• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Warren Buffett: $15 minimum wage will hurt the working class

Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

:doh Whether or not most actually do, this is an idiotic argument.

Oh wow, if you count people who received the Earned Income Tax Credit, most of them have Earned Income?!? You don't say!!! :roll:

EITC generally isn't what is meant by "welfare". Folks are talking about TANF, SNAP, Medicaid, etc. EITC was added into those numbers specifically to get that result.

EITC allows people to get their tax money back up to a certain amount.

you have to make under a certain amount depending on your family size and how much in taxes that you paid.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

cpwill said:
Gimmesometruth said:
Absurd. Of course, less welfare will surely get those elderly and children out hustling for cash money.
That's interesting. Change "elderly and children" to "able-bodied low-income", and you've just made a very conservative argument

So this is getting interesting. Apparently the conservative assumption is that, if poor people lacked sufficient income, they would take steps to improve their situation through work, or self-improvement, whereas the leftist assumption is that, if poor people lack sufficient income, they will instead create political blocs to demand that others simply give it to them.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

EITC allows people to get their tax money back up to a certain amount.

you have to make under a certain amount depending on your family size and how much in taxes that you paid.

I know what EITC is, I'm simply pointing out that generally when folks talk about welfare, that's not what they are talking about, and including it to show "what % of people on welfare work" is to deliberately skew the numbers.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

I know what EITC is, I'm simply pointing out that generally when folks talk about welfare, that's not what they are talking about, and including it to show "what % of people on welfare work" is to deliberately skew the numbers.

it is a shame that there are people that want off welfare but the government won't allow them to get off of it.
they slit their throat and make it impossible for them to be self sufficient. so these people end up cutting their wages or hours back so they can
qualify again because the gap in support is so wide.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

Let me get this, you asked for a mechanism on how the decline in income could cause employers to increase wages, you agree a grassroots mw movement can cause this, but that doesn't satisfy your forcing.

That's correct. It does not provide a forcing function. It simply (in your model) adds additional impetus to one political pressure group among hundreds. It does not actually force Wal-Mart to calculate their employee's loss of take-home pay due to food stamps and increase each employee's salary by their relative reduction.

Of course you did, I'll repost it:
"The existence of serious welfare cliffs, for example, disincentivizes increasing ones' income."
"Declining welfare cause less desire for income" is a completely indefensible position unless you are going claim everyone who experiences a decline in income becomes so depressed that they give up.

Ah, I see where we miscommunicated there.

A Welfare Cliff occurs when bringing home an additional dollar of income results in the loss of more than a dollar of benefits.

A mother with two children on the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, for example, loses her benefits once she starts making more than $1,023 a month.. So, unless she can make enough of an immediate pay raise to cover the loss and then some, she has a strong incentive to keep her income at ~$1,000 a month.

In Illinois a single mom has the most resources available to her family when she works full time at a wage of $8.25 to $12 an hour. Disturbingly, taking a pay increase to $18 an hour can leave her with about one-third fewer total resources (net income and government benefits). In order to make work “pay” again, she would need an hourly wage of $38 to mitigate the impact of lost benefits and higher taxes.

Meaning that for that single Mom there is no incentive to move from $12 an hour to $18 an hour. Welfare Cliffs disincentivize increasing one's work-related income by reducing total income.

The sarcasm went right by you, and forcing folks off welfare (especially children and the elderly) during a recession/recovery is not only insane, it is heartless.

I would concur that it is certainly heartless.

It is more of your soup kitchens cause depressions solutions.

?
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

:lol: so your argument is that if we get rid of or decrease the social safety net, instead of forming political movements to reinstitute or increase the safety net, activists will form movements to demand increased MW laws, and that therefore the gap between the imaginary MW of a hypothetical future and today's MW is the subsidy?
No, complete straw, I never said MW is a subsidy, an increase in MW is the replacement for the declining income. Again, your argument is based on this unreal idea that declines in income cause LESS desire for income.

