Minimium wage to be $15/hr in Los Angeles...Could this affect the LEGO Secondary Markets (parting out/reselling small sets)???

[tabolton314]

​I think you missed my point. I know things cost more now, but $4.16 today is exactly equivalent to $0.25 back in 1938, at least according to the CPI. According the BLS, $4.16 will buy you the same amount of stuff as $0.25 did in 1938.

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

 

​But it won't, which was my point.  Cost of living in a lot of the country has exceeded inflation by a lot.  If cost of goods increased exactly along with inflation, then milk would be $7/gal, Harvard tuition dirt cheap, and the average rent $350/month.  But they don't, so why should we expect a minimum wage that matches inflation to be enough to live on?

[GhostDad]

I think another issue is the mentality of people in this country.  The american dream, the expectation to own fancy cars, big houses, keep up with the Jones, means that people feel entitled to be given things.  Which is why a business like Ed's can't keep employees. 

The agriculture industry in states that have cracked down on migrant workers has suffered immensely.  The non-migrant workers who try the jobs quit because it's too hard and doesn't pay enough.  It was either Mississippi or Alabama that had quietly repealed the bills and were trying to entice the migrant workers back.

The work ethic in this country has suffered.  Kids these days haven't been taught responsibility and follow through.  They have helicopter parents who clean up after them and make sure they get everything they want. 

​There is ultimately only one thing that will raise wages at the bottom without increasing unemployment at the same time: a lower supply of unskilled labor.  What most people don't know, because it is never, ever mentioned in media coverage of immigration, is that in 1965 our immigration system was reshaped to focus on 'family reunification'.  It sounds nice, but what it means in practice -- fast forward to 2015 -- is that 75%, or roughly 750,000 legal immigrants are admitted into the US each year on the basis of family ties alone.  Not just spouses and minor children, but adult children and siblings, even elderly parents.  Most arrive with very little formal education, and as a result enter the job market in direct competition with Americans (and previous immigrants) who have only a high school diploma (or less).  This is the most important factor holding down wages for the bottom 40% or so.  All through the recession and tepid recovery that followed, we continued to admit the same number (750,000) of primarily unskilled legal immigrants, who entered a labor market characterized by rising unemployment, falling wages, and a declining labor participation rate.  This was (and continues to be; the labor participation rate still hovers at multidecade lows) truly insane as a matter of policy, and it (legal as opposed to illegal immigration) has not been subject to any significant national debate since 1965.

In an ideal world, we would crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants, because while legal immigration is actually the bigger problem, you need enforcement as well to prevent everyone from doing an end run around the system.  Here's what happens when an employer (say, a hotel; 80% of illegal immigrants are employed outside of the agriculture sector) has access to illegal labor: the labor supply expands, so economics 101 tells us the 'clearing' wage will fall, and it has throughout agriculture, meat packing, hospitality, construction, landscaping, and so on.  Americans won't work for the new, lower wage because they have access to government benefits like disability that will pay almost as much as work without requiring work.  But these Americans don't disappear.  They stick around, with much higher rates of substance abuse, poor health, and consequent tax increases on everyone else to provide for them.  Only the employer gains, while taxes and income inequality(employer income up while American worker income down) both rise.  It's a terrible deal for the country, and has been for the past 50 years.  If you truly want to help low income Americans, reduce immigration (legal and illegal).  An ever expanding unskilled labor supply in an era of offshoring and rapid technological change (automation) is only a recipe for mass unemployment and misery. 

[tabc59]

​But it won't, which was my point.  Cost of living in a lot of the country has exceeded inflation by a lot.  If cost of goods increased exactly along with inflation, then milk would be $7/gal, Harvard tuition dirt cheap, and the average rent $350/month.  But they don't, so why should we expect a minimum wage that matches inflation to be enough to live on?

​"The CPI inflation calculator uses the average Consumer Price Index for a given calendar year. This data represents changes in prices of all goods and services purchased for consumption by urban households." - BLS.gov

The numbers I gave weren't just based on inflation. They were based on the real increase or decrease in prices of goods. The increase in prices are already factored into the CPI.

I realize housing prices outpace the CPI, but many other things have decreased in price in real terms even though they have increased in nominal terms. Also, houses have roughly doubled in size on average since the 1940s, and there is a much larger emphasis placed on luxury items in homes now.

Edited May 21, 2015 by tabc59

[jerryherb]

This covers the Alabama issue you mention

hbowatch.com/vice-sweet-home-alabama-haitian-money-pit

but, people don't raise their kids with the values of good migrant workers because they don't want their kids to be migrant workers.  Everyone wants to be an owner of themself and their time and what they do with it, no one wants to be owned. Doing crap work you don't want to do for any amount of pay makes you feel as if you're not in control of yourself. So, very few people raise their kids to be good at it. But, they probably should.

