News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
So, couple things.
First, and least important (but still important), this article is out of date
This data is not accurate after wage increases
Second, this article has nothing to do with what we're talking about. I have nothing against raising the minimum wage. I think it should be tied to local cost of living and reassessed every 2 years.
What we're talking about is that raising the minimum wage would not provide the price pressure on the labor market you think it will, because there are already more jobs than people and wages are already rising as a result (though slowing, in which case your argument may someday become relevant again).
The market is unlikely to shift away from labor for over a generation, barring some ludicrous advancement in AI and robotics. Our population is shrinking while our economy is growing. That's bad for employers in price-sensitive markets but great for literally all employees (until they get old, but whatcha gonna do).
Raise the minimum wage. Go nuts. It won't affect average wages in any significant way, because not enough people are on the minimum wage.
I appreciate that you want more frequent adjustments to the minimum wage. I am in full agreement. I think it should be assessed on a national level more so than local, because making it piecemeal like that leaves lots of open opportunities for bad actors to exploit it (think gerrymandered congressional maps), but I do appreciate that as far as that goes, we are largely in agreement.
That said, Teter's essay addresses most of the other claims in your comment, with both argumentation and sources. Maybe you should read more of that and try addressing some of her other rebuttals to your points, rather than just ignoring them and repeating yourself endlessly? Then you might at least look a little bit less disingenuous.
I read the article
She does not discuss minimum wage's relevancy in an era of massive wage increases. In 2021, wages weren't growing. Not were they before then.
And they still aren't, so why should she discuss that?
Wages have absolutely grown quite a lot.
Top result on Google. https://www.ppic.org/blog/wage-growth-is-struggling-to-keep-up-with-inflation/ Got another "nuh uh" for me, or are you going to make an actual effort this time?
This does not imply a lack of wage growth, quite the opposite.
Literally the first sentence
Whether or not it's enough wage growth isnt what were discussing. I'd love to see wages rise more. This growth means raising min wage won't do much tho.
What's the point of discussing if wages have grown without factoring in inflation? If wages increase, but inflation increases by the same amount, then leaving out the latter when arguing the former seems a little fucking dishonest, no? And of course it didn't occur to you to read past the first sentence to see where she makes that exact same point... or you deliberately ignored it to keep doubling down on the points I've already debunked.
And you've also admitted that there are still workers making the federal minimum wage, so it doesn't seem like this wage growth you think is such a trump card has been benefiting them at all. As I pointed out earlier, a third of the workforce is making less than $15, meaning that all of them would get a pay bump from raising the minimum, not just the ones who are already on the minimum wage. I have made this point multiple times and you still refuse to acknowledge it.
Honestly, you're arguing dishonestly enough that I straight up don't believe you when you say you'd love to see wages rise more.
You're just retreading the same ground
But yes it's clear you're not interested in examining this discussion in any meaningful way and I agree it should end.
I've been retreading the same ground because your argumentation strategy has just been to double down on your original points while ignoring my rebuttals. Which makes it fucking rich of you to accuse me of "not being interested in examining this discussion in any meaningful way." Imagine what I could achieve with that level of absolute brass balls.
That dude is a troll. What you described is his typical M.O. He never responds to anything that threatens his preconceived and often poorly formed opinions.
Oh and he's a frikkin Nazi in every way except for having a fuck doll with hitler's face on it.
If your rebuttals do not change the discussion there is no need to change the discussion away from them.
You're not interested in engaging in a meaningful way if you aren't willing to engage in the current and likely reality of the discussion.