Progressive Radio Rants -- Minimum Wage

[Cobalt]

Arrogant and elitist blather. It is not propping up the incompetent to insist that a decent wage be paid for a decent day's work. The entrepreneur who hires incompetent schmucks is probably too much a schmuck to be worth saving in the first place.

You realize that not everyone puts in a "decent day's work" right? What about the people who put in more effort than your standard "decent day's work" consists of? Do they deserve more?

You argue for a standard yet haven't defined that standard.

It will have to do for now because it is a little too much a stretch to call it "enslavement."

No. It will not "have to do." You are attempting to change the very meaning of words to further your argument. Not gonna fly, bucko.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Wages are rapidly rising in China, despite the government not mandating higher wages:

http://www.newser.com/article/d9mdg...cost-manufacturing-out-of-southern-china.html

How is that possible ken? I thought no company pays more than minimum wage, and market forces cannot raise wages?

Wow, that's a whole bunch of straw there. You seem to also overlook the other factors in China, namely the one child law.

 

[Mobyseven]

Apparently it does.

Nice try: the statistics are pretty useless without a comparison though, wouldn't you say?

(For the non-link-clicky people: the first link goes to a news report on the poverty rate in Australia being around 10%, the second goes to the census website that places the poverty rate in the US at 14.3%. For children 17 or under the reported figures are 12% for Australia and 20.7% for the USA. We're really living in a post-apocalyptic nightmare down under, all thanks to our minimum wage laws...)

 

[leftysergeant]

Why wouldn't it? The newly wealthy person in the hood will purchase more goods and services benefiting and employing people.

We have nbo reason to give a rat's how many jobs he creates inVietnam.

\

If the new millionaire makes other improvements, it will increase the value of other peoples properties as well.

So he can pay for all of those imporovements if he wants them.

The economy is not a zero sum game system.

Total bull flops. If the "value" of my property goes up it just means that I have to pay more in taxes to stay put. And if the new millionaire is buying everything from China and shopping for groceries outside the neighborhood, what bloody good is he to anybody but himself?

 

[leftysergeant]

You realize that not everyone puts in a "decent day's work" right? What about the people who put in more effort than your standard "decent day's work" consists of? Do they deserve more?

Of course, and their employers are selfish schmucks if they can turn a profit at the higher wage and still decide to keep the entire difference for themselves.

You argue for a standard yet haven't defined that standard.

Way back up-thread. You weren't paying attention.

No. It will not "have to do." You are attempting to change the very meaning of words to further your argument. Not gonna fly, bucko.

Then we'll just have to keep calling it stealing labor because you are taking something to which you are not entitled. If an entrepreneur cannot make a profit making crap and paying the full price of his raw materials, is he allopwed to tell the supplier that he is not going to pay the price of those materials and expect the supplier to do anything other than to beat him senseless and take the full price of what he has recieved? Do think these things out all the way.

 

[Cobalt]

Total bull flops. If the "value" of my property goes up it just means that I have to pay more in taxes to stay put. And if the new millionaire is buying everything from China and shopping for groceries outside the neighborhood, what bloody good is he to anybody but himself?

He's doing good for the neighborhood where he shops for groceries, clearly. If he lives in township A, he has no obligation to purchase things ONLY from township A.

Did you miss my question?

 

[Grizzly Adams]

what bloody good is he to anybody but himself?

Who cares? He has no responsibility to be any good to anyone.

 

[Cobalt]

Of course, and their employers are selfish schmucks if they can turn a profit at the higher wage and still decide to keep the entire difference for themselves.

Okay, so what do you propose be done about the actually lazy people who take home their "decent day's pay" for doing less than a "decent day's work?"

Way back up-thread. You weren't paying attention.

What, this vague pile of crap?

If $8.67 becomes less than it takes to pay for a sanitary place to flop and to cook, and to pay for food, transportation and a few little luxuries, then it is time to go to $10.

That narrows it down. Sanitary is the only requirement? How much food? What if the person's fat and thinks they need more food?

What kind of transportation? I want a slick M5. Or a new Nissan GT-R. Do those get paid for?

