Seems to me like this is happening in all 50 something states though, not just the ones with special laws, we sure that's the problem?
Of course it is. Why would you expect different states to have different tipping policies? How would people remember what or whether to tip in each state?
Believe it or not, non-union restaurant businesses, being the vast majority in the U.S., have a lot more clout than unions.
How would people remember what or whether to tip in each state?
The people you're interacting with on this forum are more than likely from more populous states definitionally. If you look up those states, they likely make way more than the 2.13$ that you fear they do.
I don't remember fearing they make $2.13 an hour.
I fear they don't make what minimum wage should be at the very least- $15 an hour.
This country is wide and disparate. 15$ in NYC is not equivalent to 15$ in the middle of nowhere Utah.
This is why states can choose to make minimum wage whatever they want. Simply blanket stating that 15$/hr for everyone is silly. But lets realize that many states DO require around 15$/hr (or close enough where a 1 dollar tip per table would net them 15 really easily)... and those states actually hold a significant portion of the population of the USA... meaning that most of the people you're talking to here on Lemmy are LIKELY from those states. Does someone who lives in a house in the middle of nowhere Utah have the same requirements for income? You can look on zillow right now... There's houses that appear fully functional for sale at $30,000 (357 results for less than 50k). Does that person need 15$/hr? Just because you're used to prices where you live, and demand those wages at your location, doesn't mean that those numbers make sense at other place in the USA.
So the real question... Where you live... on the table... are they already close to 15$, or close enough that a 5-10% tip which is what used to be customary would still get them over your magical 15$/hr number?
We have a federal minimum wage. Are you really not aware of that?
And no, it is nowhere near $15 in Indiana.
We have a federal minimum wage. Are you really not aware of that?
Yes, which is completely superseded by the states minimum wage. Which is what I said in my post if you bothered to read. What about my post makes it seem like I don't know that a federal minimum wage exists?
And no, it is nowhere near $15 in Indiana.
So looking at Zillow, there's 358 houses in Indiana that are less than 50k to purchase (over 1000, at less than 100k)... Why do you need 15$/hr? What makes 15/hr "livable" when a house that typically takes up 30-50% of a persons monthly expense cost only 50k?
Yes, which is completely superseded by the states minimum wage.
Are you under the impression that state minimum wage can be lower than the federal minimum wage?
So looking at Zillow, there’s 358 houses in Indiana that are less than 50k to purchase (over 1000, at less than 100k)… Why do you need 15$/hr? What makes 15/hr “livable” when a house that typically takes up 30-50% of a persons monthly expense cost only 50k?
Got it, you're one of those people who think the poor don't deserve anything but the bare minimum society can possibly offer.
And, of course, those 358 houses are evenly distributed across Indiana so that the only 358 people in Indiana being paid minimum wage can afford them. That's exactly how things work.
Keep in mind that this is availability RIGHT NOW. Meaning that the market has availability on TOP of what's already occupied... and doesn't include rentals. The market is NOT saturated.
those 358 houses are evenly distributed across Indiana
Looks pretty centered around population centers to me.
who think the poor don’t deserve anything
Right... which is why I'm advocating here that they should be able to buy a house? That's the bare minimum to you? Jesus dude... you're really off the mark here.
All 358 of them?
Because only 358 people in Indiana are paid minimum wage?
Also, I have no idea how you calculated those numbers, but there is not a chance in hell that someone who makes less than $16,000 a year can afford a house. They can barely afford food. And who would give them a mortgage?
$16,000 a year is below the poverty line.
And yes, getting everyone into a home should be the bare minimum. Sadly, many people aren't in them, including many people who work for minimum wage. Because, believe it or not, very few people will rent to you if you make that little.
I love how you say "I think the poor deserve things because I want 358 of them to own a house" and not "I want them all to be paid better."
And yes, getting everyone into a home should be the bare minimum.
Getting into a home (eg having a house to live in) != OWNING a home. Owning the home/asset is not the bare minimum in this country.
Because only 358 people in Indiana are paid minimum wage?
Didn't say that. Actually quite literally already stated that this is surplus on top of whatever solutions people have already in place. Eg... people making minimum wage right now live somewhere already do they not? This is surplus on the market right now already. If you're going to continue to ignore half of the message and continue to argue in bad faith just let me know so I can block you sooner rather than later.
but there is not a chance in hell that someone who makes less than $16,000 a year can afford a house.
Uh... so you think the mortgage calculator is incorrect? My current mortgage is at 259,000, and I pay ~1300. a 50k house at double the apr will be something like $300. Where you'd make $1232.50 a month... so less than 25% of your income. This is 100% possible.
No. For an individual that threshold is 14,891. 7.25$/hr, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year is 15,080. I put the numbers into the calculator. You can too. Minimum wage keeps you just above poverty if you're on your own.
You claimed that 15$/hr is required for your area. I'm showing you that that is bullshit as you can have well more than "minimum" with minimum wage income.
The funny part is that this already ignores that at minimum wage you can claim benefits as well that would help (SNAP for example) since you wouldn't be grossing 130% of the poverty level.
I love how you say “I think the poor deserve things because I want 358 of them to own a house” and not “I want them all to be paid better.”
