Forgot your password?

The U.S. minimum wage should be

Displaying poll results.
Fixed, but below the current $7.25
  533 votes / 2%
Fixed, right at the current $7.25
  763 votes / 3%
Fixed, but at higher than the current $7.25
  3875 votes / 15%
Linked to the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
  10373 votes / 42%
Linked to a particular measure other than CPI
  2333 votes / 9%
  5830 votes / 23%
[I'll write my minimum wage manifesto below.]]
  955 votes / 3%
24662 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The U.S. minimum wage should be

Comments Filter:
  • Wow, only $7.25? (Score:5, Informative)

    by gibbo2 (58897) on Sunday February 24, 2013 @03:43PM (#42996713) Homepage

    And there's an option to LOWER it? Is anybody actually talking about doing that?

    In Australia the minimum wage is almost $16/hr, or US$16.50. It increases most years, not sure if it's tied to CPI.

    Yes, we don't have as big of a tipping culture, although when we do tip it's for good service, not because it's expected. It seems to me that tips are an excuse to pay your workers shit, and a lot of jobs don't get tips but still get the crappy pay.

  • by jklovanc (1603149) on Sunday February 24, 2013 @03:53PM (#42996791)

    Capital gains is also normally irrelevant to all but the "pretty rich"

    Buy a house for $200K, sell it for $300K years later would be $100K in capitol gains. Many people who are not "pretty rich" do that. Then there are 401K's, Small stock portfolios, etc.

  • by reboot246 (623534) on Sunday February 24, 2013 @07:31PM (#42998343) Homepage
    You guys make it look like half the country earns the minimum wage. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Check the Department of Labor website and see for yourselves how few people actually work for the minimum wage. It's just a few percent of workers, and a good portion of those are teenagers, college students working part time, and second-income earners for a family.

    It's just not that big a deal.
  • Re:Fixed (Score:5, Informative)

    by Capsaicin (412918) * on Sunday February 24, 2013 @08:51PM (#42998853)

    "The general consensus, which is not science, among economists is..."


    OK let's do this scientifically. A theory predicts that a minimum wage will create unemployment. The null hypothesis is no effect, so proponents of that theory will need to go out and a) test or b) provide epidemiological evidence, (separating out all contended factors) that the minimum wage actually does create unemployment.

    Now it just so happens that among the advocates of increasing the minimum wage we have people like Alan Krueger who have actually bothered at least to look at the real world. Krueger's empirical work led him to the conclusion (see Myth and Measurement []) that there is simply no empirical evidence to support the idea that the minimum wage chokes employment. If anything, Krueger claims, the opposite is the case.

    Of course this is an intensely political subject and it would be insanely naive simply to accept the findings of a single researcher. In the current context, however, it must be noted a) that pundits like Peter Schiff, quoted by OP, don't sully their hands with empirical work; and b) the onus of proof rests with those who seek to overturn the null hypothesis. Even dismissing Krueger as overly rosy (or, more likely, overly committed), such evidence does not seem to be not forthcoming.

    Now if this were a Science, we might be scratching our heads and wondering why reality and theory don't seem to match. Why would labour be any different from any other commodity? Is the fact that the recipient of the money is at the same time a worker and a consumer possibly relevant? What meta-analysis should we perform to filter out the ideological commitment?

    But of course this is, as you so correctly point out, not Science, it's Economics. So instead let's abandon a rational epistemology throw our hands in the air and agree with whatever position our particular political tribe is advocating at this particular election cycle. Feels good!

  • Re:Thank you! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Khashishi (775369) on Monday February 25, 2013 @12:27AM (#43000097) Journal

    Credit isn't a subsidy. It's a fucking trap.

  • Re:Fixed (Score:4, Informative)

    by war4peace (1628283) on Monday February 25, 2013 @01:59AM (#43000511)

    "The word "billion" once meant one million million (1,000,000,000,000), but this has become obsolete and the word has been used meaning one thousand million (1,000,000,000) unambiguously for decades in the English language." []

    Welcome to the present.

  • Re:Fixed (Score:4, Informative)

    by jmauro (32523) on Monday February 25, 2013 @12:56PM (#43004307)

    Yes []. And the penalties are awesomely high [] when you're caught [].

  • Re:Thank you! (Score:5, Informative)

    by AK Marc (707885) on Monday February 25, 2013 @01:47PM (#43004969)

    We can be the great experiment and raise minimum wage and see if it does in fact reduce jobs. (not a good idea but if you insist we should track the result)

    We have raised the minimum wage a number of times. It did not, in fact, reduce jobs.

  • Re:Not a real fix (Score:5, Informative)

    by phantomfive (622387) on Tuesday February 26, 2013 @03:23PM (#43017215) Journal
    He means he got paid under the table. He didn't get a paycheck because that would be more easily traceable by the IRS.

Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition. - Isaac Asimov


Forgot your password?