So. No. There is no forcing function. Merely the potential for an indirect function in a world in which employers do not make cost/benefit assessments. :) Okedoke.
I have shown 2 mechanisms that put pressure upon employers, either mandatory wage increases or the threat of employee loss. If the employer believes retraining costs/less productivity for a new (and more than likely long term unemployed) hire will be cost effective, so be it, but again, you keep ignoring that folks do react to less income by seeking more income.



We have a wide pool of low-skill laborers. Supply and Demand are real things, that have real effects on prices. Price floors artificially reduce demand. :shrug: None of these are economically controversial, it seems, until you put them together, at which point you challenge people's desire to have their cake and eat it too as the desert of a Free Lunch. But hey, if this is the best ya'll can come up with, then that's fine, because it means that our point stands. There is no actual subsidy to employers in the social safety net.
You have slipped into pure rhetoric while holding to the idea that folks have less desire for income when income declines and ignoring that there is lots of evidence that employers were not rehiring the unemployed quickly, preferring the already employed. You ignore 2 mechanisms on employers to increase wages while you create absurd income claims.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

cpwill said:
Gimmesometruth said:
Absurd. Of course, less welfare will surely get those elderly and children out hustling for cash money.
That's interesting. Change "elderly and children" to "able-bodied low-income", and you've just made a very conservative argument
So this is getting interesting. Apparently the conservative assumption is that, if poor people lacked sufficient income, they would take steps to improve their situation through work, or self-improvement, whereas the leftist assumption is that, if poor people lack sufficient income, they will instead create political blocs to demand that others simply give it to them.

Oh look. A Laboratory of Democracy:

Last year Maine passed a measure that would require recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, otherwise known as SNAP, to complete a certain number of work, volunteer, or job-training hours before being eligible for assistance...

At the close of 2014 approximately 12,000 individuals were enrolled in the state assistance program. Keep in mind that these individuals are adults who aren’t disabled and who don’t have children at home and who are claiming the food-stamp benefits because of a lack of financial resources.

After forcing these individuals to either work part-time for twenty hours each week, enroll in a vocational program, or volunteer for a minimum of twenty-four hours per month, the numbers showed a significant drop from 12,000 enrollees to just over 2,500...

Huh.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

That's correct. It does not provide a forcing function. It simply (in your model) adds additional impetus to one political pressure group among hundreds. It does not actually force Wal-Mart to calculate their employee's loss of take-home pay due to food stamps and increase each employee's salary by their relative reduction.
Your argument get narrower and narrower, you are moving the goalpost of forcing an employer. I provided 2 mechanisms that force increases in wages, if it does not cause an employer to weigh retraining cost for those lost employees, so be it.



Ah, I see where we miscommunicated there.
A Welfare Cliff occurs when bringing home an additional dollar of income results in the loss of more than a dollar of benefits.

A mother with two children on the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, for example, loses her benefits once she starts making more than $1,023 a month.. So, unless she can make enough of an immediate pay raise to cover the loss and then some, she has a strong incentive to keep her income at ~$1,000 a month.

In Illinois a single mom has the most resources available to her family when she works full time at a wage of $8.25 to $12 an hour. Disturbingly, taking a pay increase to $18 an hour can leave her with about one-third fewer total resources (net income and government benefits). In order to make work “pay” again, she would need an hourly wage of $38 to mitigate the impact of lost benefits and higher taxes.

Meaning that for that single Mom there is no incentive to move from $12 an hour to $18 an hour. Welfare Cliffs disincentivize increasing one's work-related income by reducing total income.
That is assuming large numbers would be effected...and that no changes to TANF/SNAP would be made.

I would concur that it is certainly heartless. ?
Sure you do.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

No, complete straw, I never said MW is a subsidy, an increase in MW is the replacement for the declining income. Again, your argument is based on this unreal idea that declines in income cause LESS desire for income.