I grew up in poverty... Demanding increased minimum wages has never worked to resolve poverty (and quite contrarily has typically made it worse in the community I grew up in, and continues to NOT help in that community to this day [I visit every once in a while... the place is a mess] even though the state has raised minimum wages MANY times and probably about 100-200% of what it was when I was growing up). So why would I make that demand? Why would I demand something that has historically NOT helped? The surplus in the housing market shows that those working minimum wage CAN survive more comfortably than I did as we never even owned a home back then.
You claimed that 15$/hr is required
No, I said $15/hour should be the federal minimum wage.
Demanding increased minimum wages has never worked to resolve poverty
False:
Researchers determine that regardless of the scenarios, a federal minimum wage increase would reduce poverty among all race and ethnic groups. Considering this wage increase would likely impact 56 million workers, it has the potential to bring great financial relief to families who need it most.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the $15 federal minimum wage would have boosted the earnings of low-wage workers and decreased poverty. In its absence, a national policy agenda focused on raising wages is still urgently needed.
A new Center for American Progress analysis shows that setting one fair minimum wage for all workers across the nation, specifically tipped but also for disabled and temporary teenage workers, will help alleviate poverty, sustainably grow the economy, and advance gender, racial, disability, and economic justice.
Eight states have already eliminated the tipped minimum wage entirely.2 This analysis finds that in those states, workers and businesses in tipped industries have done as well as or better than their counterparts in other states over the years since abolishing the subminimum wage. Meanwhile, 16 states use the federal tipped minimum wage of $2.13 per hour. Another 26 states and the District of Columbia have a tipped minimum wage higher than $2.13 but still below the prevailing regular minimum wage.
Critics of a higher minimum wage argue that raising it would end up taking jobs away from the very workers it is meant to help because employers could not afford the higher labor costs. [...] Assuming no job loss would occur as a result of raising the minimum wage, nearly one-third of U.S. workers would be affected by an increase in the federal minimum wage to $15.
So this page/"study" specifically has to control out the actual argument against for their data to work. and even have to acknowledge later that if there actually is job loss...
Even assuming some job loss, 6.9 million people would be lifted out of poverty,
Their "helped" number goes down. I give you an example from the community I grew up in that it doesn't work...
But for the tens of millions of Americans struggling to afford the costs of living in their local communities, it’s arguably the metric that matters most.
And part of that metric is... wait for it... Housing affordability! Which I've already acknowledged is location dependent. Which is the whole reason why I looked at the market overall in your state. This issue is worse in some places for sure. But not in any you've brought up or have come up in conversation thus far. This article doesn't even cite the study it's based off of.
I wonder how many people who still tip know that in these states. If my wait-staff is making 15$ an hour... I'm not tipping them, and I'm willing to bet a lot of people wouldn't either. However... if these states typically have people tipping till that are under the false belief that their wait-staff are making 2.13 an hour... then making 15 and tips on top... That wait staff can easily be pulling in 25-30 an hour. That could be a good reason why they do "better" than other state counterparts. But notice the phrasing here... "as well or better" meaning that some of the data shows that after the wage increase... THEY'RE STILL NOT BETTER OFF in some of the locations. Isn't that interesting?
But right! I understand that my community that I grew up in and my personal experience is anecdotal... But when it's completely counter to the claim that "it is universally good!" then you have to wonder.
Seems to me like this is happening in all 50 something states though, not just the ones with special laws, we sure that's the problem?
Of course it is. Why would you expect different states to have different tipping policies? How would people remember what or whether to tip in each state?
Believe it or not, non-union restaurant businesses, being the vast majority in the U.S., have a lot more clout than unions.
The tip "laws" are indeed different per state... and the onus is put on the business owner as it should be.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/state/minimum-wage/tipped
The people you're interacting with on this forum are more than likely from more populous states definitionally. If you look up those states, they likely make way more than the 2.13$ that you fear they do.
I don't remember fearing they make $2.13 an hour.
I fear they don't make what minimum wage should be at the very least- $15 an hour.
This country is wide and disparate. 15$ in NYC is not equivalent to 15$ in the middle of nowhere Utah.
This is why states can choose to make minimum wage whatever they want. Simply blanket stating that 15$/hr for everyone is silly. But lets realize that many states DO require around 15$/hr (or close enough where a 1 dollar tip per table would net them 15 really easily)... and those states actually hold a significant portion of the population of the USA... meaning that most of the people you're talking to here on Lemmy are LIKELY from those states. Does someone who lives in a house in the middle of nowhere Utah have the same requirements for income? You can look on zillow right now... There's houses that appear fully functional for sale at $30,000 (357 results for less than 50k). Does that person need 15$/hr? Just because you're used to prices where you live, and demand those wages at your location, doesn't mean that those numbers make sense at other place in the USA.
So the real question... Where you live... on the table... are they already close to 15$, or close enough that a 5-10% tip which is what used to be customary would still get them over your magical 15$/hr number?
We have a federal minimum wage. Are you really not aware of that?
And no, it is nowhere near $15 in Indiana.
