PDA

View Full Version : Minimum Wages


Rule303
11-26-2001, 03:45 PM
During my last visit to USA, I think the minimum wage was $5.25/hour.
I read that the US minimum wage was introduced post-civil war to ensure that employers in the south would not create a monopoly on industries. The reasoning was that a factory in the south could not undercut the prices of a manufactured item in the north by reducing the cost of manufacture through lower wages. This apparently caused wide spread unemployment at the time.

A similar contrast is apparent when large name brand companies are manufacturing their goods in Mexico and some third world countries at abysmally low wages. Not wishing to draw a law suit againt myself, but there are some major sports brands that are manufactured in these countries then marketed in major countries like Germany, USA, England and Australia. In a television documentary, it showed a 16 year old girl who worked in "quality control' in one of these factories. She examined around 1500 - 2000 shirts during her 12 - 14 hour shift for which she received $4.50 US a day.This creates very little employment for people in those economically better countries.

But is there a solution?

But within the local employment industry, Australia developed the "award wage' sytem. This is where the wage/salary applied to the job is based on the duties required. A miner working in a dangerous environment receives very high salary. A person sweeping floors receives a low salary. Australian does not have a generalised minimum wage, but rather one that suits the place of employment. Most Australians are paid above the award wage. This however, creates a higher priced product. That in return, makes the Australian product less competitive with the same product made in a third world country.

But again, are there any answers to this situation.?

TexasGlockCop
11-26-2001, 09:29 PM
I agree with the Ausie thinking about dangerous jobs receiving more pay (compared to a janitor). I think that the amount of training, education, experience, degree of difficulty and hazards of the job should all be factored when calcualting ones pay rate. This would most likely require a "National" pay scale (different from Federal minimum wage). It would be difficult to implement, since local taxes are involved with regards to "civil servant" jobs. You would have to "pool" all of the taxes and then split them evenly. I do not feel this would be fair. Most people move to areas where crime is lower and schools are better for example. "Moving" those taxes elsewhere would put that type of decision in a whole new perspective. Police officers, for example, could work in a tiny town (with little hazard or work) and get the same pay for an officer in a large city where crime is rampant (LA area for example). Now we have to start rating cities (and areas of the city) as to the hazards involved and adjust the pay again. Now, we are right back where we started.

Well, with that just said, I obviously don't have an answers either. The Ausie way of hazards affecting job pay, sounds great to me, but would take alot of work to implement here in the states. Guess, I'll stick with my pay as is. Or maybe move "down under"? Hhhmmm..........

11-27-2001, 08:25 AM
I think it maybe $5.75 or $6.16 now, not sure...

Rule303
11-27-2001, 12:14 PM
I won't get out of bed to go work for less than $15 an hour.
:-/

maximus
01-17-2002, 11:45 AM
I grew up in Mexico and know all bout these places of work where these people make the equivalent of 8 USD for an 8 hour day of work. I have gotten into this discussion before.
The truth is that making 8 USD in mexico for an 8 hour shift sounds horrible for us that are used to a 5.25 an hour minimum wage, but truth is for a laborer in mexico the minimum wage is 4.50 USD per day and making 8 is a good deal. YOu have to take into account that the cost of living and other expenses is much lower there.
This is also a reason why so many imigrants come to the US to try to get a job, all they hear is minimum of 5.25 an hour and think is great only to realize that it buys them about the same lifestyle as they had back in their home countries.
The real great deal would be earining in dollars and spenidng in pesos! :c)

01-17-2002, 06:16 PM
I am for government staying out of the mix. They only seem interested in their welfare not ours.

Rule303
01-17-2002, 08:26 PM
I read somewhere a claim that in Mexico, it was possible to rent a small ranch, hire a maid, a cook, a chauffeur and a stable hand; feed a few horses, feed yourself and family..... and do all that, for less than $10,000 a year.

Sipowicz
02-15-2003, 09:25 AM
I couldn't believe when I found out the poverty level numbers. Talk about dumbfounding! :o

According to the government, a family of four (4) is not considered at the poverty level until they have an annual income of ~ $18,000 or less!

We're talking two adults and two children living for a year on 18 G's a year! This was part of an exercise for my Applied Criminology class. We had to determine a budget for a family of four only keeping the bare necessities (this was before we knew the number). The average thought for a minimal required income by myself and my classmates was more than double what the actual level is! :-\