No, it's just a failure of reading comprehension. Observe:

cp said:
so your argument is that if we get rid of or decrease the social safety net, instead of forming political movements to reinstitute or increase the safety net, activists will form movements to demand increased MW laws, and that therefore the gap between the imaginary MW of a hypothetical future and today's MW is the subsidy?

I was asking if your argument was that the gap was the subsidy, as that is what you seem to be saying. Not the MW itself.

gimme said:
I have shown 2 mechanisms that put pressure upon employers, either mandatory wage increases or the threat of employee loss.

Neither of these is an actual forcing function. One depends upon a possible hypothetical in which increased "pressure" results in a political decision, and the other merely requires having to hire new low-skill workers.

If the employer believes retraining costs/less productivity for a new (and more than likely long term unemployed) hire will be cost effective, so be it

McDonalds already has an annual turnover rate of 150%. It seems that low-skill workers are also more likely to quit when they have worked enough to qualify for benefits again, or when school starts up, etc. So those costs are already baked in the cake.

but again, you keep ignoring that folks do react to less income by seeking more income.

I concur with that. I simply think that your mechanism is highly unstable, and your idea that it of necessity creates a forcing function on employers is implausible. Sure, people will seek more income. That doesn't mean that a low-skill job or worker will suddenly magically increase it's value-added.

You have slipped into pure rhetoric while holding to the idea that folks have less desire for income when income declines and ignoring that there is lots of evidence that employers were not rehiring the unemployed quickly, preferring the already employed.

Quite the contrary - never have I suggested otherwise. However, that does not mean that the unemployed are unemployable, except where artificial price-floors have made them so.

You ignore 2 mechanisms on employers to increase wages while you create absurd income claims.

You have one mechanism which is very hypothetical and dependent on a series of indirect means.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

Your argument get narrower and narrower, you are moving the goalpost of forcing an employer.

I am maintaining the goalpost that I set out in the beginning - that of a forcing function on the employer to raise wages commensurate with the loss of public aid experienced by his or her workers. Thus far you've come back with "well, in such a scenario politics might mandate the increase in the MW" hypothetical, forgetting that A) in that parallel universe apparently going through such a libertarian moment, that is unlikely and B) employers have alternatives to human labor when that labor becomes prohibitively expensive. Demand for low-skill labor is not perfectly inelastic.

I provided 2 mechanisms that force increases in wages, if it does not cause an employer to weigh retraining cost for those lost employees, so be it.

The employer is likely already retraining employees, and your other mechanism was that perhaps a political pressure group would arise.

Warren Buffet is correct. If you actually want to help Low-Income workers, expanding the EITC is a better policy to actually put money in their pocket.

That is assuming large numbers would be effected...and that no changes to TANF/SNAP would be made.

... I do not understand this reply. I am saying that welfare cliffs exist and have negative impact on people's desire to earn income, not making any proposals. Though I would agree that large changes to TANF/SNAP should be made, and that this would effect many millions of Americans.

Sure you do.

I do. I'm in favor of a social safety net, simply a simpler, better designed one with fewer destructive incentive structures.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

So this is getting interesting. Apparently the conservative assumption is that, if poor people lacked sufficient income, they would take steps to improve their situation through work, or self-improvement, whereas the leftist assumption is that, if poor people lack sufficient income, they will instead create political blocs to demand that others simply give it to them.
I'm not surprised that working for wage increases is viewed as "giving" in light of how min wage has not kept up with inflation, and you have of course ignored comments on seeking greater wages by the already employed. Dishonest argument.



Oh look. A Laboratory of Democracy:Huh.
Well, now you have your work cut out for you, show that Maine has either increased funding for their "training programs" providing enough spaces for those seeking it (one reason why those have given up) or that there is private employers hiring for those unemployed.