​i see three solutions to this dilemma. college, trade school or 2-year military service. i can guarantee you a lot more kids will strive to get a diploma, but either way they will become productive adults and contribute to society on both social and economic level instead of sucking it dry

Edited May 21, 2015 by jerryherb

[jerryherb]

​I think this is also why the higher education system in the US is so messed up.  In other parts of the world, people know what they want to do first and then use the higher education as a mean to achieve the goal.  None of the wasting freshman & sophomore years "figuring out what to do" while partying, flunking classes, and accumulating debts.  Especially in 3rd world countries where higher education is harder to come by, competitive to get into, and expensive as heck.

​i wouldnt exactly say expensive, but definitely only the best get in.

[tabolton314]

​"The CPI inflation calculator uses the average Consumer Price Index for a given calendar year. This data represents changes in prices of all goods and services purchased for consumption by urban households." - BLS.gov

The numbers I gave weren't just based on inflation. They were based on the increase in prices of goods. The increase in prices are already factored into the numbers.

I realize housing prices outpace the CPI, but many other things have decreased in price in real terms even though they have increased in nominal terms.

​I just verified, but the numbers I gave also followed CPI.  So using the CIP, Harvard tuition should cost $12k.  It doesn't.  Rent should cost $450 (which is likely true in some cities, but not all).

So would $4/hr cover costs in a very low cost of living place?  maybe.  but it wouldn't in most places.

[Darth_Raichu]

​I don't know a lot about other country's higher education systems, but don't they attend college at the same age US kids do?  Is it because the curriculum of K-12 (or their version if it) is so different than ours?

Broad brush time
 

More or less similar age, although some countries have mandatory 2-3 years military service for high school graduates.  In a lot of countries, the spots for cheaper state run university are very limited, thus highly competitive.  The alternative is private colleges which are expensive.  Both usually require potential students to take some kind of qualification tests to even enter the program.

However, some countries also have some kind of vocational or trade schools, even on high school level which students can enter in lieu of regular high school or even college.  So technically students do not need to go to college to be proficient in some trades.  I believe the European countries have concepts of apprenticeship, which is similar idea.

**Disclaimer: I am no way an expert on this, just have a few friends on/from other parts of the world

Edited May 21, 2015 by Darth_Raichu

[Darth_Raichu]

​i wouldnt exactly say expensive, but definitely only the best get in.

​Not expensive per US currency / standard, but expensive for the majority of people whose income and cost of living are lower than US, as in 3rd world countries. 

Although, I believe you are correct for western European countries where governments subsidize higher educations so people do not have high out of pocket costs per say.

 

**Disclaimer: I am no way an expert on this, just have a few friends on/from other parts of the world ​

Edited May 21, 2015 by Darth_Raichu

[Migration]

​i wouldnt exactly say expensive, but definitely only the best get in.

Where you from, if you don't mind my asking?

[randrace]

My contribution:

Rents in L.A. are expensive. I've lived in L.A. for ten years on minimum wage, but it was a struggle. $15 seems appropriate in relation to the cost of living in L.A.

Yes, this sucks for small business owners, but it is awesome for the local economy. Some generalizations about minimum wage workers: many don't drive, some don't have bank accounts and use cash to pay for things. Why is this good? The money they make does not move far from their location. Businesses close to the worker's home and work, will get a boost. 

The above is more of a hunch, and not based on any hard data I've collected. 

 

[Brick625]

My contribution:

Rents in L.A. are expensive. I've lived in L.A. for ten years on minimum wage, but it was a struggle. $15 seems appropriate in relation to the cost of living in L.A.

Yes, this sucks for small business owners, but it is awesome for the local economy. Some generalizations about minimum wage workers: many don't drive, some don't have bank accounts and use cash to pay for things. Why is this good? The money they make does not move far from their location. Businesses close to the worker's home and work, will get a boost. 

The above is more of a hunch, and not based on any hard data I've collected. 

 

​How can that be awesome for local economy? Please explain

Rent/food/services will dramatically increase in price. LA has problems with unemployment, this move will only aggravate the situation. Middle class will get hurt the most. 

For the past 2 days ive spoken to several small business owners about this increase, and all of them agreed that they will have to let some employees go or move their business from LA. Cant pay full benefits + $15 an hour. 

I agree they should raise minimum wage but not to $15/hour. LA is not SF or NY, where i could see that transition happening. 

[fuzzy_bricks]

Could be isolated, could be one of several unintended consequences.  I don't see people asking for reduced hours ever impacting the secondary Lego market.

http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/nonprofit-worker-reduced-hours-requested-stay-subs/nmYYS/#cmComments

Kind of along the same lines, another Mike Rowe post.