GOP Debate

[DaveW]

I think this would affect small businesses more than corporations but perhaps that is what you want. Corporations would likely invest in more automation and hire fewer people. Small businesses don't have that luxury.

small businesses should pay their employees a livable wage. If they can't then they should go out of business.

 

Capitalism, homie.

[biggentleben]

I've always struggled with minimum wage in general. Dave mentioned $26-52K being "unlivable", yet it's pretty rare for someone around this area to make $52K as cost of living is incredibly cheaper. Combining our base jobs, and my wife and I don't make much more than that number. We're working extra jobs, but that's more due to a desire to pay off all debts than a need for those extra jobs to survive. We could live in our recently-purchased home and pay all the utilities along with our typical food and such and still put away a decent amount on just our base salaries without some of the debt from school and vehicles that we acquired before the marriage.

 

How do you base a minimum wage when costs of living are so drastically different throughout the country? My home recently purchased had a doppleganger house in Wayzata go on the market that listed for just short of a half million dollars. Our home didn't even come near cracking $200K. That's a huge difference in what it takes to live comfortably, let alone just to get by.

 

I'm not saying there should be no minimum wage, but I can tell you that a $15/hour part-time job in this area would be better than pretty much anything you could get outside of the medical field currently (and that obviously requires specific training/degrees) for part-time work. I'm not sure how to solve that, but I guess I'm saying that I'm against an arbitrary number enforced throughout the nation unless it's on the extreme low end of things, which is where the current minimum wage is.

[kab21]

 

small businesses should pay their employees a livable wage. If they can't then they should go out of business.

Capitalism, homie.

Capitalism is not interfering and letting the employer and employee agree on the wage.  Socialism is setting a high minimum wage and making sure that everyone gets paid regardless if they have any skills.  The ideal solution is somewhere in between.  $15 minimum wage is at the extreme end of socialism.

 

Instead of focusing on the minimum wage I think it is far more despicable that employers maintain large numbers of part time employees so they can avoid paying benefits.  If you think it is hard to live on min wage then try min wage at 25 hrs/wk with no benefits.

[DaveW]

Capitalism is not interfering and letting the employer and employee agree on the wage. Socialism is setting a high minimum wage and making sure that everyone gets paid regardless if they have any skills. The ideal solution is somewhere in between. $15 minimum wage is at the extreme end of socialism.

 

Instead of focusing on the minimum wage I think it is far more despicable that employers maintain large numbers of part time employees so they can avoid paying benefits. If you think it is hard to live on min wage then try min wage at 25 hrs/wk with no benefits.

I agree with you there re: the part time vs full time etc.

[DaveW]

I've always struggled with minimum wage in general. Dave mentioned $26-52K being "unlivable", yet it's pretty rare for someone around this area to make $52K as cost of living is incredibly cheaper. Combining our base jobs, and my wife and I don't make much more than that number. We're working extra jobs, but that's more due to a desire to pay off all debts than a need for those extra jobs to survive. We could live in our recently-purchased home and pay all the utilities along with our typical food and such and still put away a decent amount on just our base salaries without some of the debt from school and vehicles that we acquired before the marriage.

 

How do you base a minimum wage when costs of living are so drastically different throughout the country? My home recently purchased had a doppleganger house in Wayzata go on the market that listed for just short of a half million dollars. Our home didn't even come near cracking $200K. That's a huge difference in what it takes to live comfortably, let alone just to get by.

 

I'm not saying there should be no minimum wage, but I can tell you that a $15/hour part-time job in this area would be better than pretty much anything you could get outside of the medical field currently (and that obviously requires specific training/degrees) for part-time work. I'm not sure how to solve that, but I guess I'm saying that I'm against an arbitrary number enforced throughout the nation unless it's on the extreme low end of things, which is where the current minimum wage is.

just curious, where do you live? The majority of this country lives in metropolis areas like NYC, LA, Chicago etc where cost of living is significantly higher. Maybe $15 is too high for some rural areas, but it absolutely should be the minimum in large cities.

[biggentleben]

 

just curious, where do you live? The majority of this country lives in metropolis areas like NYC, LA, Chicago etc where cost of living is significantly higher. Maybe $15 is too high for some rural areas, but it absolutely should be the minimum in large cities.

 

I live in rural South Dakota, and I do completely understand that I'm not in a majority of the population, but it could truly hurt rural communities to bring in a $15/hr minimum.

 

That last piece is why I celebrate places like San Francisco and Los Angeles (among many others) who have raised their minimum wage in the city. I understand and support the need for a federal minimum wage, but it should be a number that would be "getting by" at the lowest cost areas of the country. That way if my town chose to raise it from the federal minimum to $10/hr, that'd be a choice of the city, not something enforced at a federal or even state level.