Three of Maine’s 16 counties, home to about 100,000 of its 1.3 million residents, are designated “labor surplus areas” by federal labor market monitors. That means there is a serious imbalance between the number of people willing to work and the number of jobs available — an imbalance that stripping away food assistance will do nothing to correct.
Maine Has Kicked 6,500 People Off Of Food Stamps So Far This Winter | ThinkProgress
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

I am maintaining the goalpost that I set out in the beginning - that of a forcing function on the employer to raise wages commensurate with the loss of public aid experienced by his or her workers. Thus far you've come back with "well, in such a scenario politics might mandate the increase in the MW" hypothetical, forgetting that A) in that parallel universe apparently going through such a libertarian moment, that is unlikely and B) employers have alternatives to human labor when that labor becomes prohibitively expensive. Demand for low-skill labor is not perfectly inelastic.
I never knew that forcing MW increases was a "libertarian" moment or that alternative universes exist. I understand that this forcing via MW does not fit well into your universe.



The employer is likely already retraining employees,
Not to the extent of new hires to existing employees, stop please, you are reaching for your denials.
and your other mechanism was that perhaps a political pressure group would arise.
Thats the reality.

Warren Buffet is correct. If you actually want to help Low-Income workers, expanding the EITC is a better policy to actually put money in their pocket.
It is better for the EMPLOYER, it reduces pressure on the EMPLOYER to increase wages....that why he likes it.



... I do not understand this reply. I am saying that welfare cliffs exist and have negative impact on people's desire to earn income, not making any proposals.
You are assuming that many would be affected by wage increases and that TANF/SNAP would not change. They have changed in the past when MW changes.
Though I would agree that large changes to TANF/SNAP should be made, and that this would effect many millions of Americans.
I know you do, and the belief is that it will cause greater employment, the soup kitchen theory for the elderly and children.



I do. I'm in favor of a social safety net, simply a simpler, better designed one with fewer destructive incentive structures.
....for businesses.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

:doh Whether or not most actually do, this is an idiotic argument.

Oh wow, if you count people who received the Earned Income Tax Credit, most of them have Earned Income?!? You don't say!!! :roll:

EITC generally isn't what is meant by "welfare". Folks are talking about TANF, SNAP, Medicaid, etc. EITC was added into those numbers specifically to get that result.
So has the result of increased EITC caused large wage gains for those in lower quintiles?

I think we have already gone over this. It hasn't.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

sure it is a fallacy there is a paywall so it should be free.

I guess their house should be free
I guess their rent should be free
I guess their car should be free

another strawman argument. if you'd like to continue discussing this topic with me, post it again without the logical fallacies. your next strawman argument will be our final interaction.
 
of course i do.... without one, I probably wouldn't understand why making it free to the students isn't a policy we should be chasing after.
Yeah, you want to limit competition for your labor.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

Thats nice. So how about free universal higher public education/technical college?

Much closer to the way things are done in the advanced nations .. Thanks to the conservatives .. we are so backward ..
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

Much closer to the way things are done in the advanced nations .. Thanks to the conservatives .. we are so backward ..

How are conservatives responsible for costs associated with colleges and technical schools?
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

Woop de mother ****ing dog doo. Britney Spears has sold more records than the Beatles. "Far more people blah blah blah" is not a valid argument...its not even a good argument.
Umm, what? Fyi, Beatles have out sold Britney by several million records. There may be a single album that has out sold a single Beatle Album, but we both know what you just said is BS.
Oh look, its a private education website, promoting private education from 9 years ago.

Like I said, you'll have to show some metric that shows private education out stripping public, here is your rebuttal from 2013.

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools, Book Says - Education Week

I love this quote at the bottom
"In the end, no study of public versus private schooling is going to be methodologically perfect," he said. "It's just too complicated to try to find a definitive answer when the sectors are so diverse, the confounding factors so many, and the data sets so limited."

This shows that what you think is true really isn't depending upon who is doing the study and what metrics they are using. In the end, there are far more public school students, regardless of affluence than there are private.

