Others might be more well-meaning. Until a few decades ago, economists made a theoretical argument that a minimum wage was a form of price control, and price controls are typically a bad idea. (Later on, empirical data challenged that theory, but that is a more recent development, and not everyone is sufficiently plugged-in to be aware of that.)
…and some of the first group pretend they are in the second group, often willfully dismissing the empirical data.
I think the minimum wage should be intelligent and automatic.
Every year there should be an open source formula that determines what the upcoming year’s minimum wage should be. It should get announced in, say, October, and then go live on Jan 1.
The formula should take in a variety of data points from different sources so that it’s not just a measure of real estate or the stock market, but is one of actual cost of living.
And I think every zip code should probably have it’s own minimum wage.
And it should be a living wage. Enough that you can afford to live by yourself in the equivalent of a studio apartment or greater, eat healthy food, be able to transport yourself around your zip code at will, get medical needs met, and communicate with others freely.
>…what do YOU (yes YOU reading this post) think the minimum wage should be…
I have no idea.
If you gave me dictatorial authority to set the minimum wage, but authority over nothing else, I would ask economists to analyze the data and show me how far we can raise it without doing harm (or, more likely, not too much harm).
…but if you gave me dictatorial control over everything, I’m not sure I would want to raise it. Other countries do without a minimum wage; maybe we should copy the aspects of their systems that make that work.
Mostly people are uninformed about the impacts of it.
> what do YOU (yes YOU reading this post) think the minimum wage should be
The maximum of {75% of the median wage of the state, 75% of the median wage of the country}, for each state, and reassessed automatically every 5 years—with a threshold to force early reassessment if inflation is higher than 10% over a 3 year period.
So, today, that would put the national minimum at ~$16/hr, which would be a major boost to rural areas of the US in particular.
Minimum wage should be priced at around the median cost of a 1 or 2bd apartment in the area. That is it should make it so you can spend around 20-30% gross income on rent.
I’m not sure a national minimum wage makes sense given the widely diverse costs of living. I think it should be enough for housing, food, transportation, medicine, and other necessities. That means cities should pay more because it costs more to live there. Little Rock is more affordable than San Francisco so the minimum wage should reflect that.
The loudest argument I’ve heard in opposition to raising it is that it would hurt the bottom line of small businesses to such an extent that many would have to close. Because this argument is so loud I somewhat cynically think it’s being amplified by large corporations, who oppose it because they oppose anything that cuts into a profit margin, even if it would be minimal. The same playbook was used during and after the Affordable Care Act passed.
I think the minimum wage should be indexed to inflation, and automatic adjust. I also think it should be localized, similar to how salaries for federal employees work (there is a baseline that is adjusted up or down depending on the cost of living in each state). This would probably never happen because of the politics of our era.
I think it should be a number updated annually and calculated at a local level (city or county) based on the cost of living in a given area. So things like average/median number of hours worked, rent, groceries, medical expenses, transportation costs, savings, internet, utilities, etc. Basically, I’d like intelligent economists to make a formula that needs to be updated annually so the MW is reasonable and constantly changing along with the economic environment within an area.
Different markets have vastly different cost of living so applying a blanket minimum makes no sense. I’m not of the camp that all jobs are meant to live off of/support a family/ etc. it puts people out of a job and exacerbates the push towards automation.
I can think of 3 reasons why someone might be against raising the minimum wage.
I think the most common is they simply don’t think poor people deserve a decent standard of living. A sub category of this is people who don’t care about the standards of living of poor people but aren’t willing to give up the benefit of people being economically desperate. Having to pay a little more or having slightly less access to goods and services.
The second reason (I don’t know if this is more or less common than the third) is that they support some other means of increasing people’s standards of living. Greater unionization, employee ownership of their workplace, expanded welfare state to subsidize wages etc.
The third reason is they think it is counter productive in some way. I am not an expert so I can’t say this is completely false, but people making the argument tend to do so with a bit of a straw man of if we raised it to hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour or something.
If I was in charge of the minimum wage I would set it based on the economic conditions at the county level. Outside of that I would want to consult with economic experts but I would lean towards the upper side of the grey area between helping people achieve a better standard of living and causing any sort of wider societal problems. Not just because I’m a bleeding heart, but also because I think it would encourage automation which would help expand the total wealth in the economy and be better for everyone.
My impression is that a lot of people dislike the one-size-fits-all approach of a higher national minimum wage (and many others dislike the concept entirely, regardless of the wage). I tend to like the way the Oregon has done it, where the state is divided into three zones (roughly speaking: Portland, Portland metro and the valley, everywhere else) with three tiers of minimum wage accordingly. I think the tree bands are now $15.95, $14.70, and $13.70, which seems fine to me.
I’m not against raising it, but I don’t think it solves any problems really if you raise it to like 20 or 30/hour like some have suggested. businesses will just charge more for their products to cover (significantly) increased labor costs.
and then all the people currently making 20/30 hour in more difficult jobs need raises too, further increasing the labor costs for the business. the business either folds, or triples the prices of their product.
I think a lot of people are missing the fact, that most employers do not raise the wages of their existing employees an amount that reflects the minimum wage raise. This lowers the status of the employees who have already put in work. The rise of inflation that results from said minimum wage increase further damages those already working. Minimum wage should be abolished and universal basic income should be installed it’s as simple as that. Doing this would solidify the base of our society those who get everything done all day long. And then working would provide you money to improve on that basic life.
My only issue with minimum wage is that I think it should be adjusted for cost of living depending on where someone lives. The minimum wage should be way higher in Los Angeles county then say Toledo Ohio.
It’s really interesting that conservatives say “minimum wage will just lead to inflation.” When reality is, we will get inflation no matter what. And studies have largely shown weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy. Minimum wage increase policies are backed by literature, since cost of living has far increased iirc up 80% since 2000. Yet people will try to simplify a “complicated” issue into “meh, inflation.”
No one should be against it. Concerns about “small business”, feels like a buzz term. IMO they get enough government support and tax write offs as is.
People are concerned that raising the minimum wage would both cause inflation (the idea is that since the lowest paid people would have more money while producing the same amount of labor it would just inflate the value of goods/services they consume) and cause companies to price certain jobs out of the market (if job X’s labor only generates $Y, then rasing the minimum wage above that means that job wouldnt be profitable for a conpany to employ).
I’m not that concerned with many of those myself. The minimum wage has been much higher in the past when adjusting for inflation, and many other nations have higher min wages and dont experience those issues listed above as a result.
In an ideal world, minimum wage should be whatever money it takes to maintain basic living standards over a 40-hour work week. What constitutes as “basic living standards” varries a lot and is too complicated for a reddit comment, especially when we are more or less starting from arguing whether some arbitrarly low rate that hasnt been updated in decades is acceptable or not.
Why would you ask people who are in favor of raising the min wage why they are against it? Most liberals are in favor of raising it or at least having one. I’m not sure why this question is even a real question for this sub or certainly not directed it in a way that seems to imply that most liberals are against it.
Economists need to evaluate the above against any potential income gains for workers. Keep in mind that a federal minimum wage would be applied across the entire country, from very low cost of living areas to high ones.
The economics on how a specific minimum wage will affect the local economy can thus be very different for different parts of the country.
The last assessment I saw was during the 2016 campaign where I think $12/hour achieved the best balance. Thats likely outdated now given the inflation we went through. States and localities should also set higher ones depending on their situation.
I think that minimum wage is kind of a blunt instrument, and there are ways to structure the economy that are better ways to accomplish the same goals. But they are politically much more difficult than just raising the minimum wage.
I think there are good arguments both for and against indexing it to local cost of living, but I live in Chicago, a city that I would consider to have a medium-high cost of living and I think somewhere around $22-25 is about right.
I think the best way would be to have regional minimum wages adjusted annually based on a basket of goods and services. The minimum would be based upon a Minimum to Median Ratio (MMR). This ratio will be calculated annually at the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level (or a comparable geographically defined economic region as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics). The regional minimum wage for each MSA will be mandated to fall within 40% to 60% of the MMR.
In addition, there would be some negative feedback mechanism. A “High Housing Cost Threshold” should be established based on a multiple of the national median housing cost (e.g., 1.5 times the national median rent or home price). This threshold will be determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) annually. A negative adjustment factor should be applied to those with increasing multiplier based on a progressive standard. Once an “Extreme Cost of Living” center falls below the High Housing Cost Threshold for two consecutive years, the negative adjustment will be phased out over a period of two years. I also think there should be a reportable distance to employer metric (DTE) which is measured which should factor into the overarching policy.
Comments
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
Body Text
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Im not against it. I rather just advocate for a strong union mentality. Join a union and let union negotiate wage for you.
>Why are people against raising the minimum wage…
Some want to harm people they believe deserve it.
Others might be more well-meaning. Until a few decades ago, economists made a theoretical argument that a minimum wage was a form of price control, and price controls are typically a bad idea. (Later on, empirical data challenged that theory, but that is a more recent development, and not everyone is sufficiently plugged-in to be aware of that.)
…and some of the first group pretend they are in the second group, often willfully dismissing the empirical data.
I think the minimum wage should be intelligent and automatic.
