One Company’s New Minimum Wage: $70,000 a Year

[Domingo Halliburton]

Dude is now broke renting out hs home

and this happened as well....

Well, the people getting paid less than $70,000 are going to be enjoying their pay raise.
The problem with this is that you have people currently making $70,000 who have higher qualifications than the lower paid employees. They are going to look at Jim Bo Bob who went through zero college education and has the skills of a monkey all of a sudden get paid the same as the college educated dude who worked his way up with skills, knowledge, hard work, and maybe brown-nosing. He's going to high tail it and look elsewhere. That or employee morale is going to tank. It's human nature for the more veteran employees to be disgruntled to get paid the same as others who have less to offer.

The employee morale backlash could only be prevented if everyone else got a raise too.

 

[MikelArteta]

and this happened as well....

However, The New York Times has just reported that two of Gravity's "most valued" employees have quit as a result of the pay raise. Here's why.

 

[ogc163]

This CEO raised his company's minimum wage to $70,000 a year — and his two best employees quit

 

[hashmander]

i could have told his ass that wouldn't work if the guy currently making 70k didn't get the same % bump. everyone can't make the same wages.

 

[ill]

Liberal economics don't work?

 

[unit321]

This is a long article but worth reading if you want to read more about this company and stuff.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/b...klash-against-the-raise-that-roared.html?_r=1

She left.

 

[Apollo Creed]

I think this is low key why some people are against the 15 buck min wage. If fast food workers who can't get orders right go from making 8 bucks to 15 bucks, while you went to college and such and are still at say 20 bucks, and the price of goods may potentially increase to cover min wage increase, is that really fair? But then what if everyone gets raises, and price of goods go up/companies lay off in big numbers, was it worth it? Your income is still the same being that everything has inflated.

 

[Broke Wave]

Liberal economics don't work?

This wasnt economics... It was a social experiment. Economics is "hey, people should be paid a wage that allows them to not depend on the govt, as that is a subsidy to the employer who isnt paying the true cost of labour"

 

[Grand Conde]

Liberal economics don't work?

Explain the term 'liberal economics'.

 

[CHL]

Explain the term 'liberal economics'.

He's trolling. At least for the sake of his intelligence ()I'm assuming he is.

 

[tmonster]

It's weird that some of you econ 101 geniuses don't even realize how sociopathic y'all are

 

[ill]

Explain the term 'liberal economics'.

Liberal economics - Blindly spending money (typically other peoples money) without thinking it through and just hoping for the best aka a Democrats wet dream.

Ya know, like giving 70k to every employee regardless of their skills/accomplishments/any other goddamn standard that was in place already. Its about screwing over those that have excelled and worked hard/smart in their lives to out compete everyone else and EARN that 70k only to have it spit back in their face while every idiot gets handed that same 70k. Its giving out $15 min wages to unskilled labor cuz you think they deserve a McMansion on their McDonalds salary. Theres nothing wrong with raising the minimum nor is there anything wrong with workers fighting for more. What is wrong is when people make 'social' financial decisions blindly without looking at the true cost/repercussions of their social policies. This 70k company is a perfect example of wanting to do whats "right" socially, but instead doing whats wrong financially. You guys are driving labor demand towards unskilled industries thus trapping these people in the same plight they've always been in. If you're preaching anything other than continued education and working on their skills then we're going to be revisiting this situation often.

This wasnt economics... It was a social experiment. Economics is "hey, people should be paid a wage that allows them to not depend on the govt, as that is a subsidy to the employer who isnt paying the true cost of labour"

I know. Im half trolling. Lol at experimenting with peoples livelihoods.