Also, there is a pretty major decline in private school attendance.

https://www.census.gov/hhes/school/files/ewert_private_school_enrollment.pdf

I'm sorry to poke holes in your personal bias, but at least use honest sources.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

another strawman argument. if you'd like to continue discussing this topic with me, post it again without the logical fallacies. your next strawman argument will be our final interaction.

your the one committing the fallacies not me. you claim a paywall exist but have yet to actually prove it. you simply post the cost of going to a college and call it a pay wall.
which is simply not true as there are plenty of ways that they can get money to pay for college.
and if they are poor the greater portion of that they don't have to pay back as they have access to grant money and low income scholarships.

you say it should be free because of this paywall but refuse to actually pay for it.
I simply pointed out other examples of pay walls using your own theory.
should those be free as well?

your not discussing anything. you claim it should be free and that other should pay for it.
you yourself refuse to even pay for it. so I don't see how you can force other people to.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

college graduates need less public assistance. should I post the chart again?
and when everyone has a college degree, what do you suppose happens?

it can be boiled down to a supply and demand equation....and I would have thought most of us understand what ramifications a massive supply glut brings.




be careful not to make physical contact with the plebes. you might sully yourself
well,I guess if you don't have an actual argument, being snide and insulting is the next best thing:roll:

come on dude, you're better than that...
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

your the one committing the fallacies not me. you claim a paywall exist but have yet to actually prove it.

false.

you simply post the cost of going to a college and call it a pay wall.

because that's what it is.

which is simply not true as there are plenty of ways that they can get money to pay for college.

it is true, and the potential debt can be a real deterrent.

and if they are poor the greater portion of that they don't have to pay back as they have access to grant money and low income scholarships.

not everyone who wants to go to college qualifies for financial aid, which you already know.

you say it should be free because of this paywall but refuse to actually pay for it.

this is a lie that has already been addressed.

I simply pointed out other examples of pay walls using your own theory.
should those be free as well?

your examples are not analogous to a college education which can be the difference between poverty and a good career.

your not discussing anything. you claim it should be free and that other should pay for it.

this will be the last time i explain it to you because you are misunderstanding it on purpose.

1-15.jpg

we're already paying for some of it in the form of entitlements. i'm arguing that we should make the investment on the front end.

you yourself refuse to even pay for it. so I don't see how you can force other people to.

lie.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

and when everyone has a college degree, what do you suppose happens?

we will have a highly educated and competitive first world population.


it can be boiled down to a supply and demand equation....and I would have thought most of us understand what ramifications a massive supply glut brings.

by that logic, we shouldn't even make high school mandatory.

well,I guess if you don't have an actual argument, being snide and insulting is the next best thing:roll:

come on dude, you're better than that...

i've supported my argument just fine. refer to the data that i posted.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

we will have a highly educated and competitive first world population.
you're right about the highly educated part...I think employers will be more competitive when their labor costs dramatically decrease due entirely to a labor market glut.... the workers themselves?...well, they wouldn't fare so well...when highly educated labor is a dime a dozen, it's compensated accordingly.


by that logic, we shouldn't even make high school mandatory.
well, that's another issue.... and I have my own ideas about that as well... one that doesn't include the one-size-fits-all bull**** we currently have.



i've supported my argument just fine. refer to the data that i posted.
then stick to your arguments and knock off the personal bull****....I'm not being a dick to you, don't be one to me.
 
Re: Warren Buffett Don't raise the minimum wage

you're right about the highly educated part...I think employers will be more competitive when their labor costs dramatically decrease due entirely to a labor market glut.... the workers themselves?...well, they wouldn't fare so well...when highly educated labor is a dime a dozen, it's compensated accordingly.

once again, why even require a tenth grade education?

because we all benefit from an educated population. it helps us to compete in the first world, and is worth investing in.

well, that's another issue.... and I have my own ideas about that as well... one that doesn't include the one-size-fits-all bull**** we currently have.

so do you support letting kids quit school earlier? i support requiring high school graduation or GED. letting kids make the mistake of dropping out costs society too much money, and there's no good reason for it.

then stick to your arguments and knock off the personal bull****....I'm not being a dick to you, don't be one to me.

if you feel that i've insulted you, i apologize.
 
Back
Top Bottom