How does the federal minimum wage rate effect all USA wage rates?

Nov 2014
3,457
417
Florida
Transcript from another group's posting board:
"Augiedogie, North Carolina's minimum wage rate is the federal rate. If there were no federal rate, it's not unlikely that there'd be no minimum NC rate. Particularly, if South Carolina, and/or Tennessee, and/or Virginia had a lesser or no legally enforced minimum wage rate, a NC minimum rate would be more difficult to enforce and sustain.

... The federal minimum wage rate is a minimum rate. States may, and many have enacted a higher minimum within their own jurisdiction.

Delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention determined a federal law was necessary for reducing the economic harm that a U.S. State may deliberately or inadvertently inflict upon any other State, particularly an adjoining state.
The constitution's commerce clause was enabled by delegates from wealthier states agreeing to sacrifice their own states' advantages. Without such compromises, the constitution would not have been ratified and our nation might not have survived to this day. That compromise is no less needed now, as it was in 1787.
Then there is no reason to raise it
 
Oct 2009
510
88
Cliffside Park, NJ
The problem isn't 15 dollar minimum wage.. the minimum wage increase is NOT for the 2 out of every 100 people that earn minimum wage of which 80% are pimply faced teenagers working their first jobs.

it is about the Union Workers making 20-30/hour those wages are TIED directly to the US minimum wage... double the minimum wage you have to increase the Union wages proportionately.. so the Union workers will get a 10-15 hour increase.. remember 2007... this is what killed the auto industry in and sparked the recession, Union workers lost jobs, then they defaulted on their Mortgages, tons of foreclosed homes on the market, housing prices crashed... and so on.
TNVolunteer73, the federal minimum wage rate's effects upon all USA's lower wage-rate and the majority of middle wage-rate employees range from critical to substantial; that's an effect upon more than 30% of all USA employees.
Additionally, more than 24% percentiles of USA's employees, (i.e. 4/5 of USA's lower wage-rate, and the majority of middle wage-rate employees) are not all “pimply-faced teenagers working their first jobs”.

If employees' unions would now have the political and economic influence you attribute to them, our government, economy, and employees' median income's purchasing power would now all be superior in conditions.

USA's manufacturing products proportional losses within our own domestic markets began many decades prior to the Bush recession your post referred to.
It was not unions, but financial institutions that speculated in the derivative securities' markets.
It was not unions, but rather lesser regulated banks that winked at falsely inflated evaluations of real-estate and then granted loans to that couldnt be repaid because future prices couldn't sustain those inflated collateral valuations.

It was not Unions, but Wall Street that precipitated a worldwide financial calamity which affected USA's and other nation's economies.
Respectfully, Supposn
 
Oct 2009
510
88
Cliffside Park, NJ
Then there is no reason to raise it, [i.e. the federal minimum wage rate].
PTIF219, you neglected to read the enclosed transcript or do you find English text to be challenging? Respectfully Supposn

Transcript from another group's posting board:
"Augiedogie, … Delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention determined a federal law was necessary for reducing the economic harm that a U.S. State may deliberately or inadvertently inflict upon any other State, particularly an adjoining state.
The constitution's commerce clause was enabled by delegates from wealthier states agreeing to sacrifice their own states' advantages. Without such compromises, the constitution would not have been ratified and our nation might not have survived to this day. That compromise is no less needed now, as it was in 1787”.
 
Nov 2014
3,457
417
Florida
PTIF219, you neglected to read the enclosed transcript or do you find English text to be challenging? Respectfully Supposn

Transcript from another group's posting board:
"Augiedogie, … Delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention determined a federal law was necessary for reducing the economic harm that a U.S. State may deliberately or inadvertently inflict upon any other State, particularly an adjoining state.
The constitution's commerce clause was enabled by delegates from wealthier states agreeing to sacrifice their own states' advantages. Without such compromises, the constitution would not have been ratified and our nation might not have survived to this day. That compromise is no less needed now, as it was in 1787”.
What does that have to do with minimum wage
 
Oct 2009
510
88
Cliffside Park, NJ
PTIF219, you neglected to read the enclosed transcript or do you find English text to be challenging? Respectfully Supposn

Transcript from another group's posting board:
"Augiedogie, … Delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention determined a federal law was necessary for reducing the economic harm that a U.S. State may deliberately or inadvertently inflict upon any other State, particularly an adjoining state.
The constitution's commerce clause was enabled by delegates from wealthier states agreeing to sacrifice their own states' advantages. Without such compromises, the constitution would not have been ratified and our nation might not have survived to this day. That compromise is no less needed now, as it was in 1787”.
What does that have to do with minimum wage
PTIF219, you are challenged by English text, or just too lazy to entirely read what you yourself quoted in post #41? Read the very first paragraph that you quoted in post #41.
Respectfully Supposn
 
Nov 2014
3,457
417
Florida
PTIF219, you are challenged by English text, or just too lazy to entirely read what you yourself quoted in post #41? Read the very first paragraph that you quoted in post #41.
Respectfully Supposn
There would always be a minimum wage.
 
Oct 2009
510
88
Cliffside Park, NJ
There would always be a minimum wage.[/QUOTE00]PTIF219, yes, within every labor market their exists an indefinite theoretical minimum wage rate that applies to the least desirable employee or applicant for the least challenging job. But there's no absolute certainty that there will always be a legally defined and enforced minimum wage within every U.S. Labor market. You and I apparently agree that's so. Furthermore, I believe that there will always be a federal minimum wage rate.

There are those that are opposed to any Legally defined minimum wage rate.

There are those that are opposed to a federal statute defining a Legally enforced minimum wage rate.

I suspect that many of those opposing the federal minimum, do so in the belief that they can more easily eliminate the state's minimum wage rates. If these people have their way, there will not always be federal minimum rate, there may not be a minimum wage rate in every state, and there may not be a minimum wage rate in any state.
Respectfully, Supposn
 
Nov 2014
3,457
417
Florida
So you think they can grt democrats to get rid of it? The unions powerful lobby will never allow it
 
Oct 2009
510
88
Cliffside Park, NJ
So you think they can grt democrats to get rid of it? The unions powerful lobby will never allow it.
PTIF219:
Minimum wage, a character issue. That's the essence of personal and political opposition to the FMW rate.
The federal minimum wage, (FMW) rate is of net social and economic benefit to our nation. It has never been among the major causes of the U.S. dollar’s inflation; on the contrary, it’s certainly among inflation's victims.
There's no economic justification for opposing our minimum wage rate laws. Opposition to the minimum wage indicates a deficiency of character. ...
Respectfully, Supposn