Possible California ballot iniative to raise the minimum wage to $10, then $12

[Admiral Yi]

Berk: if the notion is to raise the minwage to $10 (or $12) an hour, then the statistics that matter are "jobs that pay lower than $10 (or $12) an hour."  If you don't believe that is the case, I believe the onus is on you to explain why that is.

Anyway, I think it'd be a positive development if the new floor from which people may negotiate upward and only upward were in fact a floor and not a parent's basement.  Certainly you would see less negotiation.  But that is A-OK.

Apparently people were not very good negotiators back in 1979.

[The Brain]

What's the legal basis for a federal minimum wage?

[Ideologue]

What's the legal basis for a federal minimum wage?

Seriously?  The commerce clause of the constitution.

[Ideologue]

Berk: if the notion is to raise the minwage to $10 (or $12) an hour, then the statistics that matter are "jobs that pay lower than $10 (or $12) an hour."  If you don't believe that is the case, I believe the onus is on you to explain why that is.

Anyway, I think it'd be a positive development if the new floor from which people may negotiate upward and only upward were in fact a floor and not a parent's basement.  Certainly you would see less negotiation.  But that is A-OK.

Apparently people were not very good negotiators back in 1979.

Elaborate?

[Admiral Yi]

Elaborate?

Well, the subtext of your previous posts is the Big Labor view of wages: wages are a function of how nice employers are, and since they're generally not very nice, employees have to force wage increases from them, either through the power of collective bargaining(tm) or through legislative means.

The other subtext in relation to Throbby's factoid about the shrinking percentage of the workforce earning the minimum wage is that any data that undercuts your paradigm must be impeached.  If the % of workers at min wage has been dramatically shrinking over time, maybe employers are not such dickheads after all.

The fact you failed to consider when you panicked over that factoid is that the min wage in real terms has been shrinking over time frame, so it makes sense that a smaller % of the workforce is being paid that amount.  So it's not actually all that terrible a data point for you.

That being said, it also demonstrates that wages are not a function of employer shittiness and labor power.  Else, we should expect more or less the same % of workers earning min wage now as did back in 1979, no?  So the natural conclusion is that wages are in fact determined by the interplay of supply and demand, demand being a function of marginal labor product.

[The Brain]

What's the legal basis for a federal minimum wage?

Seriously?  The commerce clause of the constitution.

Interstate commerce?

[dps]

What's the legal basis for a federal minimum wage?

Seriously?  The commerce clause of the constitution.

Interstate commerce?

Uhm, yeah?  What exactly are you asking?

[Eddie Teach]

Brain supports States' Rights.

[The Brain]

What's the legal basis for a federal minimum wage?

Seriously?  The commerce clause of the constitution.

Interstate commerce?

Uhm, yeah?  What exactly are you asking?

It's not obvious how a general wage floor is a matter of interstate commerce.

[crazy canuck]

It seems the numbers in Canada are similar to the numbers Berkut found for the US.  The report is from 2010 from data pulled from 2009.  The report concludes that the majority of people paid minimum wage are under 24 and if you look at chart 3 most are under 19. Most of the people under 24, and especially under 19, who are paid a minimum wage are going to school.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/topics-sujets/minimumwage-salaireminimum/minimumwage-salaireminimum-2009-eng.htm

[Razgovory]

It's not obvious how a general wage floor is a matter of interstate commerce.

The federal government has the power to regulate interstate commerce and international commerce.  This in effect allows the federal government to regulate all commerce in the US and pretty much all aspects of commerce.  "Commerce" is equated with economic activity which wages fall under.

[Berkut]

It seems the numbers in Canada are similar to the numbers Berkut found for the US.  The report is from 2010 from data pulled from 2009.  The report concludes that the majority of people paid minimum wage are under 24 and if you look at chart 3 most are under 19. Most of the people under 24, and especially under 19, who are paid a minimum wage are going to school.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/topics-sujets/minimumwage-salaireminimum/minimumwage-salaireminimum-2009-eng.htm

Minimum wage data is totally not relevant to discussions about minimum wage jobs.

[Neil]

The other subtext in relation to Throbby's factoid about the shrinking percentage of the workforce earning the minimum wage is that any data that undercuts your paradigm must be impeached.  If the % of workers at min wage has been dramatically shrinking over time, maybe employers are not such dickheads after all.

Why is it an either or?  Surely the employers can be dickheads while a shrinking percentage of the workforce earns the minimum wage?

[The Brain]

It's not obvious how a general wage floor is a matter of interstate commerce.

The federal government has the power to regulate interstate commerce and international commerce.  This in effect allows the federal government to regulate all commerce in the US and pretty much all aspects of commerce.  "Commerce" is equated with economic activity which wages fall under.

I don't have a problem with "commerce". What I find a bit odd here is "interstate commerce".

[Ideologue]

Elaborate?

Well, the subtext of your previous posts is the Big Labor view of wages: wages are a function of how nice employers are, and since they're generally not very nice, employees have to force wage increases from them, either through the power of collective bargaining(tm) or through legislative means.

The other subtext in relation to Throbby's factoid about the shrinking percentage of the workforce earning the minimum wage is that any data that undercuts your paradigm must be impeached.  If the % of workers at min wage has been dramatically shrinking over time, maybe employers are not such dickheads after all.

The fact you failed to consider when you panicked over that factoid is that the min wage in real terms has been shrinking over time frame, so it makes sense that a smaller % of the workforce is being paid that amount.  So it's not actually all that terrible a data point for you.

That being said, it also demonstrates that wages are not a function of employer shittiness and labor power.  Else, we should expect more or less the same % of workers earning min wage now as did back in 1979, no?  So the natural conclusion is that wages are in fact determined by the interplay of supply and demand, demand being a function of marginal labor product.

"Supply and demand" is exactly coextensive with "employer shittiness and labor power."  Supply = employer shittiness and demand = labor power.

I was simply pointing out that there are reasons beyond pure numbers--I refuse to say non-economic reasons, as everything is economic--that lift even the lowest-wage positions slightly off the floor set by the wage.

I also agree that the wage, being as low as it is, has been outpaced by pure numbers.

I simply had two points: 1)there are psychological-economic reasons why people tend not to be paid exactly at any given wage floor; and
2)I don't see how anyone can say "no one earns the minwage" and consider that a very important fact when the discussion by its definition encompasses low wage jobs that pay 40% above the current minwage, which are hugely--hugely--more common than those rare, exactly-$7.25/hr gigs.