Good question. First of all every participant might raise their products a percentage from the price they currently have to be equivalent with the minimum wage. For example if an average household is making 50% more with the minimum wage, raise the prices of the products by 50%.

When it comes to price fixing, everyone start off the with the same price. Next one of the following might happen:

1. Those companies with low recognition might try decreasing their prices a little more.
2. A company might raise the price to a product 5 or 10 dollars because the different is not much. Buyers might not change their minds from purchasing from the company. Next other companies raise their prices 5 or 10 dollars from the company who raised their price the previous month.
3. If everyone stays with the exact same price I could see a lot of companies going out of business because people will stick with the major companies.
4. If all the prices remain the same I can see companies giving special deals to get more business. For example, points for purchasing their products, 3 month return of the product, free shipping included for repairs, more credit cards offered in the company's name, free 3 year warranties, etc.

Let's expand the picture.
But first a few facts:
1.) The U.S. has one lowest 'minimum wages', in the world.
(27% of median income.)

2.) Production amongst ''minimum wagers" HAS increased 19%, in the past ten years.
(NO increase in pay.)

3.) 'Median Wages', in the U. S., have increased,..20...?..30%, in the past ten years.
(Marx has NEVER been disproved. The 'trickle down' HAS.)

4.) Minimum Wage was establish, as a protective measure..
Not as a standard.

Expand the picture.
Look at countrys with HIGHER minimum wage.
Austraila?
Why not.
45% of the Median Wage.
phewww!
That's a lot!
Yes.
A Big Mac costs 22% MORE(!).
An apartment,...MORE!
Clothes, Trucks,...Dinner and Movie with your sheila,....MORE.
(Deck of Card,...same price.)

But.
But,...
less crime.
Far less.
Lower taxes,
...because of this.
Fewer Police.
Fewer Judges.
Fewer prisons per capita...
Lower un-employment,.....
Lower un-employment amongst youth.
Higher productivity amongst employed 'minimum wagers'.
Less 'industrial sick',...lower medical costs.
Higher national retirement,...
Fewer Governmental Burocrats(!),... due to the lower crime and poverty management.
Lower Taxes.

Workers have MORE free time.

In my opinion,
and on paper...
it costs more,
but the benefits out-weigh the burden.

In the U.S.,
raise the Minimum Wage.
To 40% of the Median Wage: $22.00
Lower Income Tax amongst the 'middle incomers'..
oh,..
they did that,..
didn't they...

Prices WILL go up. (5 to 10%)
But, so will spending and profits.
Crime will decrease.

(In the 'bill', I would add:
"Another Tax Cut, for the middle class, in seven years, IF this happens."
,..because hey,....Government should become EVEN cheaper.)

One other point,
Australia has strick Imigration Laws.
(Otherwise, I would simply advise:
Forget about the U.S.(!),...
let's all pack up and go under!)
Just joking,..
but,
..the Imigration Laws, I believe, help protect the 'minimum wagers'.
(Partly living in Germany, I believe the germans 'opened the doors',
because they NEED cheap workers for the factorys.
...another story.)
Gallagher

p.s.: Donald Trump, sitting in a restaurant, says to the owner:
"I've created 500,000 new jobs, in my first 2 years, as President!"
The waiter looks and replys:
"That's right. I have 3 of them!"

P.p.p.s.: I would like to point out, as well:
In relationship to 'higher prices',...Inflation;
the cheif cause of increase IS NOT higher production costs(!),..'wages'.
But, peoples' willingness and capablity to PAY more.

(Adam Smith,..)

Bottom line: The quality of Life will improve, for everyone.
I believe.
gallagher,...with crossed fingers.

Five year planning on prices and production did not work out well when tried elsewhere. Fifteen years of such enforced by laws could cause more damage.
No comment about increased (federal minimum) rage.

Marx has never been disproved but trickle down has?

But if you want to play that demonization game don't use terms that are made up specifically to do that. Don't say trickle down. The term is supply side economics, and it worked when JFK did it.

I don't mean to demonize what we are both talking about here.
I'm sorry, that was not my intention.

I just want to show,...sadly:
It doesn't work.

Business profits have grown,..considerably.
'Middle-class' wages have grown,...considerably.
Prices HAVE increased,...considerably.
More peoples are working for 'minimum wage', then ever before.
Minimum Wage has not been boosted,..considerably.

Un-justly,...I feel somebody's getting screwed.
Minimum Wage was set up to protect,..prevent this.
Sadly,...we need it.

"It has been said that supply-side economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic policy—what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows."
(John Kenneth Galbraith)

On the brighter-side,..
I think we can use experience,..
to improve.
At least 'try' to improve.
Wouldn't we ALL like things to be 'better'?

If increasing the Minimum Wage would,..could,..maybe,..
What do we have to lose?

Do we want to live like Dynamike?
Boarded-up,..surrounded with loaded weapons everywhere?
Protecting our 'wealth'?
Experience, not hypothetical 'political/philosophical rhetorical debate',..
Marx vs. Scars,..
seems to show,
we could change this.

