Buffett: I'd love to see minimum wage at $15 an hour

Posted by $ mminnick 5 years, 11 months ago to Business
6 comments | Share | Flag

He can pay his people $15/hr. He can pay that with his pocket change.
SOURCE URL: http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/03/news/economy/buffett-minimum-wage/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by overmanwarrior 5 years, 11 months ago
    He doesn't care about $15 an hour because the Obama administration, so long as it delays the Keystone Pipeline is insuring that all that oil gets to China on his Buffet's trains running across the USA Northern boarder. His appeasment of Obama is to protect his investments few of which involve any minimum wage workers. But it would hurt Buffet's competition. Funny how that stuff works. Sounds like what...................oh.............Atlas Shrugged. That silly book of cult drivin maniacs--according to the radical left. That book is just science fiction and filled with hate--again acording to the radical left. That is why people who have not read that book fail to see what Buffet has been up to with his support of Obama's administration.

    Nobody should make a minimum wage of $15 dollars an hour. That is just rediculous.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 5 years, 11 months ago
    I was thinking about this today.
    Walmart is hurting for help.
    The normal solution is to offer more pay.

    But when the base pay is already near what the value of the work being done is, there's not much room for merit pay.

    Let's say you have two people stocking shelves. One does a good job, quickly, another does a poor job, slowly. Stocking shelves is worth,ultimately, only so much money to the company, and requires a minimal skill level (for the sake of argument). When you have to pay a lot for *anyone* to stock the shelves, that doesn't leave much room in the profit margin to pay good stockers more than you pay mediocre stockers. And you can't only hire good stockers and fire the mediocre stockers, because you need the shelves stocked and a good stocker can still only do so much, and when you fire someone you have a ton over overhead expenses thanks to uncle Sam.

    Further, and more to the point, let's say you have a job of stocking, and then a job of inventory control. The latter may be worth a little more to the company than the former, but because the base pay of the former is so high, again you're hemmed in between what you have to pay *anyone*, and what the inventory control is worth to the company's bottom line.

    When the minimum you have to pay any warm body is high, that leaves less room for you to offer people to enter at higher skill levels, or to move up the skill ladder on merit.

    And as you can only raise prices so high, with every drone making a certain amount,that leaves limited room to reward industry and/or skill.

    Yesterday,we had a nasty snow/sleet/ice storm. Our store was forced to send two people to another store. We had 22 people call-in, unable (read: unwilling) to come in to our store; we still were forced by corporate to send two people to that other store (they're doing inventory) even though they only had 12 call-in. (Total call-ins for our store over the 3-shift period was 62 people).

    When you're paying so much out as a minimum, you don't have any margin to bribe people to come in on a nasty day, for example.

    Predictably, the minimum wage rewards unskilled and/or non-productive people, and harms the skilled and/or productive, discourages ambition, and increases companies' overheads.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo