Minimum wage rates do not determine wage differentials.

**Eagle_Eye** · 09-30-2019, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

...and the minimum wage law does nothing it was designed to do.

The Fair Labor and Standards Act of 1938 did what it was intended to do at the time. Problem is the minimum wage was not tied to anything.

**Truth Detector** · 09-30-2019, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Eagle-Eye

The Fair Labor and Standards Act of 1938 did what it was intended to do at the time. Problem is the minimum wage was not tied to anything.

I know you keep saying that, but arbitrary minimum wage laws don't do what they are claimed to do.

**rjhenn** · 09-30-2019, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by cawacko

You are correct sir. I'm from Oakland, we don't speak the Queen's English.

Yet Gonzomin's post was in quite clear American English.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

**cawacko** · 09-30-2019, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by rjhenn

Yet Gonzomin's post was in quite clear American English.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Not too familiar with Oakland are you?

**rjhenn** · 09-30-2019, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by cawacko

Not too familiar with Oakland are you?

Nope, should I be?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

**Gonzomin** · 09-30-2019, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by cawacko

Ok, which states have a lower minimum wage than the federal wage?

Alabama has no min. wage. A couple of southern states just got to 7.25. Wyoming has a lower state rate.

**Supposn** · 10-01-2019, 12:55 AM

Originally Posted by CFM

A minimum should't exist at all. If someone's skills are worth $2/hour, they should be paid $2/hour not $7.25/hour.

The “race to the Bottom”.

CFM, the wage rates of foremen, managers, supervisors, do not have much affect upon the rates of those they supervise, but wage rates of the “indians” certainly effect the rates paid to their chiefs. Due to wage differentials, the minimum wage has some indirect effect upon all other wage rates.

The extent of the minimum's influence upon other job's rates are inversely related to the differences between the minimum and the jobs' rates. Lower job rates are more, and higher job rates are less affected by the minimum rate. (Where there's a scarcity of capable workers for any particular job, the minimum's affect is of no consequences).
The minimum wage rate is applicable to the least desirable employee or applicant for the least challenging task.

If the minimum rate laws were repealed, theoretical indefinite market determined minimum rates would emerge. Because someone can likely be found to perform some lesser challenging tasks for lesser wages, it's true that there would be more employment; but at extremely lesser wage rates for tasks that would not have justified the previously existing federal minimum wage rate. That's the devaluation of human labor, (i.e. wage rates “racing to the bottom”) that would likely too often occur.

Remember, due to wage differentials, the federal minimum wage indirectly affects all other wage rates.
Respectfully, Supposn

**Supposn** · 10-01-2019, 01:18 AM

Originally Posted by Eagle-Eye

The Fair Labor and Standards Act of 1938 did what it was intended to do at the time. Problem is the minimum wage was not tied to anything.

Eagle-Eye, I agree.

HR528 retains purchasing power by pegging it to the proprtional annual changes of USA's median wage rate. I haven't decided if that, or average wage rate, or average wage, or cost-price index would be preferable? But none of them are unacceptable. Respectfully, Supposn

Originally Posted by Supposn

H.R. 582, “Raise the wage act” is a good bill, but opponents of the bill will refrain from mentioning the minimum hourly rate will not be $15 until 7th year after the bill's passage.

In the likely case that it's not passed through and added to our federal statutes, I urge U.S. Congressional members to continue striving and pass a bill that would increase the minimum wage rate by 12.5% of its purchasing power until it attains 125% of its February-1968 purchasing power. Thereafter the rate should be monitored and annually adjusted to retain that purchasing power. ...

**CFM** · 10-01-2019, 05:54 AM

Originally Posted by Supposn

The “race to the Bottom”.

CFM, the wage rates of foremen, managers, supervisors, do not have much affect upon the rates of those they supervise, but wage rates of the “indians” certainly effect the rates paid to their chiefs. Due to wage differentials, the minimum wage has some indirect effect upon all other wage rates.

The extent of the minimum's influence upon other job's rates are inversely related to the differences between the minimum and the jobs' rates. Lower job rates are more, and higher job rates are less affected by the minimum rate. (Where there's a scarcity of capable workers for any particular job, the minimum's affect is of no consequences).
The minimum wage rate is applicable to the least desirable employee or applicant for the least challenging task.

If the minimum rate laws were repealed, theoretical indefinite market determined minimum rates would emerge. Because someone can likely be found to perform some lesser challenging tasks for lesser wages, it's true that there would be more employment; but at extremely lesser wage rates for tasks that would not have justified the previously existing federal minimum wage rate. That's the devaluation of human labor, (i.e. wage rates “racing to the bottom”) that would likely too often occur.

Remember, due to wage differentials, the federal minimum wage indirectly affects all other wage rates.
Respectfully, Supposn

No they don't. That's an excuse put forth by you "indians" in order to try and get more than you're worth. Your claim is that if you're paid a low wage, although it's equivalent and often greater than the skill set you offer, the wages of the "chiefs" is lower.

I don't make a wage, boy. That's a concept for those unable or unwilling to do anything but be paid by the hour. Try improving your skills and that concept may sink in.

**CFM** · 10-01-2019, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by Gonzomin

Alabama has no min. wage. A couple of southern states just got to 7.25. Wyoming has a lower state rate.

There shouldn't be a minimum wage. An employer should be able to pay someone providing a $1/hour skill set $1/hour.

**CFM** · 10-01-2019, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by rjhenn

It appears that English is not your native language. Get someone to explain Gonzomin's post to you.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Gonzomin can't explain his own post.

**cawacko** · 10-01-2019, 06:45 AM

Originally Posted by Gonzomin

Alabama has no min. wage. A couple of southern states just got to 7.25. Wyoming has a lower state rate.

I just googled Wyoming and it said $7.25 which is the same as the federal.

I read five states don't have a minimum wage (which I admittedly was unaware) and thus default to the federal amount. But it's not like these states had a minimum wage and recently eliminated it. And a large number of cities and states have increased their minimum wage. So I'm not understanding your argument that there is this race to the bottom vis a vis the minimum wage.

**Superfreak** · 10-01-2019, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Gonzomin

They do . Here are min wages by state., http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-a...age-chart.aspx

which of those are lower than the federal rate?

**Superfreak** · 10-01-2019, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Gonzomin

Alabama has no min. wage. A couple of southern states just got to 7.25. Wyoming has a lower state rate.

If a State doesn't have one, the default is the federal min wage

**Gonzomin** · 10-01-2019, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Superfreak

If a State doesn't have one, the default is the federal min wage

Wyoming has a 5.15 min. If they have to pay 7.25 why do they have it? Does it have to do with the number of employees? Certain occupations and groups of employees are exempt from the Federal Min wage. There are people in the states with lower min wages, making less than 7.25.