift in a cafeteria for mimimum wage, which at that time was $1 and hour. They also gave you one free meal on the days you worked. I was able to pay rent ($25) on a one bedroom apartment, I shared with three other girls, (two slept in the bedroom and two slept in the living room), as well as utilities and we chipped in equally for groceries (although one of our fatter roomates ate the larger portion of the food).

I was also able to pay for bus fare, books, lab fees and an occassional movie or LP music album. Tuition was free for state residents and we had a student health clinic, if we needed medical attention. Also, we could purchase a hospitalization policy for $15 a semester. I thought it was hard then, but it sure was a lot easier than what kids go through today what with student loans putting them in hock up the ying yang.

[Nikia]

18. I have seen support for business owners to pay living wage

Unfortunately such articles cite the benefits of paying a working wage to one's workers in terms of what advantage the business might have over businesses that don't pay living wages. Yes, businesses will be more likely to hire better workers, have better retention, and have happier, healthier workers if they pay their unskilled worked $10/hour instead of $6 or $7/hour like many of their local competitors. These businesses that do pay more though really don't want their labor competitors to pay more though.

[Trillo]

20. Time-Spent-in-Classroom-Chair living-wage Model.

This idea is separate and distinct from the locality based living wage model.

From 1993 data (likely out of date):
http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/p70-51/table02.txt

We learn that a Professional degree offers on average $5,534 per month income.
A high-school degree offers on average $1,380 per month income.

The ratio of high-school to professional years spent in education is approximately 13:21 (for dentists, as an example), or reduced, approximately 3/5, which converts to about 60%. This means that a high school graduate, while they spend 3/5 of the time that a professional does in school, they earn roughly 1/4 of what an average professional does.

If we assume that education leads to higher income, this data illustrates a vast disparity of deferred compensation later in life per hour spent in class. In a system that rewards what one knows with income in the earning years, we can conclude that high-school students are not being taught necessary survival skills as efficiently as professionals are.

I would prefer to see a world where hours sat in a classroom seat is compensated similarly amongst all. This should be in line with the hypothesis that learning's lack of compensation can only be rationalized as fair if later in life that learning results in deferred compensation. Otherwise learning is a type of financial slavery for all except an arrogant few.

There are several ways of remedying the Professional-High School pay disparity:

One is to reduce compensation at the high side, roughly in line with time spent in education achievement: in this scenario we see compensation for professionals reduced to around 5/3 of what high-school graduates earn, roughly 166% instead of the current 400%.

Another way is to raise minimum wages to living wages. According to the time-spent-in-school model, a commensurate wage for 13 years of schooling (K-12) should correspond to about $3,320 per month, roughly $19.30 per hour.

Another tactic to bring fairness to the hours spent in class doing the bidding of teachers in the current model is to reduce the current K-12 grade school years (13 total) to a ratio of 1/4 instead of 3/5 relative to the professionals, meaning that K-12 years are reduced to a total of approximately 5.5 years.

Any one of the three above brings current pay disparities into time-spent-in-a-seat parity with those of professionals, a higher paying class.