House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour • Hacker News Board

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#31

Post by undersuit » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 10:32 PM UTC

Liron wrote: post #5

luxuryballs wrote: post #3

Effectively banning/exporting any jobs that aren’t productive enough to be worth paying as much. Price fixing always creates shortages and is an inefficient way of allocating resources. Less people will be hired, businesses will go under. Stupid idea and should be a constitutional violation, you should have the right to work for whatever wage you want.

Right, plus there are plenty of Americans who want to work for say $13/hr if the job is a rewarding one. The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 is arguably low enough to raise somewhat because why not, but $15/hr is clearly high relative to the current supply/demand equilibrium.

What about $8.40/hr for the current supply/demand?

>$8.40 in 2019, $9.50 in 2020, $10.60 in 2021, $11.70 in 2022, $12.80 in 2023, $13.90 in 2024 and $15 in 2025.

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#32

Post by marcusverus » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 11:01 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #30

harryh wrote: post #10

It's important to note that there is a ~0% chance that this will pass the Senate or that the current President would sign it. This is best discussed as politics and not policy.

Correct. It will apply substantial political pressure on Mitch McConnell, as everyone who would see a benefit (anyone making under $15/hr) is unable to if he won't bring it up for a vote.

It will apply zero political pressure to Mitch McConnel.

Even if Dems had the Senate, the would still face a presidential veto.

This isn’t an issue of one man preventing a change. Dems only control 1 of the 3 institutions required to pass this law.

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#33

Post by toomuchtodo » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 11:13 PM UTC

marcusverus wrote: post #32

toomuchtodo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. It will apply substantial political pressure on Mitch McConnell, as everyone who would see a benefit (anyone making under $15/hr) is unable to if he won't bring it up for a vote.

It will apply zero political pressure to Mitch McConnel. Even if Dems had the Senate, the would still face a presidential veto. This isn’t an issue of one man preventing a change. Dems only control 1 of the 3 institutions required to pass this law.

He’s running for re-election in 2020. Amy McGrath [1], the democratic challenger, is polling within two percentage points of him. There are more lower income voters than wealthy conservatives in Kentucky.

Of course nothing will happen today, it’s for campaigning.

[1] https://twitter.com/AmyMcGrathKY

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#34

Post by harryh » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 11:25 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #33

marcusverus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will apply zero political pressure to Mitch McConnel. Even if Dems had the Senate, the would still face a presidential veto. This isn’t an issue of one man preventing a change. Dems only control 1 of the 3 institutions required to pass this law.

He’s running for re-election in 2020. Amy McGrath [1], the democratic challenger, is polling within two percentage points of him. There are more lower income voters than wealthy conservatives in Kentucky. Of course nothing will happen today, it’s for campaigning. [1] https://twitter.com/AmyMcGrathKY

That's much closer than I would have guessed. What poll is this?

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#35

Post by toomuchtodo » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 11:43 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #34

toomuchtodo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s running for re-election in 2020. Amy McGrath [1], the democratic challenger, is polling within two percentage points of him. There are more lower income voters than wealthy conservatives in Kentucky. Of course nothing will happen today, it’s for campaigning. [1] https://twitter.com/AmyMcGrathKY

That's much closer than I would have guessed. What poll is this?

Was just referenced in a Ditch Mitch PAC marketing email that went out an hour ago. I've contacted their team to ask for a citation and will report back with it when I receive it.

EDIT @ 1563753486: http://kentuckytoday.com/stories/mcgrath-comes-out-firing-in...

“Change Research conducted a poll of 1,629 likely 2020 voters in Kentucky from June 15-16 and found that retired Marine Amy McGrath is already essentially tied with Senator Mitch McConnell in a hypothetical 2020 general election Senate matchup, despite half of Kentucky voters not even having an opinion of her yet. If the election were held today, 47% would vote for McConnell compared to 45% for McGrath, a deficit well within the margin of error.

Ayoub added, “Senator McConnell is extremely unpopular in Kentucky, with 22% viewing him favorably and 61% viewing him unfavorably. Even among Republicans, roughly as many view him favorably (40%) as unfavorably (39%). This stands in stark contrast to other prominent Republicans like President Trump, who is overall well-liked in Kentucky (58% favorable, 40% unfavorable) and nearly universally beloved among Republicans (92% favorable, 4% unfavorable)."

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#36

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 11:48 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #10

It's important to note that there is a ~0% chance that this will pass the Senate or that the current President would sign it. This is best discussed as politics and not policy.

