Recently in New York, a national fast-food wage protest was organized. To keep this content evergreen I will be taking a closer look at the meat and potatoes driving this particular protest instead of focusing on the specific details of this event that transpired. Anytime an event like this takes place, what follows is a debate over minimum wage between conservatives and liberals alike. This issue is not as straight forward as some may want, because raising the minimum wage will have an impact on the entire economy. Whether that impact will create positive results, is subjective at best.
Economically Entitled or Emotionally Entitled
Before a minimum wage increase can occur, first it has to be defined by some measure, or else we are left with various opinions to what a fair minimum wage looks like from many different individuals. I already wrote an article on defining an employee’s value (“What are You Worth?”). Essentially, business owners are not the individuals that decipher what the minimum wage will be for the jobs. How much an employee is paid is defined by the market, specifically the job market.
The conservative argument asks why a business owner should pay employees double the current wage, if there are still people that are willing to work at half the proposed rate. Supporters for this position explain that this is how business owners are able to keep overhead low and pass savings on to the consumer market. If employee wages go up, then that increased business expense will be picked up by the consumer, reflected by a loss in value in goods/services whether it be a price increase, cheaper quality, lower quantities, etc.
The liberal argument asks why can’t the business owners take a pay cut, and turn a minimum wage into a livable wage, because the employees are the ones who keep their business chugging along. The protesting minimum wage employees who work forty plus hours at the current minimum wage say,” it is very difficult to maintain a living off (x) amount of dollars an hour.” Supporters of their position like to describe the lavish lifestyles of the business owners as evidence that there exists money that “should” be going towards the employee’s wages.
How much is Too Much?
Think about how much money it takes a month to sustain your personal lifestyle. Say that your position on this argument is that minimum wage is not enough to maintain your current situation. If you had the opportunity to indulge in some of life’s greatest luxuries, would you do so? Better yet, what modern day luxuries do you already have that someone, who is currently sustaining their lifestyle on today’s minimum wage (or less), may think isn't a necessity or may consider overabundant? So how do we measure abundance? Some people’s lifestyle requires a thousand times the amount of today’s minimum hourly wage and more to sustain, but yet there are also individuals who live so modestly that their lifestyle can be sustained with less than the current pay per hour. Defining the line between modesty and overabundance is about as easy as a task, as forming one single opinion using over seven billion different perspectives and counting. The definition of overabundance is: a state of being more than full. Abundance itself isn't a concept that can be measured, because it’s a hypothetical concept. Imagine everyone is a glass. If no two people are the same then that means everyone’s glass comes in a different size. Therefore what one person may consider a “rich” fulfilling life, another may see the glass as half empty. This is why I think those who are trying to increase the minimum wage have an uphill battle ahead of them, because it’s difficult to come up with evidence that proves how one individual’s lifestyle is righteous over another’s.
Before a minimum wage increase can occur, first it has to be defined by some measure, or else we are left with various opinions to what a fair minimum wage looks like from many different individuals. I already wrote an article on defining an employee’s value (“What are You Worth?”). Essentially, business owners are not the individuals that decipher what the minimum wage will be for the jobs. How much an employee is paid is defined by the market, specifically the job market.
The conservative argument asks why a business owner should pay employees double the current wage, if there are still people that are willing to work at half the proposed rate. Supporters for this position explain that this is how business owners are able to keep overhead low and pass savings on to the consumer market. If employee wages go up, then that increased business expense will be picked up by the consumer, reflected by a loss in value in goods/services whether it be a price increase, cheaper quality, lower quantities, etc.
The liberal argument asks why can’t the business owners take a pay cut, and turn a minimum wage into a livable wage, because the employees are the ones who keep their business chugging along. The protesting minimum wage employees who work forty plus hours at the current minimum wage say,” it is very difficult to maintain a living off (x) amount of dollars an hour.” Supporters of their position like to describe the lavish lifestyles of the business owners as evidence that there exists money that “should” be going towards the employee’s wages.
How much is Too Much?
Think about how much money it takes a month to sustain your personal lifestyle. Say that your position on this argument is that minimum wage is not enough to maintain your current situation. If you had the opportunity to indulge in some of life’s greatest luxuries, would you do so? Better yet, what modern day luxuries do you already have that someone, who is currently sustaining their lifestyle on today’s minimum wage (or less), may think isn't a necessity or may consider overabundant? So how do we measure abundance? Some people’s lifestyle requires a thousand times the amount of today’s minimum hourly wage and more to sustain, but yet there are also individuals who live so modestly that their lifestyle can be sustained with less than the current pay per hour. Defining the line between modesty and overabundance is about as easy as a task, as forming one single opinion using over seven billion different perspectives and counting. The definition of overabundance is: a state of being more than full. Abundance itself isn't a concept that can be measured, because it’s a hypothetical concept. Imagine everyone is a glass. If no two people are the same then that means everyone’s glass comes in a different size. Therefore what one person may consider a “rich” fulfilling life, another may see the glass as half empty. This is why I think those who are trying to increase the minimum wage have an uphill battle ahead of them, because it’s difficult to come up with evidence that proves how one individual’s lifestyle is righteous over another’s.
