NJ referendum on raising minimum wage. Opinions?

[Kheldarson]

Damned right it is my problem. If minimu wage is raised to 15 as many of these groups want, I will become a minimu wage employee and my investment in college will have been worthless, and yes, I will take offense at that. If you think that companies will magically believe that a job worth 30k a year will be worth 60k simply because minimum wage doubled, then you are frankly delusional. All it will mean is a lot more people at minimum wage.

Hi. I have a college degree (two technically since I double majored in an Arts and a Science) and work minimum wage. I can't seem to find a job in my chosen field (teaching) so I work retail part-time because they won't make my position full-time at my store. My husband, also a college grad, also works retail, part-time as well. Between the two of us and for the two of us, we made a livable wage at barely above minimum wage. This was because we didn't pay rent.

We now have a baby and a mortgage payment. If I made any less, or if my husband did, we'd probably be on more government benefits than we are (mostly medical because baby is expensive). There's a lot wrong with how corporations and our government work together, but saying that those of us who have to work these kinds of jobs because we didn't go to college is a stupid as hell argument.

[Andara Bledin]

There's a lot wrong with how corporations and our government work together, but saying that those of us who have to work these kinds of jobs because we didn't go to college is a stupid as hell argument.

Yeah. That's usually the territory of SC's over on CS. You'd think a CS poster would know better.

[Hyena Dandy]

Damned right it is my problem. If minimu wage is raised to 15 as many of these groups want, I will become a minimu wage employee and my investment in college will have been worthless, and yes, I will take offense at that.

Other people shouldn't get enough to live off, because then you're not special?

[smileyeagle1021]

Two questions:

If your $30k/year will buy you the same amount after a hike as it would before

Because it won't buy the same amount. Did everyone sleep through economics? A gradual increase can be absorbed easily enough, supply can keep up with demand... but doubling it and demand will skyrocket and supply will not. I know from experience that 10 an hour is livable without government help, it is damned difficult, but it is doable... I have no problem with an increase to 10, even including raises tied to cost of living adjustments, but the demands that some workers groups are making are insane.

[Andara Bledin]

Ooooh. And we're on to the "my anecdote is the same as data" portion of the debate.

It was doable for you.

The fact is that minimum wage has fallen so far behind the cost of living that even a raise to $15/hour wouldn't even bring us up to even.

It's deplorable that anyone should think that it's ok to allow businesses to prey on the poor and desperate to further enrich their shareholders and CEOs at the cost of, well, all of society, including them.

[Hyena Dandy]

I know from experience that 10 an hour is livable without government help, it is damned difficult, but it is doable...

For you. Not for other people who might have other issues. And the minimum wage is too low. $10 an hour is too low. On that point, the poverty line is too low, too, since it only takes into account the price of food and not housing or anything like that.

And if it was difficult... That's still a problem. Difficult things can be failed without a lot of effort. People should not have to put in a large amount of effort just to make ends meet.

If doubling the cost of living up to $15 would make your job minimum wage, then perhaps that's a sign that you're underpaid, rather than a sign that wanting a living wage for a 40-hour-a-week job is an "Insane demand."

And again, why, exactly, do you think it'd be bad for people who haven't gone to college to make the same amount of money you have? What's wrong with them not suffering? What is "Insane" about people getting enough money to get by?

[Kheldarson]

I know from experience that 10 an hour is livable without government help, it is damned difficult, but it is doable... I have no problem with an increase to 10, even including raises tied to cost of living adjustments, but the demands that some workers groups are making are insane.

Oh, oh, can I play this game too?

$10 an hour is totally doable... if you're working full time hours.

Guess what my work hour cap is right now? 20 a week. And I make $10.75 a hour right now thanks to a shift deferential. That means I make around $430 every two weeks, before benefits and before taxes.

My mortgage payment's going to be $328 a month. So there's one of my paychecks gone. Our current utilities are about $150 a month; I'm expecting that to increase. So that's another one of my paychecks more or less. So then we're on my husband's paychecks: he works part-time but his company counts part time as averaging around 38 hours for six weeks. He just got pushed to over $10. So his paychecks cover our "entertainment": insurance for the car, phone bill, cable/internet.

And that's before going into the costs for all the stuff we need for a growing baby (who has launched from being in 3 month clothes to 9 month clothes in less than 3 months).

Sure. $10 a hour for a full-time single person might be doable to the standard most Americans might want to live (depending on your area of course), but it is not doable for all.

[Racket_Man]

and as for college grads then earning minimum wage- um, why would college grads be earning only $1 above the minimum wage?

because as someone said up above THERE ARE NO JOBS available so you have to make do with ANY job you can find.

Also (I am too lazy to find it now) I think I posted a couple of months ago (either here or on CS) about a McD's franchise in Virgina that, for a cashiers position, REQUIRED a college degree and 2 years experience all for the kingly sum of


MINIMUM WAGE (whatever minimum wage is/was at the time)

[ninjasushi]

Well I can tell you from my perspective, minimum wage is too low.