All politics serves a policy goal, and all policy exists in a political context. The two are inseperable.

Moreover policy pursued for political ends becomes a policy goal simply by the action of the propaganda it initially serves; appeal to racism was about politics more than immediate policy when the Republicans adopted the Southern Strategy in ’68

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#37

Post by harryh » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 12:03 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #35

harryh wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's much closer than I would have guessed. What poll is this?

Was just referenced in a Ditch Mitch PAC marketing email that went out an hour ago. I've contacted their team to ask for a citation and will report back with it when I receive it. EDIT @ 1563753486: http://kentuckytoday.com/stories/mcgrath-comes-out-firing-in... “Change Research conducted a poll of 1,629 likely 2020 voters in Kentucky from June 15-16 and found that retired Marine Amy McGrath is already essentially ti…

Wild!

I had, apparently incorrectly, assumed she'd get handily trounced.

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#38

Post by clairity » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 12:25 AM UTC

gwright wrote: post #19

clairity wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you make it sound so bad to own a mcd's franchise, but most people would be ecstatic at the chance. $150k roughly puts you in the top 10% by individual income. most people are quite happy working hard for that amount of money. and raising prices as a result would be fine since other minimum wage earners (i.e., customers) would now have more money to spend on fast food. (estimating based on your numbers, prices would…

> and raising prices as a result would be fine since other minimum wage earners (i.e., customers) would now have more money to spend on fast food. (estimating based on your numbers, prices would have to increase about 10%) And what about the customers that aren't minimum wage earners and don't have more money to spend? And what about the formally minimum wage workers who no longer have a job or have fewer hours (redu…

what small business owner really wastes money by carrying extra headcount though? if the business could have cut headcount before and still have done all the work needed, they would have done that already regardless of a change in minimum wage. small businesses just don't generally carry extra overhead the way a larger organization does.

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#39

Post by gwright » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 2:49 AM UTC

clairity wrote: post #38

gwright wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and raising prices as a result would be fine since other minimum wage earners (i.e., customers) would now have more money to spend on fast food. (estimating based on your numbers, prices would have to increase about 10%) And what about the customers that aren't minimum wage earners and don't have more money to spend? And what about the formally minimum wage workers who no longer have a job or have fewer hours (redu…

what small business owner really wastes money by carrying extra headcount though? if the business could have cut headcount before and still have done all the work needed, they would have done that already regardless of a change in minimum wage. small businesses just don't generally carry extra overhead the way a larger organization does.

I think you are simplifying things quite a bit.

For example, a grocery store might have minimum wage workers who help bag groceries to provide a better service to their customers. If the minimum wage goes up, then the store might decide to eliminate that service.

My local Dairy Queen, for example, might decide that two people getting paid $15/hour will just have to do instead of three people getting paid $10/hour. Maybe that isn't for all shifts/times, but just on the margins.

And of course it isn't just the lowest paid workers that are affected by this. Let's say there are two tiers of jobs at a particular business. One that pays $15/hour and one that is $10/hour. If the lowest tier must be paid $15, what happens to those workers at the next tier of $15/hour? Either their pay must be increased or they are going to be unhappy about having more responsibilities/skills for the same pay as the person that was just hired. Alternatively new hires will have little incentive to work harder to fill the next tier (since they won't get paid any more). So wages for the positions just above minimum wage also have to go up increasing total payroll costs.

IMHO, Anyone who thinks that hourly wages can be increased by 50% ($10 to $15, for example), without having a significant impact on any business that depends on low-skilled labor isn't thinking very deeply about this sort of change. I'm being generous also since the federal change is almost a 100% increase.

Re: House passes bill to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour

#40

Post by londons_explore » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 8:01 AM UTC

syshum wrote: post #16

Liron wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, plus there are plenty of Americans who want to work for say $13/hr if the job is a rewarding one. The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 is arguably low enough to raise somewhat because why not, but $15/hr is clearly high relative to the current supply/demand equilibrium.

It seems market forces are already working to do that with out the need for government intervention. Many Companies (walmart, Amazon, Target, etc) have all raised their companies minimum starting wage to well above the federal minimum, some even to $15 This is correct way for wages to raise, not by government demand

I suspect those companies have raised their minimum wages not because of the local labor market, but instead because of nationwide PR risks.

That is just as bad as a law really. The companies will end up employing fewer people at higher wages, while other people end up unemployed, and the total nationwide labor salary gets reduced.