Wealth Inequality in America

[BigRedBuster]

OK...what makes 1968 magical other than that's when Blackburn made minimum wage?

 

If I go all the way back to 1938 when the minimum wage was first put in place and adjust that to inflation, it comes out to $4.20.

 

My point being, that modern minimum wage increases haven't kept up with inflation, which is illustrated nicely by the difference between 1968 and 1975 adjusted wages.

 

 

And, my point is, it all depends on the point of origin of what you consider "modern". From what I read in the article, the only reason 1968 was used was because that is when the Representative made minimum wage. Seem kind of arbitrary to me.

[knapplc]

Knapplc....

 

Should every job be expected to offer a "livable wage"?

 

"Every job" is a pretty broad spectrum. Even the FLSA doesn't cover "every job."

[BigRedBuster]

Knapplc....

 

Should every job be expected to offer a "livable wage"?

 

"Every job" is a pretty broad spectrum. Even the FLSA doesn't cover "every job."

 

So, what changes (if any) would you make with that?

[knapplc]

Knapplc....

 

Should every job be expected to offer a "livable wage"?

 

"Every job" is a pretty broad spectrum. Even the FLSA doesn't cover "every job."

 

So, what changes (if any) would you make with that?

Where are you going with this? I didn't say anything about changing the FLSA.

[BigRedBuster]

That's why I said...."if any". You didn't mention anything. I'm not "going" anywhere with this other than having a conversation about the subject.

 

However, I still have concerns about entry level type jobs for teenagers...etc. I personally feel that there are some jobs that are just jobs that people shouldn't expect to make a "living wage" doing.

[knapplc]

However, I still have concerns about entry level type jobs for teenagers...etc. I personally feel that there are some jobs that are just jobs that people shouldn't expect to make a "living wage" doing.

 

You'd know a lot more about this subject than I, being in a position to employ people. In general I agree with the bold, and I don't know where the distinction should be made between those jobs. The workforce is vast and varied and I'm glad it's not in my job description to figure out how to make that "livable wage," and any distinctions it should entail.

 

For the record, I generally believe that higher minimum wages equate to higher costs of goods/services, because while there are many places where a business can cut expenses to pay for those wage increases, raising prices to customers is the most expedient in many cases. I don't blame the businesses for that, it's just business.

[BigRedBuster]

For the record, I generally believe that higher minimum wages equate to higher costs of goods/services, because while there are many places where a business can cut expenses to pay for those wage increases, raising prices to customers is the most expedient in many cases. I don't blame the businesses for that, it's just business.

 

One side stomps there feet and says......"Jobs will be cut"

 

The other side stomps their feet and says....."Cut expenses".

 

In reality, businesses do both. Interestingly, many on the "cut expenses" side use cutting middle management jobs as a way to cut expenses. So, we put some people out of work so others can make more. I guess it's a give and take.

 

Earlier you asked how do we put more people in jobs that earn a "living wage". I have said several times in this thread that I am not against raising the minimum wage. However, reality that many don't want to admit to is competing with foreign labor. Raising minimum wage doesn't just raise the people right at minimum wage. It raises most of the bottom earners. That is a good thing. Problem is, countries like China don't give a crap so when an employee here is making $10-20, they are competing with someone in other countries making $2 or less.

 

Fix that issue and it is MUCH easier to raise wages in the US. Don't fix it and reality is that jobs are cut or not created.

[NUance]

 

/thread-derail: I happened across this graphic, and thought it was particularly relevant to the conversation here. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming. LINK

[BigRedBuster]

 

/thread-derail: I happened across this graphic, and thought it was particularly relevant to the conversation here. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming. LINK

 

 

Very interesting graph. I'm not surprised at much of it. One thing I am surprised at is the areas where 20-35% of kids raised in the bottom fifth rise to the top fifth. That seems like a high percentage of kids rising to the top income level.

[JJ Husker]

Not only does it not fix everything, it doesn't fix anything. There is nothing wrong with raising the minimum wage, but if you went from $7 to $12, jobs would be lost, period. There are a lot of low end manufacturing jobs even here in Nebraska that pay in that range. Do you really need more incentive to move jobs to Mexico? I just don't see how pulling some out of poverty is good when at the same time we would be sending more to the unemployment line.

 

While a "poverty class" is likely inevitable, the smaller that class is the better for everyone. What is the best way to reduce the number of people living at or below the poverty line?

 

This will at first appear like a smart ass response but, the best way to reduce the amount of people living in poverty would be to reduce the ultra wealthy and anyone higher on the chart. Poverty is basically a relative concept and if there were no rich people, either nobody would be in poverty or everybody would. The biggest component to tell if a person is in poverty is if they can afford the bare essentials. Without wealthier people driving up the cost of living, nobody would be living in poverty. Of course, this is why my outlook is that some living in poverty is just the way it is, has been, and always will be. The only way to eliminate it also eliminates all other options.

[knapplc]

Do you really think the wealthy, or the ultra-wealthy, drive up the cost for the common man? The wealthy can afford a Pagani Zonda and have been known to pay a premium for getting one before the next guy, but I'm not in that market anyway so does that really affect me? I'm more the Camry or minivan market these days. No matter how many Zondas they buy, I don't think that really affects me.

 

Or look at wine. I drink a lot of wine, but my market isn't the same as the wealthy person's market. They're (most likely) buying entirely different wine than me. How does that affect my cost of living?

[HSKR]

Not only does it not fix everything, it doesn't fix anything. There is nothing wrong with raising the minimum wage, but if you went from $7 to $12, jobs would be lost, period. There are a lot of low end manufacturing jobs even here in Nebraska that pay in that range. Do you really need more incentive to move jobs to Mexico? I just don't see how pulling some out of poverty is good when at the same time we would be sending more to the unemployment line.

 

While a "poverty class" is likely inevitable, the smaller that class is the better for everyone. What is the best way to reduce the number of people living at or below the poverty line?

 

To start lets flush Obamacare down the toilet where it belongs.

 

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/brevard-county-cut-back-hours-some-part-time-emplo/nY2KK/

 

Raising minimum wage doesn't do any good when everyone will only be working 29 hours a week.

[JJ Husker]

Do you really think the wealthy, or the ultra-wealthy, drive up the cost for the common man? The wealthy can afford a Pagani Zonda and have been known to pay a premium for getting one before the next guy, but I'm not in that market anyway so does that really affect me? I'm more the Camry or minivan market these days. No matter how many Zondas they buy, I don't think that really affects me.

 

Or look at wine. I drink a lot of wine, but my market isn't the same as the wealthy person's market. They're (most likely) buying entirely different wine than me. How does that affect my cost of living?

 

It's not necessarily a direct result of the rich driving up the cost of living. I was just speaking relatively. If everyone had the same basic purchasing power, there would be no rich or poverty stricken. The only way someone can live in poverty is if someone else is living better and vice versa. I'm not proposing it, just sayin.

[BigRedBuster]

Someone being ultra rich has absolutely no affect on someone with less money other than creating jealousy.

 

JJ.....I know you are not proposing this. But, there has never been a civilization where everyone was equal in the history of the world. There will always be people living better than others.

[JJ Husker]

Someone being ultra rich has absolutely no affect on someone with less money other than creating jealousy.

 

JJ.....I know you are not proposing this. But, there has never been a civilization where everyone was equal in the history of the world. There will always be people living better than others.

 

I know, that is why I cannot get all up in arms over poverty. Sure it sucks but it always has been and always will be.