I served in the Army Reserves from 2007 to 2013. Recently got out, actually. And since I was 16 in 2006, Ive been working fast food and retail.

Back then, from 2006 to 2010 I worked those jobs and always had between 35 to 40 hours guaranteed. I had money to pay bills, and rent. It was very very tight. I didnt make it all the time. From 2011 to the present, companies decided to stop giving hours. I do not know anyone...I mean ANYONE who works more than 30 hours now.

I made more money in 2009 making $7 an hour full time than now. I live with my dad and cant make it on my own. I also am a single dad. With the hours I get, I make enough to put gas in my car and pay my pay-go phone (had to down grade). The rest is my daughters expenses.

I would kill for a wage increase. If I could make even $500 bi weekly I would be happy. Cause now, Im making barely $300 and thats on a very good week.; I cant pay my student loans. I cant save. I cant get a desperately needed new car. I cant support myself or my little one.

I cant find a second job because NO ONE is hiring. So Im sitting here with bills piling up, car breaking down, no money...and they deny people a living wage. Disgusting. Am I not good enough to live by myself and support my own kid?

[smileyeagle1021]

And again, why, exactly, do you think it'd be bad for people who haven't gone to college to make the same amount of money you have? What's wrong with them not suffering? What is "Insane" about people getting enough money to get by?

And what exactly is my sin for actually expecting there to be a reward for the effort of bettering myself? This isn't I've got mine and I don't care if they get theirs, it's I worked really damned hard to get mine and if they want theirs they can work just as damned hard. If we remove the incentive to go to college, how many people will actually make that investment? Who in their right mind will spend four years and thousands of dollars (hell, we can leave it at four years of hard work and pretend that the government has made higher education free) to better themselves when the message sent to them is "you shouldn't have to better yourself to be rewarded, your very existence is worthy of reward whether or not you make efforts to improve yourself." The last economic system that decided that we should pay solely based on what someone needs and not what effort they've put into bettering themselves and making themselves more valuable collapsed quite spectacularly about 25 years ago.
So yes, I think it is appropriate for the doctor to get paid more than the orderly because it is the doctor who is going to save my life, I also think it is appropriate that the accountant gets paid more than the front line cashier because the accountant is working to ensure the financial viability of the company. Are cashiers undervalued currently? They probably are, there is no doubt that they are very important for a company, they are often the first and last person that a customer interacts with and the company literally cannot survive without them. That said, anyone can be a cashier, you can take almost anyone off the street and train them to be a cashier, but not just anyone can be a good accountant and see the warning signs of financial trouble ahead and help to set a course to avoid it, that takes years of study and experience. Same thing with orderlies and doctors, same thing with front desk clerks and general managers, stockers and purchasing directors. Should the lower end positions get pay raises to the bare minimum needed to survive? Yes, they should. Should they be raised enough to be easy or as much as the more highly skilled and educated workers? No, because the world doesn't owe anyone anything, if they want more than the bare minimum to survive, then they need to find a way to make themselves more valuable, be that through hard work and accepting on the job training to work into lead positions and lower management, going to vocational skills to learn a valuable trade, or going to college to become better educated... or even becoming such great cashiers (or whatever lower level position you'd like to substitute for that) that they show that they are bringing in more than the bare minimum worth to the company (and that may be a valid reason to pay more than the minimum, a cashier that can ring through twice as many customers whilst keeping high customer service scores is definitely someone I'd be willing to pay more to keep around).
There is a lot to be said about the education reforms and other reforms that we need as a country to make bettering oneself a more affordable prospect for people of all walks of life to be able to achieve, but saying that education and training is flawed, let's skip to a system of to each according to their needs from each according to their ability is an invitation for disaster.

[Kheldarson]

And what exactly is my sin for actually expecting there to be a reward for the effort of bettering myself? This isn't I've got mine and I don't care if they get theirs, it's I worked really damned hard to get mine and if they want theirs they can work just as damned hard. If we remove the incentive to go to college, how many people will actually make that investment? Who in their right mind will spend four years and thousands of dollars (hell, we can leave it at four years of hard work and pretend that the government has made higher education free) to better themselves when the message sent to them is "you shouldn't have to better yourself to be rewarded, your very existence is worthy of reward whether or not you make efforts to improve yourself."

Who said that college was about making more money? True, there is a corollary effect based on long term job opportunities, but that's the real point of college: gaining background knowledge/training for particular job lines. That means a four year college is not for everyone because not everyone is going to be going into jobs that need that four year degree. So do we punish those for whom the four year college isn't going to help? The mechanic or plumber or construction worker? Sure, they might get some use out of going to a full four year school, but their time would be better spent in hands on learning.

Heck, as a first year teacher in most states, one doesn't make much more over minimum wage. But teachers still go in pursuing that path. So saying college = better pay isn't the best argument. Nor does saying that pay is the only incentive to going to college. Some of us go because, hey, we like learning and learning is its own reward.