My one little luxury would be one of these babies. Yes, those examples are absurd on purpose. My point, however, is that you've not made anything clear, you just claim you did.

Then we'll just have to keep calling it stealing labor because you are taking something to which you are not entitled. If an entrepreneur cannot make a profit making crap and paying the full price of his raw materials, is he allopwed to tell the supplier that he is not going to pay the price of those materials and expect the supplier to do anything other than to beat him senseless and take the full price of what he has recieved? Do think these things out all the way.

No, the only person calling it stealing labor is you. And it's still incorrect.

And why yes, he IS allowed to tell his supplier he isn't going to pay, at which point his supplier is allowed to sue him for what he's due.
Do think these things out all the way, hm?

 

[Trakar]

"States with Minimum Wages Above the Federal Level have had Faster Small Business and Retail Job Growth" - http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/FPISmallBusinessMinWage.pdf

 

[respect]

Let me try it one more time for the benefit of those who mistake ecconomics for for an actual science.

While hard sciences and social sciences are recognized I am unable to find a standard for actual sciences. Perhaps you think that economics is a non-actual science because it is often considered the bridge between social sciences and hard sciences, containing elements of both?

Any person who performs a day's labor for the benefit of another person, especially for the benefit of a person who shall benefit financially from that labor, is entitled to a decent day's provisions in return.

So what do you think should happen to the millions of unskilled workers who are not capable of providing valuable enough labor to meet your standards? Should they be told to $^#@ off and starve because you have arrogantly decided that they should not be hired at all if they can't add significant value to a company? What about people who want to work part time?

A "decent day's provisions" shall herein mean "such an amount of money or other consideration as shall allow the worker to obtain shelter, food, transportation and reasonable entertainment, consistant with the modal standard of living without going into debt."

See above. Many people cannot provide enough value to be worth such pay. I can only assume that you want them to starve to death rather than simply have two or more workers in the household.

Right now, ten bucks will get you there. Eight is a pretty feeble attempt. One hundred is over the top in an Alex Jones way.

Ten bucks an hour would not do around here (Chicago area) and would not in many areas. Someone making ten bucks an hour in San Francisco would have to live in a slum. Such a standard would vary largely in different parts of the country.

 

[respect]

If he can't make a profit without stealing labor



It is the suppression of theft, which is a legitimate concern of government.

You really need to learn what the words you are using mean. Someone who voluntarily agrees to a wage and then works for it is not being stolen from.

 

[respect]

What % of jobs do you think pay minimum wage? Why aren't all jobs minimum wage, since you seem to think corporations pay only the government-mandated minimum?

Very few. Most jobs pay over minimum wage, even unskilled labor jobs.

 

[respect]

If you do not want to pay a man a decent wage, you have the option not to hire him. you do not have the option to collude with fellow business people not pay for the labor you use.

Who said anything about collusion?

We have the option not to buy your product. You want us to buy it, make it worth buying.

Irrelevant, but true.

If paying for the labor to make it costs more than you get back, make it yourself.

Also irrelevant, labor won't get hired if they add less than they cost.

Why should I work at a loss so that you do not go broke manufacturing crap that nobody wants?

You should learn what a loss is.

 

[respect]

There is a minimum wage for the same reason that you are not allowed to sell yourself into indentured service or prostitution.

Who would have thought that you would turn out to be a religious conservative?

 

[respect]

The logic of that statement utterly eludes me.



Yeah..huh? The bolded part is absurd. Taxing the rich and giving to the poor is redistributive. Minimum wage laws simply codify as a formal norm a certain standard of ethical behavior for business. As for the italicised part, did it occur to you that thelevel of poverty may be direcrtly traceable to whether or not there is a minimum wage? Before the abolition of slavery, rise of unions and minimum wage laws in America there was a vast and growing impoverished class and a small but growing-like-a-tumor oligarchy. You may well be confusing cause and effect.

She is right. There has to be considerable wealth present for things like minimum wage laws, forty hour work weeks etc to take place. Third world countries don't have such options because they cannot afford to skip work for leisure. The wealth has to be present before the leisure or else there will be mass starvation.

