Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 354 posts

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#121

Post by hackable_sand »

murderfs wrote: post #58
user9999999999 wrote: post #23

the min wage is long overdue, its should be somewhere near $25/hr this is how you 'tax' billionaires

That's a good way of turning the poorest US workers into the poorest US unemployed. If you raise the minimum wage above the actual value of an employee, then they're just going to get fired. Even if they still provide more value than their being paid, it makes automating away their job more competitive. California tried this with a $20/hr minimum wage in fast food restaurants: the next time you go into a McDonalds, c…

Pure japes.

Ordering kiosks mean we can meet volume because more time is spent in production. Same with mobile ordering.

The employee count doesn't need to change up or down.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#122

Post by WalterBright »

tired-turtle wrote: post #116
WalterBright wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Framing it as not increasing taxes being a cut is misleading. It's just as disingenuous as scaling back a proposed budget increase and calling it a "cut". The FTC wouldn't let businesses get away with such language, why should the government get a pass?

If a bill due at the end of the month is forgiven on the 25th, were expenses cut? What if the debt is forgiven on the 2nd of the next month? I’d wager most people would consider those scenario cuts. However, in your framework, the verbiage is different despite a shared outcome.

Bills are not due in advance. The analogy is inapt.

The taxes were cut 8 years ago. There aren't further "cuts". Billionare tax rates have been the same for the last 8 years, and will continue at the same rate at least into next year.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#123

Post by hackable_sand »

ta20240528 wrote: post #102
XorNot wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McDonalds were going to do that anyway. And what's the point of a minimum wage of it doesn't provide a living? That's just letting private enterprise piggyback off the welfare system.

Good question - it has a partial answer: minimum wage is to provide a living to a single young person for a shortish period. Not a family. Especially not families with - for other reasons- only one breadwinner. The problems of poverty (to the extent the US even experiences it) are broader than demanding someone make uneconomic decisions with their investors capital.

Why not?

I know several people supporting families on minimum wage.

Do they not deserve to be paid more?

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#124

Post by Auracle »

user9999999999 wrote: post #23

the min wage is long overdue, its should be somewhere near $25/hr this is how you 'tax' billionaires

Why?

Pretty sure the data of the past few years has shown we don’t really need a minimum wage apart from ensuring people aren’t absolutely taken advantage of. Nobody is paying just minimum wage anymore, apart from servers and the like that make most of their income from tips. The local McDonalds pays at least 50% more, for instance.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#125

Post by t43562 »

alvah wrote: post #81
deadbabe wrote: post #13

There is just no advantage to being poor in America.

Why should there be an advantage to being poor?

...because if there isn't then your democracy will turn into an oligarchy. The advantage needs to be somewhat against the richest and for the poorest if you're going to protect that.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#127

Post by mh- »

csb6 wrote: post #27
mh- wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not wait to release them until enough data has come in that it's settled? Serious question, what's the downside?

Because the law requires them to release reports on certain dates, so they do so and then make corrections as more data comes in.

Thanks.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#128

Post by reliabilityguy »

hvb2 wrote: post #97
reliabilityguy wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t the deportations increase the demand for low-paying jobs resulting in increasing salaries?

Which would mean food gets more expensive, right? Regardless of the fact that a lot of poor people don't live in the areas where most of those jobs are but they do get their produce from there.. The top 4 counties in the US for agriculture production are all in the central valley in California.

> Which would mean food gets more expensive, right?

Which in turn will create more pressure to increase the salaries until it reaches the equilibrium that satisfies everyone.

The alternative is to use de-facto slave labor just for the sake of cheap food?

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#129

Post by reliabilityguy »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98
reliabilityguy wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Stable, long term tariffs. Well, you have to start somewhere. > We’re seeing historic falls in manufacturing employment for a reason. In your opinion, what is this reason?

> you have to start somewhere There has been no start. You don’t build a factory because the President announced a tariff that he is also negotiating a trade deal around. > what is this reason? I’m remodelling my deck. I had orders into a steel mill in Utah. Tariffs mean their steel inputs are pricer than competitors in Vietnam. So I switched the order. And I paid with a cheque—if I paid cash I could skip taxes altog…

> There has been no start. You don’t build a factory because the President announced a tariff that he is also negotiating a trade deal around.

You absolutely do once the math of tariffs makes your manufacturing abroad not competitive with onshored one. Will it apply for all categories of products? Probably not. However, it will definitely apply for many.

I am not sure I understood your reply about the reasons.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#130

Post by JumpCrisscross »

reliabilityguy wrote: post #129
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you have to start somewhere There has been no start. You don’t build a factory because the President announced a tariff that he is also negotiating a trade deal around. > what is this reason? I’m remodelling my deck. I had orders into a steel mill in Utah. Tariffs mean their steel inputs are pricer than competitors in Vietnam. So I switched the order. And I paid with a cheque—if I paid cash I could skip taxes altog…

> There has been no start. You don’t build a factory because the President announced a tariff that he is also negotiating a trade deal around. You absolutely do once the math of tariffs makes your manufacturing abroad not competitive with onshored one. Will it apply for all categories of products? Probably not. However, it will definitely apply for many. I am not sure I understood your reply about the reasons.

> absolutely do once the math of tariffs makes your manufacturing abroad not competitive with onshored one

If someone bet on e.g. our Japan tariffs three months ago, they lost money. (Nobody did. The types that take Trump at his word on tariffs aren’t making economically significant decisions.)

Post reply on HN