[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

That article ia misleading because its suggests that there are reliable, employable people out there who are out of work because they are not skilled enough to work for the minimum wage rate, and would gladly work a lower-paying, less skilled job if only they were allowed to. This is false.

The definition of minimum wage job is basically a job that doesn't require any special skills, some don't even require ability to read or write and even employ people with significant mental disabilities.

Anyone who is not currently employable at the minimum wage rate is basically not employable at any rate as the only criteria for a lot of minimum wage jobs is just to show up when you're supposed to and do what you're told. If they can't do that, they won't be able to work anywhere.

You're not getting it.

The labor market in both of our countries looks like this:

1. People who make more than minimum wage.

2. People who are not looking for jobs (retired, students, incarcerated, etc.)

3. People who are on welfare because it pays them (net) more than if they were working.

4. People who are worth at least minimum wage and can find a job at that rate.

5. Illegal immigrants who work for less than minimum wage.

6. People who want a job but whose job skills are not competitive with the people in categories 1 & 4 and whose legal status is not economically competitive with the people in category 5.

So if the minimum wage is set at $15 an hour and your job skills are worth $7 an hour then you're screwed.

[BeaverFever]

6 is false because it is impossible for anyone to be uncompetitive with people in category category 4. Category 4 is already a category for anyone who is employable but has uncompetitive skills. The people you describe in item 6 are already working for minimum wage.

Also 3 is not true in Canada and in the US it is only true in certain circumstances and certain states.

[herbie]

Welfare that pays more than working? You must really live in some rightwing cliche.A
And I've yet to meet an illegal immigrant working for less than anyone else on the site. Who'd even work with one? Maybe the boss's underage kid, that's about it.

When I ran my shop a hike in minimum wage meant little, only the newest part time employees made that. So it cost me $3 an hour more for staff. The rabble would've been able to spend $20 more when they shopped.
The bullshit about someone else's wages always comes from the same people, the ones UNABLE to do dick shit about their own wage, unable to even admit that to themselves.

[Lemmy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Anyone who is not currently employable at the minimum wage rate is basically not employable at any rate as the only criteria for a lot of minimum wage jobs is just to show up when you're supposed to and do what you're told. If they can't do that, they won't be able to work anywhere.

Nope. Bart's right this time. Everyone is employable at some wage rate. Even the least skilled have MRPL > 0. Let's say I own a hardware store and I'd hire 5 unskilled workers at the market rate (let's assume the market rate is $10/hr). Of those 5 hires, let's presume the "least useful" worker is the mentally handicapped guy who can sweep floors, generally direct people to where shit is in the store and that's about it. He sure as hell not giving customers plumbing and electrical expertise or explaining how to operate power tools. But now the gov't sets the minimum wage at $15. I decide I have to reduce my staff by one. Who goes? Businesses will hire nearly useless people if they're able. But only if they're free to pay them based on ability rather than on an artificially-imposed price floor.

But that's only one of a dozen troubling and unintended side-effects of minimum wage laws.

[BartSimpson]

Lemmy Lemmy:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Anyone who is not currently employable at the minimum wage rate is basically not employable at any rate as the only criteria for a lot of minimum wage jobs is just to show up when you're supposed to and do what you're told. If they can't do that, they won't be able to work anywhere.

Nope. Bart's right this time. Everyone is employable at some wage rate. Even the least skilled have MRPL > 0. Let's say I own a hardware store and I'd hire 5 unskilled workers at the market rate (let's assume the market rate is $10/hr). Of those 5 hires, let's presume the "least useful" worker is the mentally handicapped guy who can sweep floors, generally direct people to where shit is in the store and that's about it. He sure as hell not giving customers plumbing and electrical expertise or explaining how to operate power tools. But now the gov't sets the minimum wage at $15. I decide I have to reduce my staff by one. Who goes? Businesses will hire nearly useless people if they're able. But only if they're free to pay them based on ability rather than on an artificially-imposed price floor.

But that's only one of a dozen troubling and unintended side-effects of minimum wage laws.

Thank you, You get it.

[BartSimpson]

herbie herbie:

Welfare that pays more than working? You must really live in some rightwing cliche.

Note that I said "NET" income.

First, in California as a single male if you work full time at the current minimum wage of $10 an hour you make $20,800 a year which is 34% of the Sacramento areas $60,015 median income.

To qualify for rental assistance from Sacramento County you have to make less than 30% of the median income. The subsidy is then calculated on a sliding scale based upon your income. The less money you make the greater the subsidy until at no earned income you qualify for the maximum of $1450 in rental subsies or $17,400 per year.

http://www.shra.org/Portals/0/pdf/hcv/H ... 8%2013.pdf

If you make no income and you live in California you can also qualify for State assistance consisting of

* $157 per month in food subsidies or $1,884 per year.