[DaveW]

I live in rural South Dakota, and I do completely understand that I'm not in a majority of the population, but it could truly hurt rural communities to bring in a $15/hr minimum.

 

That last piece is why I celebrate places like San Francisco and Los Angeles (among many others) who have raised their minimum wage in the city. I understand and support the need for a federal minimum wage, but it should be a number that would be "getting by" at the lowest cost areas of the country. That way if my town chose to raise it from the federal minimum to $10/hr, that'd be a choice of the city, not something enforced at a federal or even state level.

I hear ya on that. $10 is prob a good middle ground as that is still only 21k a year.(I still have no idea how you can even try to send a kid to college on that salary, maybe you have a house etc, but $400 a week isn't much IMO)

 

But current minimum wage works out to less than $300 a week, unreal.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Capitalism is not interfering ... .

Okay, we should probably end shareholding, limited liability granted to corporations, and government inducements to invest if we really care about 'not interfering' in the market. The investment side has plenty of non-market advantages that are not found in the actual market that pervert their share of wealth.  The reality is that employers and employees don't have equal bargaining power to negotiate market wages.  Minimum wage standard is a way to address that problem without unions.  Minimum wage is hardly an extreme end of socialism, given that the solution concedes a largely capitalistic market.

 

Part-time workers is a similar side of the same coin.  I'm not sure why you would think that the employers/employees should be able to negotiate a low a wage, but not low hours.  Honestly, I'd love to mandate a shorter full-time work week, and be willing to add subsidies to grandfather in businesses that show need.  

 

[kab21]

 

Okay, we should probably end shareholding, limited liability granted to corporations, and government inducements to invest if we really care about 'not interfering' in the market. The investment side has plenty of non-market advantages that are not found in the actual market that pervert their share of wealth.  The reality is that employers and employees don't have equal bargaining power to negotiate market wages.  Minimum wage standard is a way to address that problem without unions.  Minimum wage is hardly an extreme end of socialism, given that the solution concedes a largely capitalistic market.

 

Part-time workers is a similar side of the same coin.  I'm not sure why you would think that the employers/employees should be able to negotiate a low a wage, but not low hours.  Honestly, I'd love to mandate a shorter full-time work week, and be willing to add subsidies to grandfather in businesses that show need.  

Perhaps you missed the part where I said that I thought the best solution was a mix between capitalism and socialism.  If you go too extreme to either side there will be issues and there are benefits that society needs in both.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Perhaps you missed the part where I said that I thought the best solution was a mix between capitalism and socialism.  If you go too extreme to either side there will be issues and there are benefits that society needs in both.

Maybe I did miss that, but you also called minimum wage extreme socialism--the minimum wage, I believe, is a mix between the two.  Maybe not to your preference, but the notion is not extreme. 

 

That said, a mix is appropriate.  Some industries are perverted by capitalism, and should be run publicly even if "inefficiently," or for a non-profit end.  It might be good for humanity to have more than few industries run at break-even/a loss. And the gov't, largely, has no business in the trade of goods.

[TheLeviathan]

I personally think federal minimum wage laws are pretty dumb.  They should be state driven, but if you insist on making a federal minimum it should be a calculated as a percentage of the cost of living.  

 

What it takes to live a middle class lifestyle in Minneapolis doesn't even compare to Chicago, LA, or the East Coast.  If you want evidence of how extreme it is just hop on a home buying site and see how far your money goes.

 

If you mandate a business in po-dunk Minnesota to pay the same as one in New York City it's the height of economic stupidity.

[kab21]

 

Maybe I did miss that, but you also called minimum wage extreme socialism--the minimum wage, I believe, is a mix between the two.  Maybe not to your preference, but the notion is not extreme. 

 

That said, a mix is appropriate.  Some industries are perverted by capitalism, and should be run publicly even if "inefficiently," or for a non-profit end.  It might be good for humanity to have more than few industries run at break-even/a loss. And the gov't, largely, has no business in the trade of goods.

No, I didn't. I called a $15/hr minimum wage as extreme socialism. 

 

Having a minimum wage is fine compromise between capitalism and socialism.  Increasing the minimum wage $1 or even $2/hr is not out of line but I would leave it in the hands of the states or even the cities to decide.  This allows for there to be differences between NYC and SD as mentioned above.

[DaveW]

 

No, I didn't. I called a $15/hr minimum wage as extreme socialism. 

 

Having a minimum wage is fine compromise between capitalism and socialism.  Increasing the minimum wage $1 or even $2/hr is not out of line but I would leave it in the hands of the states or even the cities to decide.  This allows for there to be differences between NYC and SD as mentioned above.

