this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
125 points (97.0% liked)

General Discussion

12066 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy.World General!

This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.


🪆 About Lemmy World


🧭 Finding CommunitiesFeel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!

Also keep an eye on:

For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!


💬 Additional Discussion Focused Communities:


Rules

Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.0. See: Rules for Users.

  1. No bigotry: including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘silly’ questions. The world won’t be made better by dismissive comments to others on Lemmy.
  4. Link posts should include some context/opinion in the body text when the title is unaltered, or be titled to encourage discussion.
  5. Posts concerning other instances' activity/decisions are better suited to !fediverse@lemmy.world or !lemmydrama@lemmy.world communities.
  6. No Ads/Spamming.
  7. No NSFW content.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Most jobs will give you a performance review and a raise every year to account for inflation and any increased duties you've taken on. We increase minimum wage by massive amounts after far too many years which causes all sorts of economic concerns, business complaints, and just a bunch of arguments everywhere. Shouldn't they just increase minimum wage 3.5% or whatever, every single year?

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, but then how would capitalists exploit you?

See, if it doesn’t increase with inflation then there is a good chance they can delay giving you an adequate raise for a long time. And, when they do give you a raise, you’ll probably just need to accept less than if you had been receiving them all along.

I hope you’ll consider the capitalist here. He does need to create endless revenue growth, even if that means squeezing his employees until they can’t afford to live.

[–] subignition@fedia.io 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Cost of living adjustments need to become a regular and expected demand from workers. Because yes, if they conveniently fail to give you a raise that at least meets inflation every year, they are effectively cutting your pay in a way that the legal system has absolutely no problems with.

Edit: Not just minimum wage, ALL wage. Inflation adjustments are the bare minimum for the company to be maintaining your value. Performance raises etc. need to happen in addition to that.

[–] Pyro@pawb.social 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Got to think about those poor business if they have to pay a nickel more for labor they would be broke

Joking aside, minuim wage is a hot issue. One side fully believes that minuim wage is in fact a bad thing and shouldn't exist. So for them putting a bill out that auto raises it would be counter productive to ~~their interests~~ business being able to hire with supply demand

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If a business cannot function while paying a decent wage it should not exist.

Businesses with unrealistic business plans fail everyday, it is a basic function of capitalism.

It is not a society's responsibility to prop up business ventures that waste capital by continuing to pursue uneconomically viable enterprises.

[–] Kalkaline@leminal.space 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And further more, if a business pays it's employees such a low rate that they need government assistance and the company is so important that they need to be subsidized like that, the company should be owned by the government.

[–] MelodiousFunk@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Somewhere, a Walton just sneezed.

[–] detalferous@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They already lie about inflation to make it look like the economy isn't in dire straits. Indexing minimum wage to inflation would make them lie even more.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The minimum wage should include 1 voting share upon the worker joining the company that can only be given up by leaving the company. No voting shares should be held by anyone that isn't currently working at that company

[–] singron@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Economists think that directly tying wages or prices to inflation can cause inflationary spirals. CPI is based on prices, and raising wages will eventually raise prices and CPI, so if you raise wages based on CPI, it can enter a positive feedback loop.

It might be ok if the feedback is slow enough or if the minimum wage influences a macroeconomically insignificant proportion of wages.

[–] justaregularthrowaway@lemmynsfw.com 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Economists must think Belgium doesn't exist. See this document explaining how automatic indexation happens for all Belgians (including those on pensions) without there being a higher inflation than in the other countries: https://www.abvv.be/sites/abvv/files/2023-01/Index_EN%20final.pdf A lot of it is: we simply get the raise a little quicker and without a fight, and only have to fight for real wage increases. Where in other countries they need to wait for the next wage negotiations and then fight to keep the real wage and hopefully increase it too.

[–] Encode1307@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Belgium is probably also macroeconomically insignificant in the euro zone

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We definitely don't want that, since that hurts everyone, sapping value from wages and savings. I'm definitely not an economist. I was just thinking about how long we go in-between minimum wage increases and how it impacts prices every time it goes up. I was wondering if it would have less of an impact if it was raised incrementally instead of sudden big increases.

[–] Anamana@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

I was wondering if it would have less of an impact if it was raised incrementally instead of sudden big increases.

It probably does yeah. You can clearly learn sth about power within our system by seeing which jobs adapt their wages to inflation first. Aside from the ones who are in high demand anyway.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The quick answer is cola should be built into the system. Neither party has taken minimum wage laws seriously. States have taken it more seriously than the feds. All jobs should be required to give a cola increase every year.

[–] Azzu@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

I'd be okay with that, but only if it is diet.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago
[–] wafflez@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Let's tie it to company revenue