* $517 per month in additional housing assistance or $6,204 per year.

* $511 (total) in subsidies for utilities or $6,132 per year.

* $20 per month towards your telephone bill or $240 per year.

http://www.cdss.ca.gov/foodstamps/PG841.htm

Then there's the DB101 subsidy where you'll get $1200 per month in direct cash assistance or $14,400 per year.

If you're an immigrant (legal or illegal) and you qualify for all of the above then you also qualify for the Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants (CAPI) which gives you an additional $600 per month ($3,600 per year) that US Citizens are not allowed to receive. (I am not counting this in the below total in red.)

So you can work full time at a minimum wage job and make $20,800 a year before taxes and deductions of approximately 20% and have a net income of about $16,640

or you can have $33,060 in tax free income and benefits for sitting on your ass and watching TV all day.

(mic drop)

[bootlegga]

Brenda Brenda:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Brenda Brenda:

Although I agree with your sentiment, it always astounds me that there is so little appreciation for people skills. The one thing that cannot be taught.

Dealing with people, with rude, obnoxious, demanding and 'deserving' people is exhausting and can be nerve wrecking.
Customer service ain't that easy!

I agree that customer service isn't easy, but it is much easier to teach people to deal with difficult customers than it is to do heart surgery. Or how to be lawyer. Or how to teach. Or how to write code. Or just about any other skilled job.

I don't agree. People skills cannot be taught.

Btw, why compare very expensive apples who went to school for 10 years, with pineapples are expected to HAVE those skills when they are born? There is a school for heart surgeons. Not one for people skills.
Yet everyone is bitching about the shitty service everywhere.

In theory I agree that people skills cannot be taught.

However, conflict resolution, dealing with difficult customers, and other similar skills can be. Almost every job I've ever worked at provided an employee handbook/manual with at least one section on it. Some jobs even had role-playing scenarios during training.

Let tell you, those training courses were significantly shorter than medical or law school.

[bootlegga]

$1:

Of course education and training are the key, but what you're missing is that those only deliver results in the LONG TERM. It's not like you start earning middle class wages the day you register for college. People not only need to afford tuition, they need to get by while going to college, and often it takes months or even years to find a stable job after you graduate plus there are student loans that need to be repaid. Now you are also trying to support a family at the same time. Minimum wage is what these people make and every cent in their pocket helps. The minimum wage is not meant to provide a middle-class lifestyle, its meant to prevent the worst of the worst from occurring.

And that's why I've said many, many times, that those grants/bursaries/interest-free loans should be large enough to cover their living costs as well as educational costs.

And FYI, thus increase WILL provide a middle class income to individuals on it.

Middle class was estimated by MoneySense (using Stats Can figures) in 2015 to be $23,357 and $36,859 for individuals ($52,929 - $88,074) for couples.

At $12.20/hour, an individual earns $24.4 K - and once it hits $15/hour in 2018, they will earn 30K.

[martin14]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

or you can have $33,060 in tax free income and benefits for sitting on your ass and watching TV all day.

(mic drop)

That's it. Commiefornia, here I come.

[Canadian_Mind]

bootlegga bootlegga:

$1:

Of course education and training are the key, but what you're missing is that those only deliver results in the LONG TERM. It's not like you start earning middle class wages the day you register for college. People not only need to afford tuition, they need to get by while going to college, and often it takes months or even years to find a stable job after you graduate plus there are student loans that need to be repaid. Now you are also trying to support a family at the same time. Minimum wage is what these people make and every cent in their pocket helps. The minimum wage is not meant to provide a middle-class lifestyle, its meant to prevent the worst of the worst from occurring.

And that's why I've said many, many times, that those grants/bursaries/interest-free loans should be large enough to cover their living costs as well as educational costs.

And FYI, thus increase WILL provide a middle class income to individuals on it.

Middle class was estimated by MoneySense (using Stats Can figures) in 2015 to be $23,357 and $36,859 for individuals ($52,929 - $88,074) for couples.

At $12.20/hour, an individual earns $24.4 K - and once it hits $15/hour in 2018, they will earn 30K.

No fucking way $23 357 to $36 859 is middle class. That's enough to sustain you if you live in your parents basement or live in a boarding house, not enough for you to own your own home and own/lease your own vehicle.

[BeaverFever]

Lemmy Lemmy:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Anyone who is not currently employable at the minimum wage rate is basically not employable at any rate as the only criteria for a lot of minimum wage jobs is just to show up when you're supposed to and do what you're told. If they can't do that, they won't be able to work anywhere.

