CA Minimum Wage is Bad for Workers? Inconceivable!!

[jbird4049]

Everyone knows they get welfare and section eights to get by. Just pass the tax off to the middle class.

I assume that's sarcasm?




I believe that congress cut section 8 funding in 2008 and they haven't gone up since. And the population of qualified people has only grown.

The waitlist to get for the program in my county has been closed since then, and it looks like it will be a few more years before it opens again. That's because they're still working through the five thousand remaining applicants from the time it was open for few days, perhaps a week, that it was open to new applications. In 2008!

[TheReal_ND]

It's always been an in the know kind of nepotism. I had a friend of a friend's mother that was on it last century and she still had to wait for years to get on it. I honestly don't know how people get by in LA on shit wages. When I was there I tended to homelessness or missions.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I've always thought it would be interesting to make 'minimum wage' a minimum percentage of the companies profit. That accounts for regional differences in cost of living for small business, but doesn't let massive chains extract wealth like a mug from employees.

[jbird4049]

It's always been an in the know kind of nepotism. I had a friend of a friend's mother that was on it last century and she still had to wait for years to get on it. I honestly don't know how people get by in LA on shit wages. When I was there I tended to homelessness or missions.

The list was just under 14,000 or 13,000 in 2008, I believe. I have no problem believing even being connected helps little.

And California's housing problems get a little worse each year. It hasn't been since the late 70's or maybe the early 80's that one could really plan on a decent apartment, or even a room, on retail wages.

My parents, and before them my grandparents were renting entire free standing houses with yards on such jobs up into early 70's. In Santa Clara County! Of course, the country was mostly fruit orchards, with some ranching added, with San Jose being a town, not a city, let alone the sprawl it is now.

[TheReal_ND]

I've always thought it would be interesting to make 'minimum wage' a minimum percentage of the companies profit. That accounts for regional differences in cost of living for small business, but doesn't let massive chains extract wealth like a mug from employees.

Well that sounds extremely confiscatory tbh. You're going to need one hell of a strong arm to get anything like that accomplished

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

How is it more confiscatory than a flat minimum wage?

[TheReal_ND]

Well for starters your talking about completely changing state laws on a federal level. It's going to be labeled as federal overreach. Rightly so imo. I guess you could try it on a state level and see what happens. That would actually not be confiscatory I think.

[jbird4049]

I've always thought it would be interesting to make 'minimum wage' a minimum percentage of the companies profit. That accounts for regional differences in cost of living for small business, but doesn't let massive chains extract wealth like a mug from employees.

That's something to think on. At its highest level in 1968, adjusted for inflation, the minimum wage was over $10, and adjusted for increased in productivity, which use to added to wages until about then, the minimum would be north of $15 today.

A huge part of our problems, including items like the cost of housing is the extreme gape in income and wealth in our country. It was less extreme during the the Gilded Age, or just before the Great Depression. All the money, all the power, all the resources, are being sucked up into a tiny number of people. Leaving the rest of us to metaphorically starve. Or be unable to rent an apartment.

[jbird4049]

Well for starters your talking about completely changing state laws on a federal level. It's going to be labeled as federal overreach. Rightly so imo. I guess you could try it on a state level and see what happens. That would actually not be confiscatory I think.

I don't necessarily agree with the suggestion, but I'm freaking scared that if some real, and serious, proposals are not carried out, (like FDR did, and he failed sometimes, but so long as he was trying, people were willing not to wait) some not so metaphorical tumbrels might come into use. This time it was Bernie, then President Trump, next time what?

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Well for starters your talking about completely changing state laws on a federal level. It's going to be labeled as federal overreach. Rightly so imo. I guess you could try it on a state level and see what happens. That would actually not be confiscatory I think.

People say a federal minimum wage is overreach. This is simply a system that (at best of course, it could be a disaster) would acknowledge the realities of local economies, and the difficulties of small business ownership, while achieving a basic standard for compensation. It is, obviously, confiscatory to a degree. It also ties wages to production in a way that can fluctuate, so there is a danger of deflation. The fact that this might not blow up the whole damn world goes against the accepted reasoning on deflation and inflation.

I agree that people would moan about it, but people fear change and moan about everything.