It's weird that some of you econ 101 geniuses don't even realize how sociopathic y'all are

Your liberal ideas cost real dollars. They have real effects on economics. If your ideas aren't grounded in financial feasibility, then its junk. Such as, handing out 70k salaries to people that haven't earned them thus causing companies to go belly up. Congrats, a few people made a few extra bucks for a few months but now they're all out of work. This company clearly couldn't afford to give out those salaries blindly and its costing them now. People like you will champion that its a "great cause" "justice" "equality" etc while ignoring basic economics that say its not feasible and theses dudes will be out on the street soon. Lol @ calling us sociopaths. We're not (at least Im not) against people raising their wages. What I'm against is irrational policy thats has no foundation in financial feasibility. You're saying its better for them to blindly get a bunch of cash up front while on the back end they will be out on the street when the company goes bankrupt. I'm saying its better to not do that and wait until the policy is actually fukking do-able financially and can be sustained. These social experiments are about to leave a bunch of people out of jobs.

 

[DonFrancisco]

I kinda have to agree with Ill on this one......

Labor economics is difficult. I won't hate on anyone unionizing and wanting to make $15. That is very understandable. After all a firms sole purposes is to make sure the top stakeholders and managers make the most amount of money and that lower employees and clients have no surplus. It is a bit evil but that is how economics works.

At the end of the day everyone wants to get paid, including the fast food workers. $15 in New York city is understandable. That wouldn't fly in Houston though, that would be too much money.

 

[DonFrancisco]

Liberal economics - Blindly spending money (typically other peoples money) without thinking it through and just hoping for the best aka a Democrats wet dream.

Ya know, like giving 70k to every employee regardless of their skills/accomplishments/any other goddamn standard that was in place already. Its about screwing over those that have excelled and worked hard/smart in their lives to out compete everyone else and EARN that 70k only to have it spit back in their face while every idiot gets handed that same 70k. Its giving out $15 min wages to unskilled labor cuz you think they deserve a McMansion on their McDonalds salary. Theres nothing wrong with raising the minimum nor is there anything wrong with workers fighting for more. What is wrong is when people make 'social' financial decisions blindly without looking at the true cost/repercussions of their social policies. This 70k company is a perfect example of wanting to do whats "right" socially, but instead doing whats wrong financially. You guys are driving labor demand towards unskilled industries thus trapping these people in the same plight they've always been in. If you're preaching anything other than continued education and working on their skills then we're going to be revisiting this situation often.



I know. Im half trolling. Lol at experimenting with peoples livelihoods.



Your liberal ideas cost real dollars. They have real effects on economics. If your ideas aren't grounded in financial feasibility, then its junk. Such as, handing out 70k salaries to people that haven't earned them thus causing companies to go belly up. Congrats, a few people made a few extra bucks for a few months but now they're all out of work. This company clearly couldn't afford to give out those salaries blindly and its costing them now. People like you will champion that its a "great cause" "justice" "equality" etc while ignoring basic economics that say its not feasible and theses dudes will be out on the street soon. Lol @ calling us sociopaths. We're not (at least Im not) against people raising their wages. What I'm against is irrational policy thats has no foundation in financial feasibility. You're saying its better for them to blindly get a bunch of cash up front while on the back end they will be out on the street when the company goes bankrupt. I'm saying its better to not do that and wait until the policy is actually fukking do-able financially and can be sustained. These social experiments are about to leave a bunch of people out of jobs.

I agree. Some companies can afford to pay the vast majority of workers $70,000 but most can't. It really depends on the firms size, organizational structure, and financial structure. Company culture also plays a big part in whether they pay workers enough.

 

[ill]

I agree. Some companies can afford to pay the vast majority of workers $70,000 but most can't. It really depends on the firms size, organizational structure, and financial structure. Company culture also plays a big part in whether they pay workers enough.

If it fits your company structure and it is financially feasible, by all means go for it. You'll be enticing workers to come work for you and they'll be happy about it. The problem is the majority of companies cannot afford this and forcing it through minimum wages or social pressures is not a good way to go about it, IMO. 99.99% of people cannot start a business handing out 70k salaries to all employees. Its just not realistic. Only established companies will be able to afford these salaries, but these companies have already made huge chunks of change through traditional labor practices. So basically, they'd be cheating and getting a huge head start in order to have the finances available to offer 70k salaries to all employees.