Should the lower end positions get pay raises to the bare minimum needed to survive? Yes, they should. Should they be raised enough to be easy or as much as the more highly skilled and educated workers? No, because the world doesn't owe anyone anything, if they want more than the bare minimum to survive, then they need to find a way to make themselves more valuable, be that through hard work and accepting on the job training to work into lead positions and lower management, going to vocational skills to learn a valuable trade, or going to college to become better educated... or even becoming such great cashiers (or whatever lower level position you'd like to substitute for that) that they show that they are bringing in more than the bare minimum worth to the company (and that may be a valid reason to pay more than the minimum, a cashier that can ring through twice as many customers whilst keeping high customer service scores is definitely someone I'd be willing to pay more to keep around).

The wage variable that a company provides has nothing to do with whether or not the minimum wage, front end worker should be paid a living wage. If minimum wage got raised to $15 a hour because that would allow a person to actually live well, then it is on the company to change its wage structure to reflect that. Which means its on them to pay their skilled positions, like accounting, more than the new minimum wage.

And if they're not willing to do that, then that's a reflection on them, isn't it?

[smileyeagle1021]

And if they're not willing to do that, then that's a reflection on them, isn't it?

And how long should I expect to be worse off than a high school drop out (if they are making as much as me, they will be doing so without the burden of a student debt to go along with it) while I wait for things to adjust?
You will find very few college graduates who agree with the $15 an hour proposal that some labor groups are demanding, because frankly, most of them would agree with me that it is bullshit to punish those who have invested in themselves by raising those who haven't above them.
I support the New Jersey referendum (which may have been forgotten by now, it is several pages back), I think it is exactly how it should be done, a gradual correction that gives the system time to adjust... it is the radical proposals being put forth by labor groups that I oppose.
And on a side note, you're right, college isn't just about making more money... there is a lot of intrinsic value to learning, but learning for learning sake can be done for free online, at community libraries, hell, just by talking to people. Almost anyone who says that they are going to college without expecting a return on their investment is either naive (eg hasn't seen their first bill yet and will gain a motive to get a return on investment or drop out) or lying.

[crashhelmet]

And how long should I expect to be worse off than a high school drop out (if they are making as much as me, they will be doing so without the burden of a student debt to go along with it) while I wait for things to adjust?
You will find very few college graduates who agree with the $15 an hour proposal that some labor groups are demanding, because frankly, most of them would agree with me that it is bullshit to punish those who have invested in themselves by raising those who haven't above them.
I support the New Jersey referendum (which may have been forgotten by now, it is several pages back), I think it is exactly how it should be done, a gradual correction that gives the system time to adjust... it is the radical proposals being put forth by labor groups that I oppose.
And on a side note, you're right, college isn't just about making more money... there is a lot of intrinsic value to learning, but learning for learning sake can be done for free online, at community libraries, hell, just by talking to people. Almost anyone who says that they are going to college without expecting a return on their investment is either naive (eg hasn't seen their first bill yet and will gain a motive to get a return on investment or drop out) or lying.

Unfortunately, life isn't always fair.

There are high school drop outs with union jobs as carpenters, electricians, and even delivery drivers that are making almost double than what I do with my degrees and certifications.

The truth of the matter is it has nothing to do with degrees and qualifications. It has to do with elitism. People will always look at a traditionally minimum wage job as below anything a degree is required for.

[Gravekeeper]

A better question would be: Why are you arguing against your own anecdote?

The whole $15 thing was a small group of protesters from a single industry. The actual minimum wage proposal is $9 with an annual increase to keep up with inflation. While yes, if you adjust for inflation and productivity, the minimum wage should be around $17. But no one has said that's a realistic expectation. Especially given the US political climate and general upper crust assholism.

Additionally, your argument is flawed in regards to the effect on higher wage earners. Raising minimum wage would in fact create a raise in wages for people who were making more than minimum wage before the increase but are considered minimum wage after the increase. Because the value of labour went up. Employers would need to adjust wages to keep those positions competitive with minimum wage positions.

The fact of the matter is the US has been cornholing its work force for decades in pursuit of the almighty dollar. The US is one of the largest and most advance economies in the world. But all of that wealth is concentrated solely at the top. The result is despite being one of the world's largest and most advanced economies, it pays wages worse than countries that have no where near the GDP or labour production of the US.

Your minimum wage is lower than Greece. Greece. A country whose economy is a punchline. Hell, your minimum wage is only 30 cents higher than Slovenia.

[Rapscallion]

What interests me here are the protests against the differentials of the low wage earners getting more, but nothing about the extreme incomes of the people at the top of the same organisations.

Sure, upping the wages of the current minimum wages is one way to go, but how about the incomes of the top layers? Has anyone considered reducing those?

The US seems to be blind to the inequality involved and almost worships those with mega coin.

Rapscallion