XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.trump.is.a.filthy.lying.insurrectionist.and.rapist.and.shitbag, or.politics
XPost: talk.politics.guns
On 4/12/2025 7:51 PM, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. With
the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they didn't
qualify for some anymore.
That is the reason for minimum wage: to make all salaries high enough no business gets the government to help pay.
That is *not* the reason for minimum wage. The reason for minimum wage laws is to make skilled, often unionized, labor comparatively cheaper.
Say a skilled unionized worker is twice as productive as two unskilled teens, and the union member earns $35 per hour. Minimum wage is $15 per hour. You hire the two teens and get the same output as you would get from the union member, but you're only paying $30 per hour for their output. So you hire the teens. Now
the government mandates an increase to the minimum wage to $20 an hour. The two teens now cost you $40 per hour for the same output you can get from the union member for only $35. You fire the teens and hire the union member.
The *strongest* supporters of increases to the minimum wage are *always* labor unions. Dummies think organized labor supports minimum wage increases because there is some kind of ratchet effect that increases union wages as well, but that's wrong. The reason is that increases in minimum wage reduce the demand for
low-skilled non-union labor and increase the demand for unionized labor. That's the reason.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)