Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I keep seeing the argument that minimum wage was never meant to be a living wage. So I researched it some. I've come to the decision that they are in fact wrong. In fact it was meant to be more then poverty wages....at a time when only one person was working in a family!
FDR's comments were related to the NIRA which was subsequently shot down by the Supreme Court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
How is that not connected? FDR was president when the minimum wage was enacted, these are his statements.
Or am I missing something? Did he later state otherwise, or did others when it was enacted?
Yes, you are missing something.
Minimum wage was not part of the original legislation under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The workers were just pawns for the King. FDR was too hell-bent on exceeding his powers and punishing the Supreme Court for doing its job properly.
I'm guessing you know nothing about the Court Plan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
LOL.....I think that depends on your definition of "living wage"
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
What would you define to be a living wage. how much?
Great.
So this is something else that you cannot objectively define in no uncertain terms, and which you'll waste 950 terabytes of band-width ducking and dodging the issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
The average income in 1938 was $1780. Making a $.25/hr rate about $520 a year-ie 29%. today average income is 51K. 29% of that is 14.9K-or $7.16/hr. Pretty close to our current minimum wage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
$1.60 in 1968 had the same buying power as $10.77, today.
That would be fascinating if it was even remotely relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
And the OP point (me) is that standards of living should improve as we move into the future. Thats the point of progress.
There is no evidence that they should improve, and you cannot cite any Law, Theory or Corollary in Economics to prove your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
My 15 yr old can program a computer. Probably not a common skill in 1938. I am FAR more educated then most folks in 1938 were.
Really? Are you sure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
So CEO's are REALLY earning their millions right?
That's Penis Envy pure and simple.
Why aren't you a CEO?
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
Except...thats not true.
1. Mandating a higher minimum wage WILL pay those people creating value more money. If they dont create enough value they will ahve to pursue something that DOES create sufficient value.
2. We've been creating more and more value per hour worked for DECADES
3. The gains for that have NOT gone to the people doing it. They've gone to capital.
But this is a distraction from the topic. And the topic is...was the minimum wage meant to be a living wage?
From where are you getting your Talking Points? That's not you talking...you ripped that from somewhere, and the productivity measurements are all wrong. Anyone want proof? Okay.
1 Million hours ----- $150 Million
1.1 Million hours --- $200 Million
Productivity increased, right? Wrong, at 1 Million hours they produced 1 Million widgets and at 1.1 Million hours they produced 0.9 Million widgets.
Productivity declined -- but Keynesian Economics says it increased.
What does that tell you about Keynes?
Hours per unit volume is the only true measurement of productivity, and if the CBO used hours per unit volume instead of the silly Keynesian nonsense, then in 2010 the CBO would have known, just as I did, that there is no way the unemployment rate is going to be 5% by October 12.
Keep deluding yourself that workers are more productive if you want....it only harms you in the end.
What was that joke? Oh, yeah....
Unless you can find a job paying at least the minimum wage, you may not accept employment. -- D F Bradford.
I love how regressive conservatives on this site despise seeing people getting paid a living wage, it is as if they all want to make sure there is always someone more poor than they are and then always seem to be confused why wages have been stagnant for years while only the top earners have seen their incomes skyrocket.
FDR's comments were related to the NIRA which was subsequently shot down by the Supreme Court.
Hey thanks, would be nice if you'd given this info without being such a jerk in the rest of your response.
Quote:
Yes, you are missing something.
Minimum wage was not part of the original legislation under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The workers were just pawns for the King. FDR was too hell-bent on exceeding his powers and punishing the Supreme Court for doing its job properly.
I'm guessing you know nothing about the Court Plan.
And you'd be correct.....ahhh nevermind looked it up, yes I have heard of that, didn't know the specific president.
Quote:
Great.
So this is something else that you cannot objectively define in no uncertain terms, and which you'll waste 950 terabytes of band-width ducking and dodging the issue.
Wait so I asked someone else a question, and you turned it into that? dont be a jerk.
Quote:
That would be fascinating if it was even remotely relevant.
There is no evidence that they should improve, and you cannot cite any Law, Theory or Corollary in Economics to prove your point.
Maybe because I havent had a point here, I was asking a question based upon what I read there, I do post discussion topics, and that was what this was.
Quote:
Really? Are you sure?
Yes I am.
Quote:
That's Penis Envy pure and simple.
