Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Minimum Wage laws? (POLL)

Announcements Posted on
  • View Poll Results: What do you think about minimum wage laws?
    Minimum wage is not enough and should be increased
    133
    45.08%
    Minimum wage is just right and should be left alone
    95
    32.20%
    Minimum wage is too high and should be lowered
    19
    6.44%
    Minimum wage laws should not exist at all
    48
    16.27%

    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rananagirl)
    It's a shame that there's a discrepancy between 18-21-year-olds, but I can't see that changing any time soon.

    It does terrify me, though, that Apprentice Minimum Wage (£2.60) is allowable at all. Apprenticeships in general need to be much more stringently regulated, and if the wage is going to be that low, hours need to be limited. (I say this as somebody who spent 3 months working 48 hour weeks for £2.60 an hour and learning nothing...)
    Another problem with apprentice minimum wage is that it creates a load of people who can do a job, when there may not be enough jobs, especially when there's an artificially cheaper workforce available in the form of more apprentices.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm a very left leaning person; I believe in stimulus, social safety net, and everything.

    However, the minimum wage needs to be abolished. If I want to offer my services for 2 dollars and someone wants to hire me for that much well, damnit, I should be able to.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A.J10)
    should not be lowered drastically.

    With no minimum wage, yes unemployment will probably go down, but thier pay might not be high enough to sustain themselves.

    .
    I think during this economic climate, it should be lowered.

    Don't you think your second point exposes a gaping hole? What you are (indirectly) saying is that having people on ever so slightly better wages is better than having more people employed. Bearing in mind the unemployed are not inputting into the economy, and are costing the state-taxpayer more unproductive capital.

    Its better to have more employment of those at the very bottom, than to have higher wages for those who are above them on the ladder in the slong term.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arra)
    I'm a very left leaning person; I believe in stimulus, social safety net, and everything.

    However, the minimum wage needs to be abolished. If I want to offer my services for 2 dollars and someone wants to hire me for that much well, damnit, I should be able to.
    I wouldn't say advocating social safety nets (to the extent you support .. I don't know), and wanting big spending to supposedly encourage growth is left leaning.

    And your second point is a classic right wing argument, that its better to have employment, than non at all, depite the lower wages. Which is wage slavery in the US, since safety nets only exist for people who vote democrat (sorry I just had to!!!).
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    I think during this economics climate, it should be lowered.

    Don't you think your second point exposes a gaping hole? What you are (indirectly) saying is that having people on ever so slightly better wages is better than having more people employed. Bearing in mind the unemployed are not inputting into the economy, and are costing the state-taxpayer more unproductive capital.

    Its better to have more employment of those at the very bottom, than to have higher wages for those who are above them on the ladder in the slong term.
    Like I said, I'm no expert in economics and therefore may be completely wrong, however I will ask you to look to where I said "lowered drastically". Your point focused on "slightly better wages", I was talking about a 50% reduction or abolition or some other drastic change, not a few percent.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by captainaesthetic)
    I'm two sided on the issue.

    Firstly, in terms of intervention in the market, it is blindingly obvious that it causes unemployment and there are obvious problems associated with that. This in itself is enough for me to be economically against it..
    What the **** are you talking about? How is blindingly obvious that it causes unemployment? If that's true, why do we have lower employment rate than Italy (who don't have it) and a little lower rate (by 1%) to Germany (who also don't have it)? Maybe you should take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage and realize the complexity of the issue instead of simplifying it like that when there are countless of studies that contradict what you're saying.

    (Original post by Rananagirl)
    It's a shame that there's a discrepancy between 18-21-year-olds, but I can't see that changing any time soon.

    It does terrify me, though, that Apprentice Minimum Wage (£2.60) is allowable at all. Apprenticeships in general need to be much more stringently regulated, and if the wage is going to be that low, hours need to be limited. (I say this as somebody who spent 3 months working 48 hour weeks for £2.60 an hour and learning nothing...)
    Why is it terrifying? You do realize those on Apprentice don't live on the streets? They're able to live in houses and have access to food and shelter and all that shiz? People much more experienced than you have come to a different conclusion. "In April 2010, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)[47] released a report arguing that countries could alleviate teen unemployment by “lowering the cost of employing low-skilled youth” through a sub-minimum training wage." And that's what Apprenticeships are and they've done a lot to help youth unemployment.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Morally abhorrent (use of police power to prevent uncoerced exchange between two parties) and economically nonsensical (wages are determined by worker productivity, not legislation).
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A.J10)
    Like I said, I'm no expert in economics and therefore may be completely wrong, however I will ask you to look to where I said "lowered drastically". Your point focused on "slightly better wages", I was talking about a 50% reduction or abolition or some other drastic change, not a few percent.
    I would leave that with the business community, not the god damn fluffing FTSE100 who the BBC think represent the whole of the UK business culture, I mean from Sole traders, parternships, self-employed people, medium sized Private companies etc etc, not massive PLC FTSE companies.

    They would be the ones that know how much lower the min wage should go before they start employing people in that bracket again. Problem is they would be more inclined to have it abolished rather than the FTSE100 companies who are looking at a big PR and competative scoop if they are outed, but then again, the shareholders don't care.

    Sigh.

    Whatever would happen, a central agency - namely the government, does not have the power and knowledge to decide what the min wage should be, it should be more up to the market and businesses.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beneb)
    Morally abhorrent (use of police power to prevent uncoerced exchange between two parties) and economically nonsensical (wages are determined by worker productivity, not legislation).
    Strange that you coming in from a right wing angle and then you say "wages are determined by worker productivity" which is the first component of the labour theory of value .... an Idea abanodoned by the right in 1868 and only still used by communists and marxists?
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    How is blindingly obvious that it causes unemployment? .
    Are there any studies at all that are conclusive enough to show that, either way, the min sage does or doesn't cause unemployment?

    I think this phenominom was certainly true for African Americans during the mid 20th century, Thomas Sewell and Walter E. Williams covered it pretty extensively, objectively and from expirience.









    Take your pick, I find Williams much more comprehensive.

    I would have included Friedman, but people tend to have their own conclusions about him before they listen.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Whatever would happen, a central agency - namely the government, does not have the power and knowledge to decide what the min wage should be, it should be more up to the market and businesses.
    To be fair, you could say this about any area. You see it very often in internet legislation if you follow that sort of thing. The only thing the government (as a whole) does have the knowledge to decide on is politics, and then they have a bit of a bias
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Strange that you coming in from a right wing angle and then you say "wages are determined by worker productivity" which is the first component of the labour theory of value .... an Idea abanodoned by the right in 1868 and only still used by communists and marxists?
    No, I mean that an employer will pay a worker according to how much he contributes to the earnings of the firm, discounted for time preference. This has nothing to do with the labour theory of value.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I am not in principle opposed to a minimum wage but there's no doubt that it's not really an effective way to raise one's income (by itself). I mean you read the largest studies from sympathetic economists and nobody argues that the minimum wage is really crucial for poverty reduction. Most of them argue for some small effects on the wages of low income individuals but that's about it I think.

    I believe it should be raised but I also think people should be aware that it's not really that big a deal as far as helping low income individuals goes.

    Also, I think the jury's out on whether a moderately high minimum wage raises unemployment (it doesn't).
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Instead of a fixed wage, There should be a new wage: Called the Uber rich wage. It should be around £10,000 for workers who work across in every type of department, This would solve a lot of problems as you'd be sharing a lot of money around.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Wouldn't this make living on benefits a better alternative than finding a job if the minimum wage is too low?
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Marshall)
    Instead of a fixed wage, There should be a new wage: Called the Uber rich wage. It should be around £10,000 for workers who work across in every type of department, This would solve a lot of problems as you'd be sharing a lot of money around.
    Why is that an Uber Rich wage and how is it sharing?
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Freiheit)
    Wouldn't this make living on benefits a better alternative than finding a job if the minimum wage is too low?
    But what about all those low skilled people who can't find a job beacuse of the minimum wage?

    Wathc one of my linked videos pls!
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
    Strongly against.

    The freer the market, the freer the people. There should be no minimum wage laws at all, nor should there be minimum prices for goods or services.
    You know nothing about labour economics, and neither does anyone else who thinks the minimum wage has had a negative employment impact in the UK.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Are there any studies at all that are conclusive enough to show that, either way, the min sage does or doesn't cause unemployment?

    I think this phenominom was certainly true for African Americans during the mid 20th century, Thomas Sewell and Walter E. Williams covered it pretty extensively, objectively and from expirience.









    Take your pick, I find Williams much more comprehensive.

    I would have included Friedman, but people tend to have their own conclusions about him before they listen.
    I don't think so. I'm not a statistician or economist so I can't say to the extent of which papers on either side is right.

    Come on son, Thomas Sewell? Of course his going to be apart of the economist who agree with that statement. His school of thought does largely agree with it after all. The only real difference between them to (Milton and Thomas) is Milton is much more famous and people already believe his going to be biased like Krugman. Anyway, black unemployment has reduced and been much lower than previous recessions without the need to scrap minimum wage. It could've been true sure because people were racist back then but scraping minimum wage would've been a temporal solution.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheIronist)
    I am not in principle opposed to a minimum wage but there's no doubt that it's not really an effective way to raise one's income (by itself). I mean you read the largest studies from sympathetic economists and nobody argues that the minimum wage is really crucial for poverty reduction. Most of them argue for some small effects on the wages of low income individuals but that's about it I think.

    I believe it should be raised but I also think people should be aware that it's not really that big a deal as far as helping low income individuals goes.

    Also, I think the jury's out on whether a moderately high minimum wage raises unemployment (it doesn't).
    Why not? In my previous job I was paid minimum wage, when the minimum wage rose I got a pay increase to the new minimum wage amount - and not a penny more. Had the minimum wage not increased, there isn't a hope in hell I would have had a pay increase.

    And along with their dodgy holiday policy (employing me full time on a 4 hour contract - i.e. when I took a week off holiday (and therefore missed around 40 hours of work) - I got paid 4 hours to cover it - I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that if they could, they would be paying a far lower wage.

    I'm sure I'm not unique in that regard.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: June 3, 2012
New on TSR

Naughtiest thing you did at school

Did you get away with it or were you punished?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.