The way things are developing,..
are they the direction we want?
Gallagher

All you are doing is attacking supply side, not showing it has failed. Sorry. Show actual studies please. Not just propaganda
..

Please provide some support for this "fact" as it is opposite of any study I have read or personal experience.

If you mean "productivity," it is lower than before since the amount of time actually spent working is lower now.

Production of what? Many lower-end jobs do not produce anything as they are service oriented.

If, by some stretch, you mean that because of technology a low-skilled worker can move more data around, then this does not justify a raise in pay.
Their job is easier for the same pay, but they are not personally more productive.

Perhaps all those injuries were bound to occur with so many strawmen being employed...

A little late to the party but it's an entertaining shindig.

Owners take the risk by putting all the start up capital up front: land, equipment, tools, and logistics. Were things extremely unfair back in the booming industrial age? Sure, but since then we have added safety regulations, and labor laws.

Life is about choices. There are opportunities out there if you are willing to expand your horizons, but most people rather stay in their comfort zones.

Don't worry about being late to the party, Mike--it will continue for a while more.



But those conservatives who say things like this (not saying you) are disingenuous when in the same breath they support those who have dismantled such protections and continue unrelentingly to dismantle such protections. So they don't really mean it. Just as with the minimum wage, they would like to dismantle that too.

Then they concern troll, claiming that, really, eliminating the minimum wage would help workers. Yeah, right. That's why millions are marching in the streets demanding an end to the minimum wage. That's why all those chapters of Wage Slaves for Slavery are popping up. That's why those conservative business think tanks are advocating abolishing the minimum wage. It's because of their deep concern for workers [/sarcasm off].

Which States have a higher standard of living--those with low minimum wage laws or those with (relatively) higher ones? Which countries?

And no, the Rockefellers did not take one millionth of the risk that their workers did. They did however take a million times the profit.

They didn't build America--workers did, and they sweat and died for it, while the Carnegies of the world were shooting workers.

...and without the innovators those workers would be poking the mud with sticks... glad we're not living in mud huts.


It's starting to sound a bit Monty Python-ee don't you think?

Landmark, here's some lovely filth down here.

So you were saying something about an anarchosyndicalist commune?

Mike, history counts. The innovators for the most part are and were workers, with their innovations ripped off by capitalists.

The lovely filth down here was brought on by the unlovely feudal lords and later by the uninvited unlovely capitalist colonialists (undocumented immigrants anyone?) who exploited the world's resources and polluted the air, land, and water.

We could do far worse than anarchosyndicalism.

Oh wait. We are.

Were there copyright laws back then?

History is full of autocracies, but those low incomer's have a lot more options these days... is my (long way around) point.

Sorry, but...

https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lags......obility/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioecono......d_States

I accept your apology... don't call me a butt.

Peer countries isn't what we are discussing (USA), and the 'several' studies mentioned in the other link doesn't mean all studies.

I base my position on what I know or experienced. I'm doing better than the generations before me. My brother and sister not so much, but that is more about bad life choices. I work with a large dynamic group of people with different backgrounds. One of them is from the projects who took advantage of opportunities as they arrived. He started with entry level positions and worked his way up. He also has family members who made bad choices and are still in the projects.

The link mentioned that things changed starting in 1980; as far as generational improvements, and I think that is more about work ethics more than anything. If you can't afford to go the college - join the military. You can get (an almost) free education and technical training. Can't find a good job in your backyard? Go outside your neighborhood, city, state, or country.

If I can do it, anybody (that is physically and mentally capable*) can do it.
.
.
.
.
.
*anti-strawman device

The minimum wage in Florida is $8.25 ..... Disney is upping their minimum to $15 and Universal to $12 .... All because of the increasingly good economy and workers supply and demand. If you let capitalism work .. It does....

Walmart's profits have increased steadily the past 20 years.
More custumers served,..yearly,
by the same number of employees.
(i.e.: 'increased production')
Managers received pay raises,...
'minimum wagers' = 0.

McD's,...same story.

Disney is raising the minimum,
because Robert A. Iger will be running for President of the U.S.of A.
,..he's trying to cut Bernie Sander's legs out from under him.

I believe President Trump will do the same thing,..nationally,
in the spring of 2020.
,...for similar reasons.
$10. to $12.
,......you read it here first. 🙂

You can 'work' in and for Capitalism,
but it doesn't work for you.

The great American industrial socialist, Henry Ford,
said it best:
"I have to pay my workers enough,
so they can buy the cars I'm producing."

I like that thought.
Gallagher

P.s.: I just checked Disney's profits,
for the last quarter,
as well as estimated profits for 2019.
Both sank.

The past quarter, income increased;
but costs increased more.
Therefore, lower profits.

The fact that Mr. Igner is raising the minimum wage at Disney,
only goes to prove,...
to increase profits,..
we have to increase the minimum!

😊 👏🏼 👏🏼 👏🏼 😊 👏🏼 👏🏼 👍. ✊

I'm here in Orlando. They are running out of good workers. It's essential to increase wages or get the left overs. 😎😎