Every year there should be an open source formula that determines what the upcoming year’s minimum wage should be. It should get announced in, say, October, and then go live on Jan 1.
The formula should take in a variety of data points from different sources so that it’s not just a measure of real estate or the stock market, but is one of actual cost of living.
And I think every zip code should probably have it’s own minimum wage.
And it should be a living wage. Enough that you can afford to live by yourself in the equivalent of a studio apartment or greater, eat healthy food, be able to transport yourself around your zip code at will, get medical needs met, and communicate with others freely.
The MIT living wage calculator might be a good start. https://livingwage.mit.edu/
I’m not against raising the minimum wage.
>…what do YOU (yes YOU reading this post) think the minimum wage should be…
I have no idea.
If you gave me dictatorial authority to set the minimum wage, but authority over nothing else, I would ask economists to analyze the data and show me how far we can raise it without doing harm (or, more likely, not too much harm).
…but if you gave me dictatorial control over everything, I’m not sure I would want to raise it. Other countries do without a minimum wage; maybe we should copy the aspects of their systems that make that work.
> Why are people against raising the minimum wage
Mostly people are uninformed about the impacts of it.
> what do YOU (yes YOU reading this post) think the minimum wage should be
The maximum of {75% of the median wage of the state, 75% of the median wage of the country}, for each state, and reassessed automatically every 5 years—with a threshold to force early reassessment if inflation is higher than 10% over a 3 year period.
So, today, that would put the national minimum at ~$16/hr, which would be a major boost to rural areas of the US in particular.
IMO it shouldn’t be federal. Each state should have its own based on cost of living and other factors.
Minimum wage should be priced at around the median cost of a 1 or 2bd apartment in the area. That is it should make it so you can spend around 20-30% gross income on rent.
I’m not sure a national minimum wage makes sense given the widely diverse costs of living. I think it should be enough for housing, food, transportation, medicine, and other necessities. That means cities should pay more because it costs more to live there. Little Rock is more affordable than San Francisco so the minimum wage should reflect that.
there should not be a set minimum wage, the wage should correspond with the inflation rate and COL.
15
The loudest argument I’ve heard in opposition to raising it is that it would hurt the bottom line of small businesses to such an extent that many would have to close. Because this argument is so loud I somewhat cynically think it’s being amplified by large corporations, who oppose it because they oppose anything that cuts into a profit margin, even if it would be minimal. The same playbook was used during and after the Affordable Care Act passed.
I think the minimum wage should be indexed to inflation, and automatic adjust. I also think it should be localized, similar to how salaries for federal employees work (there is a baseline that is adjusted up or down depending on the cost of living in each state). This would probably never happen because of the politics of our era.
I think it should be a number updated annually and calculated at a local level (city or county) based on the cost of living in a given area. So things like average/median number of hours worked, rent, groceries, medical expenses, transportation costs, savings, internet, utilities, etc. Basically, I’d like intelligent economists to make a formula that needs to be updated annually so the MW is reasonable and constantly changing along with the economic environment within an area.
$25 an hour, at least…
idk, use MIT’s local cost of living measure.
skip minimum wage, go straight to universal basic income
Different markets have vastly different cost of living so applying a blanket minimum makes no sense. I’m not of the camp that all jobs are meant to live off of/support a family/ etc. it puts people out of a job and exacerbates the push towards automation.
I can think of 3 reasons why someone might be against raising the minimum wage.
I think the most common is they simply don’t think poor people deserve a decent standard of living. A sub category of this is people who don’t care about the standards of living of poor people but aren’t willing to give up the benefit of people being economically desperate. Having to pay a little more or having slightly less access to goods and services.
The second reason (I don’t know if this is more or less common than the third) is that they support some other means of increasing people’s standards of living. Greater unionization, employee ownership of their workplace, expanded welfare state to subsidize wages etc.
The third reason is they think it is counter productive in some way. I am not an expert so I can’t say this is completely false, but people making the argument tend to do so with a bit of a straw man of if we raised it to hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour or something.
If I was in charge of the minimum wage I would set it based on the economic conditions at the county level. Outside of that I would want to consult with economic experts but I would lean towards the upper side of the grey area between helping people achieve a better standard of living and causing any sort of wider societal problems. Not just because I’m a bleeding heart, but also because I think it would encourage automation which would help expand the total wealth in the economy and be better for everyone.
My impression is that a lot of people dislike the one-size-fits-all approach of a higher national minimum wage (and many others dislike the concept entirely, regardless of the wage). I tend to like the way the Oregon has done it, where the state is divided into three zones (roughly speaking: Portland, Portland metro and the valley, everywhere else) with three tiers of minimum wage accordingly. I think the tree bands are now $15.95, $14.70, and $13.70, which seems fine to me.