Why aren't you a CEO?
Why arent you? Probably because like me you dont know the right people.
Quote:
From where are you getting your Talking Points? That's not you talking...you ripped that from somewhere, and the productivity measurements are all wrong. Anyone want proof? Okay.
Sorry nope, all me.
Quote:
1 Million hours ----- $150 Million
1.1 Million hours --- $200 Million
Productivity increased, right? Wrong, at 1 Million hours they produced 1 Million widgets and at 1.1 Million hours they produced 0.9 Million widgets.
Productivity declined -- but Keynesian Economics says it increased.
What does that tell you about Keynes?
What does it tell you about you? You liken productivity to working hard, not working better. Nice.
Quote:
Hours per unit volume is the only true measurement of productivity, and if the CBO used hours per unit volume instead of the silly Keynesian nonsense, then in 2010 the CBO would have known, just as I did, that there is no way the unemployment rate is going to be 5% by October 12.
No its not the only true measure of productivity.
Quote:
Keep deluding yourself that workers are more productive if you want....it only harms you in the end.
What was that joke? Oh, yeah....
Really? yeah someones a joke here all right....
Quote:
Unless you can find a job paying at least the minimum wage, you may not accept employment. -- D F Bradford.
I love how regressive conservatives on this site despise seeing people getting paid a living wage, it is as if they all want to make sure there is always someone more poor than they are and then always seem to be confused why wages have been stagnant for years while only the top earners have seen their incomes skyrocket.
I know, amazing isnt it.
Its almost like they have a irrational fear of the poors sharing in the ever larger pie......
I love how regressive conservatives on this site despise seeing people getting paid a living wage, it is as if they all want to make sure there is always someone more poor than they are and then always seem to be confused why wages have been stagnant for years while only the top earners have seen their incomes skyrocket.
I have no problem with people making a living wage, they just have to earn it, not have it mandated by the government. Plus costs would just go up and more people will be laid off. Sounds like a great plan.
Wages are stagnant because of an over regulated economy and a flooded job market. The democrats want more regulation and to bring in more democrat voters, scratch that, I mean undocumented workers.
I cannot wait till the dems get a "living wage" established. I really want to have all my needs taken care of from a job at mcdonalds, I could really go for a low stress job that does not require much in the way of critical thinking skills or talent.
A lot of conservatives feel the same as you do. That's kind of what happens when you don't personally invest in education and cling to your bibles and guns...
The average income in 1938 was $1780. Making a $.25/hr rate about $520 a year-ie 29%. today average income is 51K. 29% of that is 14.9K-or $7.16/hr. Pretty close to our current minimum wage.
This may be accurate. You seem to have researched it so I will take you at your word.
But this post also contains some cherry-picking. I feel it fails to take into account general cost of living in relation to income...inflation, in other words.
I am not making a statement so much as asking the questions, but did, say, the cost of housing, utilities, gas, groceries and other necessities take the same slice of a person's income pie in past decades as it does now?
My father bought his first house--a perfectly nice, relatively modest one--in 1961 for $6000. That was a little less than one third of his yearly salary at the time.
In that period, it was common for a typical earner to be able to spend one third of their annual income on the purchase of a home.
These days it is far more common for a person to spend far MORE than their annual income to purchase a home, often several times more, even to buy a home that is typically considered to be "within their means."
I have no problem with people making a living wage, they just have to earn it.
Wages are stagnant because of an over regulated economy and a flooded job market. The democrats want more regulation and to bring in more democrat voters, scratch that, I mean undocumented workers.
Actually thats a very simplistic view. A over regulated economy? Really? We've seen massive growth in productivity year after year.
The flooded job market isnt going to go away, and illegals are only part of it. h1-b's, and the growing automation of jobs are just as important. Regulation in certain areas-such as financial are needed, and some better inspection of chemical plants apparently given multiple incidents.
You make statements here that have no factual backing mixed in with some factual things.
I suggest those, who think the CEOs are worth that much, try to do some of their jobs. See how long you can last.
I know I can't do their job and I think they deserve the pay.
Do you feel they deserve to make hundreds of times more than their frontline workers who often aren't paid enough to even afford the kinds of things produced or sold or traded as services by those CEOs?
What about, say, hedge fund managers? The top 40 highest-"earning" hedge fund managers in 2013 made as much as 300,000 public school teachers.
Are they "worth" that? Do they "deserve" it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