Yes, which is completely superseded by the states minimum wage. Which is what I said in my post if you bothered to read. What about my post makes it seem like I don't know that a federal minimum wage exists?
So looking at Zillow, there's 358 houses in Indiana that are less than 50k to purchase (over 1000, at less than 100k)... Why do you need 15$/hr? What makes 15/hr "livable" when a house that typically takes up 30-50% of a persons monthly expense cost only 50k?
Are you under the impression that state minimum wage can be lower than the federal minimum wage?
Got it, you're one of those people who think the poor don't deserve anything but the bare minimum society can possibly offer.
And, of course, those 358 houses are evenly distributed across Indiana so that the only 358 people in Indiana being paid minimum wage can afford them. That's exactly how things work.
With minimum wage in Indiana being $7.25,
https://www.zillow.com/mortgage-calculator/house-affordability/
You can afford a house up to $67,530.
Keep in mind that this is availability RIGHT NOW. Meaning that the market has availability on TOP of what's already occupied... and doesn't include rentals. The market is NOT saturated.
Looks pretty centered around population centers to me.
Right... which is why I'm advocating here that they should be able to buy a house? That's the bare minimum to you? Jesus dude... you're really off the mark here.
All 358 of them?
Because only 358 people in Indiana are paid minimum wage?
Also, I have no idea how you calculated those numbers, but there is not a chance in hell that someone who makes less than $16,000 a year can afford a house. They can barely afford food. And who would give them a mortgage?
$16,000 a year is below the poverty line.
And yes, getting everyone into a home should be the bare minimum. Sadly, many people aren't in them, including many people who work for minimum wage. Because, believe it or not, very few people will rent to you if you make that little.
I love how you say "I think the poor deserve things because I want 358 of them to own a house" and not "I want them all to be paid better."
Getting into a home (eg having a house to live in) != OWNING a home. Owning the home/asset is not the bare minimum in this country.
Didn't say that. Actually quite literally already stated that this is surplus on top of whatever solutions people have already in place. Eg... people making minimum wage right now live somewhere already do they not? This is surplus on the market right now already. If you're going to continue to ignore half of the message and continue to argue in bad faith just let me know so I can block you sooner rather than later.
Uh... so you think the mortgage calculator is incorrect? My current mortgage is at 259,000, and I pay ~1300. a 50k house at double the apr will be something like $300. Where you'd make $1232.50 a month... so less than 25% of your income. This is 100% possible.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1c92a9207f3ed5915ca020d58fe77696/detailed-guidelines-2023.pdf
No. For an individual that threshold is 14,891. 7.25$/hr, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year is 15,080. I put the numbers into the calculator. You can too. Minimum wage keeps you just above poverty if you're on your own.
You claimed that 15$/hr is required for your area. I'm showing you that that is bullshit as you can have well more than "minimum" with minimum wage income.
The funny part is that this already ignores that at minimum wage you can claim benefits as well that would help (SNAP for example) since you wouldn't be grossing 130% of the poverty level.
I grew up in poverty... Demanding increased minimum wages has never worked to resolve poverty (and quite contrarily has typically made it worse in the community I grew up in, and continues to NOT help in that community to this day [I visit every once in a while... the place is a mess] even though the state has raised minimum wages MANY times and probably about 100-200% of what it was when I was growing up). So why would I make that demand? Why would I demand something that has historically NOT helped? The surplus in the housing market shows that those working minimum wage CAN survive more comfortably than I did as we never even owned a home back then.
No, I said $15/hour should be the federal minimum wage.
False:
https://www.rwjf.org/en/insights/our-research/2022/08/exploring-the-effects-of-a-15-an-hour-federal-minimum-wage-on-poverty-earnings-and-net-family-resources.html
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/higher-regional-minimum-wages-can-lift-half-of-struggling-households-into-economic-self-sufficiency/
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/ending-tipped-minimum-wage-will-reduce-poverty-inequality/
Believe it or not, just declaring things doesn't make them true.
And in your area, it would not make sense to do so. As evidenced.
So this page/"study" specifically has to control out the actual argument against for their data to work. and even have to acknowledge later that if there actually is job loss...
Their "helped" number goes down. I give you an example from the community I grew up in that it doesn't work...
And part of that metric is... wait for it... Housing affordability! Which I've already acknowledged is location dependent. Which is the whole reason why I looked at the market overall in your state. This issue is worse in some places for sure. But not in any you've brought up or have come up in conversation thus far. This article doesn't even cite the study it's based off of.
I wonder how many people who still tip know that in these states. If my wait-staff is making 15$ an hour... I'm not tipping them, and I'm willing to bet a lot of people wouldn't either. However... if these states typically have people tipping till that are under the false belief that their wait-staff are making 2.13 an hour... then making 15 and tips on top... That wait staff can easily be pulling in 25-30 an hour. That could be a good reason why they do "better" than other state counterparts. But notice the phrasing here... "as well or better" meaning that some of the data shows that after the wage increase... THEY'RE STILL NOT BETTER OFF in some of the locations. Isn't that interesting?
But right! I understand that my community that I grew up in and my personal experience is anecdotal... But when it's completely counter to the claim that "it is universally good!" then you have to wonder.