The problem with leaving it up to the states is we have seem time and time again that a lot of states are totally inept and frankly don't care about poor people (look at all the states trying to pass drug testing for welfare and other expensive programs that won't work)

 

I think $10 nationwide ($400 a week) is the right amount for now, that still only works out to 20k a year, and major cities like NYC, Boston, LA, Seattle etc should be bumped to $15 an hour (tipped employees, maybe raise from $2.75 and hour to $4.50 an hour +tips?)

 

Also I think companies should be required to give a minimum of 4 weeks paid maternity leave (and another 12 weeks of unpaid) and those are extremely small numbers on what I personally think they should be (6 months paid and 9 months unpaid)

[DaveW]

 

 

What it takes to live a middle class lifestyle in Minneapolis doesn't even compare to Chicago, LA, or the East Coast.  If you want evidence of how extreme it is just hop on a home buying site and see how far your money goes.

 

Don't get me started on this. A "good" one bedroom condo in NYC costs between 800k and 1.2 million. Half of that gets you a near mansion in 90% of the country. (I do work in Vegas quite a bit and its unreal what you can get i.e. the down payment it would cost for a one bedroom condo (20%) in NYC could buy a 4-5 bedroom house, gated community with a pool for cash in Vegas.

Stupid Minnesota, why do you have to be so freaking cold in the winter?!? If it wasn't that would be a perfect place to move to.

[Willihammer]

 

The notion that we should just accept what owners and shareholders dictate reminds me of something I learned in college once.   I say raise prices, and let these owners get out of the business if they won't eat the cost and the rest of us find someone who will do the work at a nonmonopoly price.  Isn't that how the market should work?

Owners don't dictate wages, the market does. Labor is a market too. You can buy from whomever you want, but most people are going to buy the cheapest thing they can, and those are going to be sold by companies who keep costs (including labor) at a minimum. If you prop up the wage the by law, prices on goods will go up accordingly. So instead of hitting the 1% in the pocket (which is frankly, a populist, petty and childish goal), you're going to just shift the costs onto other consumers, ie. the middle class. Then there is the possibility of exacerbating other problems like illegal immigration. Why hire a citizen at $15/hr when an illegal will do the job for $5?

[DaveW]

Owners don't dictate wages, the market does. Labor is a market too. You can buy from whomever you want, but most people are going to buy the cheapest thing they can, and those are going to be sold by companies who keep costs (including labor) at a minimum. If you prop up the wage the by law, prices on goods will go up accordingly. So instead of hitting the 1% in the pocket (which is frankly, a populist, petty and childish goal), you're going to just shift the costs onto other consumers, ie. the middle class. Then there is the possibility of exacerbating other problems like illegal immigration. Why hire a citizen at $15/hr when an illegal will do the job for $5?

Because you can get in a ton of trouble for hiring illegals. Something like $50,000 fine per head. Not to mention all the other labor laws you would be breaking by not paying minimum wage, payroll taxes etc

 

That's such a bad example IMO. "Well an employer can always get around it by breaking the law"

[Badsmerf]

Because it's against the law and the fines aren't worth it to hire illegals.

 

I don't think these costs are going to be put on consumers as much as you do. Again, this will hurt corporations harder than anyone, and I'm fine with that. Small businesses will benefit from this. Most successful small businesses already pay a decent wage in order to keep talent. A few thousand more in labor can be offset by small price increases.

 

In 2012 46 million people were considered poor, and 10 million of them were working poor (27 weeks in work force). Most of the poor do not work. That is a lot of people struggling to live.

 

Let's look at what 7 dollars an hour would do. 7 x 40 is 280 per week. 280 x 52 is 1960 per year. 1960 x 10 million is 19.6 billion per year. That, is a dramatic hit to the economy.

 

I don't think anyone knows what that would do.

[Willihammer]

 

Because you can get in a ton of trouble for hiring illegals. Something like $50,000 fine per head. Not to mention all the other labor laws you would be breaking by not paying minimum wage, payroll taxes etc

That's such a bad example IMO. "Well an employer can always get around it by breaking the law"

Because if you can't meet payroll then you're going to take that risk. Clearly that's the calculus they've made that draws people across the border. And if your competitor gains an edge in payroll then ... its an example of unintended consequences when you monkey with the markets. And being short-sighted.

[Willihammer]

 

In 2012 46 million people were considered poor, and 10 million of them were working poor (27 weeks in work force). Most of the poor do not work. That is a lot of people struggling to live.

Let's look at what 7 dollars an hour would do. 7 x 40 is 280 per week. 280 x 52 is 1960 per year. 1960 x 10 million is 19.6 billion per year. That, is a dramatic hit to the economy.

I don't think anyone knows what that would do.

Poverty doesn't begin and end with the min. wage. At the end of the day, the population is a bell curve and there's always going to be a set of people at the bottom who are their own worst enemy when it comes to finding a well-paying job. We all know those people.

 

As I said earlier, I work a min. wage + tips job for a small business. When the min. wage went up last Sunday, I took about a $0.40/hr pay cut, due to management shifting around our tips pool to offset the added cost. Again, unintended consequences.

[Badsmerf]

I don't see how you got a pay cut, and why that is acceptable? Do you really think it's ok that businesses are free to pay people less then what is necessary to live without government assistance? If there weren't government programs.... people would just die, and I doubt corporations would care to raise pay.

 

I used to be a big proponent of capitalism and the ideology of the old trickle down effect. I don't believe in that fantasy anymore. If the growing wealth discrepancy has shown anything, this current system doesn't work.

 

You probably think this is the greatest country in the world. Well it's not, and not even close. We still have the largest economy and military, but there are plenty of countries which have a better standard of living. The arrogance of Americans forces us to resist change, even though we continue to fall behind other countries in the first world.

[Hrbowski]

 

You probably think this is the greatest country in the world. Well it's not, and not even close. We still have the largest economy and military, but there are plenty of countries which have a better standard of living. The arrogance of Americans forces us to resist change, even though we continue to fall behind other countries in the first world.

I'll tell you what, you may not think this is the greatest country in the world, but I wouldn't live in any other country unless we get a third term of the same failed policies back in the White House.

[Willihammer]

 

I don't see how you got a pay cut, and why that is acceptable? Do you really think it's ok that businesses are free to pay people less then what is necessary to live without government assistance? If there weren't government programs.... people would just die, and I doubt corporations would care to raise pay.

I used to be a big proponent of capitalism and the ideology of the old trickle down effect. I don't believe in that fantasy anymore. If the growing wealth discrepancy has shown anything, this current system doesn't work.

You probably think this is the greatest country in the world. Well it's not, and not even close. We still have the largest economy and military, but there are plenty of countries which have a better standard of living. The arrogance of Americans forces us to resist change, even though we continue to fall behind other countries in the first world.

Tip pooling is common practice in the restaurant industry. Employers use service tips to subsidize kitchen and other positions. So when the min. wage went up, my employer simply cut the wages of those other positions, and offset them by re-allocating the tip pool. Overall their payroll cost is unchanged, only now any employees who hustled for tips (like me) saw a net pay decrease. I can only speculate how many employees across the state experienced the same thing.

 

Its frustrating to go over these grounds again. The US is a great country, but its not perfect. IMO there are smarter ways to improve the standard of living for lower and middle class people, namely by letting them keep more of their pay and providing low cost loans, food stamps, hot lunch assistance, etc, than propping up prices in the labor market. I know a tax cut would have helped me out more than this stupid min. wage hike.

[Minniman]

The Fox News moderators earned praise from liberal media outlets like the New York Times.

 

 

What liberal media outlets?

 

Who owns them, who advertises with them, who censors them, and who ultimately pulls the strings?

 

The New York Times is a centrist corporate media outlet.

[Minniman]

 

I'll tell you what, you may not think this is the greatest country in the world, but I wouldn't live in any other country unless we get a third term of the same failed policies back in the White House.

 

Another term for another Bush?

 

[DaveW]

I'll tell you what, you may not think this is the greatest country in the world, but I wouldn't live in any other country unless we get a third term of the same failed policies back in the White House.

what failed policies do you speak of? I'd love to hear specific examples instead of tired conservative rhetoric for once.

[Badsmerf]

what failed policies do you speak of? I'd love to hear specific examples instead of tired conservative rhetoric for once.

This isn't a single party problem, this is both partys' problem. It's easy to blame and point fingers, everybody is good at that. Problem is, that doesn't solve anything.

 

If anyone thinks our current America is the result of the last 8 years of policies.... they haven't been paying attention. This isn't a single party problem, it is our entire political structure.

 

I'd love for a politician to be elected for their solutions instead of their party. If live for a politician to make decisions for themselves instead of their party.

 

The cracks are showing.

[Craig Arko]

This isn't a single party problem, this is both partys' problem. It's easy to blame and point fingers, everybody is good at that. Problem is, that doesn't solve anything.

If anyone thinks our current America is the result of the last 8 years of policies.... they haven't been paying attention. This isn't a single party problem, it is our entire political structure.

I'd love for a politician to be elected for their solutions instead of their party. If live for a politician to make decisions for themselves instead of their party.

The cracks are showing.

I'd start with mandatory term limits for Congress, and probably state governments as well. Career politicians may benefit someone, but it's not the People.

[Mike Sixel]

To the person that said you can move income classes and that the American dream is real.....the data is on the internet. We have one of the most immobile nations on the planet. Your birth largely determines your class now.

[biggentleben]

The folks at Bad Lip Reading have broken down the debate:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufGlBv8Z3NU