Upon inception it was set at $0.25. It is now $7.25.

  • idiomaddict@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 年前

    But the workers don’t currently have either- lowering or removing the minimum wage might reduce the unemployment rate, but those jobs are not going to be paid at a livable rate. Currently more theft is wage theft committed by companies against workers, they’re already using the power they have against workers. There’s already a clear divide between union and nonunion blue collar benefits and wages: if there were a textbook play of economic principles, all nonunion blue collar employees would quit and join union companies or form their own.

    • trailing9@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 年前

      Having neither, it’s the same as the saying about liberty and security. If you don’t seek employment for all then you won’t get minimum wage.

      Let the people decide what a livable wage is. A bad job is better than no job. They can still refuse to work.

      Of course, without new ideas, things don’t change. Not the workers but the companies need a reason for full employment.

      • idiomaddict@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 年前

        Let the people decide what a livable wage is. A bad job is better than no job. They can still refuse to work.

        The people have a gun to their head. If they’re not eligible for unemployment because a $3/hour job is available, they’ll take it not to starve to death. That doesn’t make it a free or advantageous choice.