 

[respect]

That is unproven. If the job is not worth a day's provisions, it is not neccessary to the business concerned or there is no demand for the service or product. Otherwise, the employer could do it himself, or he is just throwing money down a rat hole or, in the case of a contractor, is in the wrong line of work.

Why do you think that a task must be worth a minimum of minimum wage or zero dollars but cannot be worth a value in between those numbers? Here in Illinois minimum wage is $8.25 an hour so an employee must add $8.25 an hour form an employer to just break even. Are you seriously supposing it is not possible for work to add less than $8.25 an hour to a company but be more than zero?

Balderdash. Minimum wage benefits the middle class largely because the poor, in a minimum-wage country, have money with which to buy the goods and services of the middle class. The middle class then have money to expand their operations, hiring more minimum-wage workers, which reduces the number of available workers and makes the employers compete for them, like by paying more. This is obvious to anyone whose brain has not been sucked out by twits like Laffer and Friedman.

It isn't obvious to any educated person, not just Laffer and Friedman. Higher wages will at least be partially offset by higher prices and sometimes less demand for employees. If the government forces an increase in business input costs (minimum wage, taxes etc) companies do not just say, "LOL they got us by the short ones guys, let's just lose money," they respond by cutting costs (which can be labor) and raising prices. How much of the new costs will come out of company profits and how much will be passed on varies depending on how elastic demand for the company's products is. Also, higher wages may lead to an increase in available labor. Perhaps an unemployed person is not willing to work for $8.25 but will work for $10, Illinois raises minimum wage to $10, they start looking for a job then. The result here could be considerably different than you imagine. Companies that can skip town for a cheaper place to do business may, while unskilled laborers come in drawn by the higher mandated wages. You could very well have an increasing labor supply with declining labor demand. There are many considerations that you are blissfully unaware of.

The people who own the fewest legislators (middle class)pay and the poor wind up with less than they would have if the investor class were required to pay them a decent wage for what they do to fatten the Wal Street piggies.

Higher prices and more unemployment benefit the middle class?

As it is, minimum wage laws in the US are generally less than what most unskilled workers make. So modest hikes don't lead to significant layoffs and higher prices. As I noted earlier, the people who do make minimum wage are generally teenagers looking for part time work, the effects are rarely noticeable outside of the teenage labor market in poor neighborhoods. Large increases would show up in higher prices and unemployment though.

Your biased opinion is exactly what it is.

Her biased opinion is informed by considerably more knowledge than yours.

 

[respect]

If there were no minimum wage, you can just bet that the country would be swamped in unethical creeps who claim that no job in the factor below a management level was worth a day's provisions and half the country would be unable to afford the garbage they crank out.

Really? Then why do most people make more than minimum wage now? If you were right almost all people would make just the price floor.

 

[respect]

We have nbo reason to give a rat's how many jobs he creates inVietnam.

\

So he can pay for all of those imporovements if he wants them.



Total bull flops. If the "value" of my property goes up it just means that I have to pay more in taxes to stay put. And if the new millionaire is buying everything from China and shopping for groceries outside the neighborhood, what bloody good is he to anybody but himself?

Apparently he is good for your neighborhood (raising property values), the grocery store in the next town (he shops there) and Chinese workers (he buys their products).

Honestly, you are the only person I have ever seen cry and tantrum because your land increases in value.

 

[respect]

Of course, and their employers are selfish schmucks if they can turn a profit at the higher wage and still decide to keep the entire difference for themselves.



Way back up-thread. You weren't paying attention.



Then we'll just have to keep calling it stealing labor because you are taking something to which you are not entitled. If an entrepreneur cannot make a profit making crap and paying the full price of his raw materials, is he allopwed to tell the supplier that he is not going to pay the price of those materials and expect the supplier to do anything other than to beat him senseless and take the full price of what he has recieved? Do think these things out all the way.

You must really hate people who do volunteer work.

 

[Corsair 115]

We're really living in a post-apocalyptic nightmare down under, all thanks to our minimum wage laws...)

Ah, now we know the real reason for Mad Max... it wasn't the lack of the precious juice at all!