I’m not against raising it, but I don’t think it solves any problems really if you raise it to like 20 or 30/hour like some have suggested. businesses will just charge more for their products to cover (significantly) increased labor costs.
and then all the people currently making 20/30 hour in more difficult jobs need raises too, further increasing the labor costs for the business. the business either folds, or triples the prices of their product.
I think a lot of people are missing the fact, that most employers do not raise the wages of their existing employees an amount that reflects the minimum wage raise. This lowers the status of the employees who have already put in work. The rise of inflation that results from said minimum wage increase further damages those already working. Minimum wage should be abolished and universal basic income should be installed it’s as simple as that. Doing this would solidify the base of our society those who get everything done all day long. And then working would provide you money to improve on that basic life.
I don’t think there should be a minimum wage.
…but I do think there should be a Universal Basic Income that’s equivalent to a living-wage.
My only issue with minimum wage is that I think it should be adjusted for cost of living depending on where someone lives. The minimum wage should be way higher in Los Angeles county then say Toledo Ohio.
It’s really interesting that conservatives say “minimum wage will just lead to inflation.” When reality is, we will get inflation no matter what. And studies have largely shown weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy. Minimum wage increase policies are backed by literature, since cost of living has far increased iirc up 80% since 2000. Yet people will try to simplify a “complicated” issue into “meh, inflation.”
No one should be against it. Concerns about “small business”, feels like a buzz term. IMO they get enough government support and tax write offs as is.
Businesses don’t want to pay more than they have to
It should be $25 an hour
People are concerned that raising the minimum wage would both cause inflation (the idea is that since the lowest paid people would have more money while producing the same amount of labor it would just inflate the value of goods/services they consume) and cause companies to price certain jobs out of the market (if job X’s labor only generates $Y, then rasing the minimum wage above that means that job wouldnt be profitable for a conpany to employ).
I’m not that concerned with many of those myself. The minimum wage has been much higher in the past when adjusting for inflation, and many other nations have higher min wages and dont experience those issues listed above as a result.
In an ideal world, minimum wage should be whatever money it takes to maintain basic living standards over a 40-hour work week. What constitutes as “basic living standards” varries a lot and is too complicated for a reddit comment, especially when we are more or less starting from arguing whether some arbitrarly low rate that hasnt been updated in decades is acceptable or not.
$15 is rapidly becoming the defacto minimum wage, it should be enshrined in law
I’m a fan of maximum wage, in that the highest paid person in any given company should not be paid more than 50-100x what the lowest person is paid.
Why would you ask people who are in favor of raising the min wage why they are against it? Most liberals are in favor of raising it or at least having one. I’m not sure why this question is even a real question for this sub or certainly not directed it in a way that seems to imply that most liberals are against it.
30 bucks. 15 stopped being enough years ago. Obviously there’s nuances im not considering but that’s the ball park number that I’d like to see.
Generally arguments raised are:
inflationary
might lead to job losses
Economists need to evaluate the above against any potential income gains for workers. Keep in mind that a federal minimum wage would be applied across the entire country, from very low cost of living areas to high ones.
The economics on how a specific minimum wage will affect the local economy can thus be very different for different parts of the country.
The last assessment I saw was during the 2016 campaign where I think $12/hour achieved the best balance. Thats likely outdated now given the inflation we went through. States and localities should also set higher ones depending on their situation.
I think that minimum wage is kind of a blunt instrument, and there are ways to structure the economy that are better ways to accomplish the same goals. But they are politically much more difficult than just raising the minimum wage.
I think there are good arguments both for and against indexing it to local cost of living, but I live in Chicago, a city that I would consider to have a medium-high cost of living and I think somewhere around $22-25 is about right.
I think the best way would be to have regional minimum wages adjusted annually based on a basket of goods and services. The minimum would be based upon a Minimum to Median Ratio (MMR). This ratio will be calculated annually at the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level (or a comparable geographically defined economic region as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics). The regional minimum wage for each MSA will be mandated to fall within 40% to 60% of the MMR.
In addition, there would be some negative feedback mechanism. A “High Housing Cost Threshold” should be established based on a multiple of the national median housing cost (e.g., 1.5 times the national median rent or home price). This threshold will be determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) annually. A negative adjustment factor should be applied to those with increasing multiplier based on a progressive standard. Once an “Extreme Cost of Living” center falls below the High Housing Cost Threshold for two consecutive years, the negative adjustment will be phased out over a period of two years. I also think there should be a reportable distance to employer metric (DTE) which is measured which should factor into the overarching policy.
That’s roughly my ideal federal minimum wage law.