Nope. Bart's right this time. Everyone is employable at some wage rate. Even the least skilled have MRPL > 0. Let's say I own a hardware store and I'd hire 5 unskilled workers at the market rate (let's assume the market rate is $10/hr). Of those 5 hires, let's presume the "least useful" worker is the mentally handicapped guy who can sweep floors, generally direct people to where shit is in the store and that's about it. He sure as hell not giving customers plumbing and electrical expertise or explaining how to operate power tools. But now the gov't sets the minimum wage at $15. I decide I have to reduce my staff by one. Who goes? Businesses will hire nearly useless people if they're able. But only if they're free to pay them based on ability rather than on an artificially-imposed price floor.

But that's only one of a dozen troubling and unintended side-effects of minimum wage laws.

You and Bart are talking about different things. You're talking about an employer who has decided to downsize in response to an INCREASING wage. I have no doubt that happens in some workplaces, just as in other workplaces places an employer just decides to eat the cost by taking a slightly smaller net profit or raising prices.

That's very different from Bart's point, which was that having ANY minimum wage at all -even a flat one that never increases- somehow keeps employable people unemployed

But to your argument: As you know businesses aren't charities so presumably the laid-off employee in your example was working there in the first place because he was doing something that supported productivity. So the business may calculate that it still makes sense to keep the whole workforce even at the higher cost. As I said before, most businesses plan to grow year over year barring larger economic events, Businesses factor inflation into their growth plans when it comes to goods and raw materials so wages should be no different. They already say "our plan is to grow by x% net of inflation over the next y years". It's absurd for them to expect the cost of wages to not also increase. Most businesses plan to grow,at least long term, so if they were planning to hire 10 net new employees this year maybe they only hire 8. But again since wage increases are usually announced years in advance, the min wage increase was probably already factored into the decision to hire 10.

If it was just a fact of law that the min wage increases annually with inflation it would be easier for businesses to plan for. Ironically however the business community has made this an unpredictable and therefore more harmful than necessary because they use political pressure to temporarily suppress increases for several political cycles but inevitably the dam breaks and they get hit with successive years of steep increases that they weren't planning for

[bootlegga]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

bootlegga bootlegga:

$1:

Of course education and training are the key, but what you're missing is that those only deliver results in the LONG TERM. It's not like you start earning middle class wages the day you register for college. People not only need to afford tuition, they need to get by while going to college, and often it takes months or even years to find a stable job after you graduate plus there are student loans that need to be repaid. Now you are also trying to support a family at the same time. Minimum wage is what these people make and every cent in their pocket helps. The minimum wage is not meant to provide a middle-class lifestyle, its meant to prevent the worst of the worst from occurring.

And that's why I've said many, many times, that those grants/bursaries/interest-free loans should be large enough to cover their living costs as well as educational costs.

And FYI, thus increase WILL provide a middle class income to individuals on it.

Middle class was estimated by MoneySense (using Stats Can figures) in 2015 to be $23,357 and $36,859 for individuals ($52,929 - $88,074) for couples.

At $12.20/hour, an individual earns $24.4 K - and once it hits $15/hour in 2018, they will earn 30K.

No fucking way $23 357 to $36 859 is middle class. That's enough to sustain you if you live in your parents basement or live in a boarding house, not enough for you to own your own home and own/lease your own vehicle.

That is nationwide, not Alberta.

But here is what StatsCan says were median wages (2010 - 2014) for families and they fit right into that scale:

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableau ... 8a-eng.htm

[Canadian_Mind]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

bootlegga bootlegga:

And that's why I've said many, many times, that those grants/bursaries/interest-free loans should be large enough to cover their living costs as well as educational costs.

And FYI, thus increase WILL provide a middle class income to individuals on it.

Middle class was estimated by MoneySense (using Stats Can figures) in 2015 to be $23,357 and $36,859 for individuals ($52,929 - $88,074) for couples.

At $12.20/hour, an individual earns $24.4 K - and once it hits $15/hour in 2018, they will earn 30K.

No fucking way $23 357 to $36 859 is middle class. That's enough to sustain you if you live in your parents basement or live in a boarding house, not enough for you to own your own home and own/lease your own vehicle.

That is nationwide, not Alberta.

But here is what StatsCan says were median wages (2010 - 2014) for families and they fit right into that scale:

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableau ... 8a-eng.htm

I think the definitions need to be changed then. I had the opportunity to spent the past 8 and a half years living everywhere but my native BC. Those numbers wouldn't have you living a middle class lifestyle anywhere in this country. The family numbers would make sense for either a single breadwinner, or a primary breadwinner and the spouse has a part time job plus keeping the home. but for a single wage earner, no way those numbers make sense, even in New Brunswick.

Oh and please don't take this as disagreeing with your original point. I think education and some educational support should be on the federal dime up to completion of either trades training or a bachelors degree.