Conquer Club

Rise of Minimum wage?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:25 am

Night Strike wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:3) AND THAT IS WHY THIS NUMBER IS USED IN The Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2013 ANDY WHY OBAMA HAS PROPOSED TO INDEX THE MINIMUM WAGE TO INFLATION, ADJUSTED BY LOCATION


So you're okay with getting rid of merit and longevity pay increases for minimum workers in exchange for a minimum wage that constantly goes up? Because that's what you're going to get until the employment system collapses on itself due to the perpetual circle of rising labor costs causing prices to increase causing inflation to increase causing labor costs to increase etc.

No, in this case the market adjusts.

See, here is the irony. The market does work , to a large extent, for people who have specialized skills. It is very far from perfect, and HIGHLY skewed by the percieved need to pay investors dividends, boost stock prices.

But, it doesn't work at the bottom because, plain and simply, the "market" places no value on low skills. This is where human beings with morality have to come in and say "People have value".
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby thegreekdog on Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:30 am

Night Strike wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:Image


That's what happens when the government prints endless amounts of money.


To be fair, the guy with the sign probably makes $40 an hour.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:09 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Night Strike wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:3) AND THAT IS WHY THIS NUMBER IS USED IN The Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2013 ANDY WHY OBAMA HAS PROPOSED TO INDEX THE MINIMUM WAGE TO INFLATION, ADJUSTED BY LOCATION


So you're okay with getting rid of merit and longevity pay increases for minimum workers in exchange for a minimum wage that constantly goes up? Because that's what you're going to get until the employment system collapses on itself due to the perpetual circle of rising labor costs causing prices to increase causing inflation to increase causing labor costs to increase etc.

No, in this case the market adjusts.

See, here is the irony. The market does work , to a large extent, for people who have specialized skills. It is very far from perfect, and HIGHLY skewed by the percieved need to pay investors dividends, boost stock prices.

But, it doesn't work at the bottom because, plain and simply, the "market" places no value on low skills.
This is where human beings with morality have to come in and say "People have value".


Sure, "it" values low-skilled workers, but you have to examine what distorts those values (e.g. minimum wage laws and the substitution effect).
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:20 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:See, here is the irony. The market does work , to a large extent, for people who have specialized skills. It is very far from perfect, and HIGHLY skewed by the percieved need to pay investors dividends, boost stock prices.

But, it doesn't work at the bottom because, plain and simply, the "market" places no value on low skills.
This is where human beings with morality have to come in and say "People have value".


Sure, "it" values low-skilled workers, but you have to examine what distorts those values (e.g. minimum wage laws and the substitution effect).


Nope, you are letting the tail wag the dog again.

Minimum wage is not about maintaining business or creating jobs or any other ephemeral cause. It is about ensuring that people who work get to live basic but decent lives for their efforts.

The rest is for the market to determine. MY argument, which you keep pretending doesnā€™t exist, is that the idea that someone can pay others less than it takes them to survive and still be providing anything for the economy is just false, particularly in a society which has determined that allowing people to just die on street corners of hunger is not a good idea. (i.e. most civilized societies)

Business should thrive or not, fully on its own.

Most of your arguments are not about economics or business in truth, they are about maintaining the CURRENT status quo. Set the boundaries and the system will change and adapt.

I am not in favor of a Marxist style revolution, donā€™t think that is really what will happen. (for one thing, folks have learned, from Machiavelli if no other, that you cannot oppress people too much or they will rebel). What I see is that this complete ignorance of the real world, the natural world, is allowing businesses and governments to make decisions that are very, very detrimental to humanity. Oil is one example, farmland is another, and chemical production is a third. There are others, but just focusing on the those 3 issues should terrify anyone.

IF business were truly forced to be accountable for the problems they are creating, then less wealth would be created, at least in the short term, but in the longer term you would see innovation toward more sustainability. Allowing ā€œits not profitable [today]ā€ to be a prime argument distorts the system and falsely creates a system where people are allowed to take serious gain by making horrible long term decisions.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:26 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:See, here is the irony. The market does work , to a large extent, for people who have specialized skills. It is very far from perfect, and HIGHLY skewed by the percieved need to pay investors dividends, boost stock prices.

But, it doesn't work at the bottom because, plain and simply, the "market" places no value on low skills.
This is where human beings with morality have to come in and say "People have value".


Sure, "it" values low-skilled workers, but you have to examine what distorts those values (e.g. minimum wage laws and the substitution effect).


Nope, you are letting the tail wag the dog again.

Minimum wage is not about maintaining business or creating jobs or any other ephemeral cause. It is about ensuring that people who work get to live basic but decent lives for their efforts.

The rest is for the market to determine. MY argument, which you keep pretending doesnā€™t exist, is that the idea that someone can pay others less than it takes them to survive and still be providing anything for the economy is just false, particularly in a society which has determined that allowing people to just die on street corners of hunger is not a good idea. (i.e. most civilized societies)


We've already been through this. What's the wage at which "it takes them to survive" and how many hours per week would that be? If you say, $10.00 per hour and 40 hours a week, that's just silly.

The main point the buyers still value low-skilled workers, and those workers, as sellers, still value the money/whatever received, but you have to examine what distorts those values (minimum wage and substitution effect). Imposing a minimum wage doesn't do minimum wage workers any favors--well, except for the ones that aren't fired.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:42 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:See, here is the irony. The market does work , to a large extent, for people who have specialized skills. It is very far from perfect, and HIGHLY skewed by the percieved need to pay investors dividends, boost stock prices.

But, it doesn't work at the bottom because, plain and simply, the "market" places no value on low skills.
This is where human beings with morality have to come in and say "People have value".


Sure, "it" values low-skilled workers, but you have to examine what distorts those values (e.g. minimum wage laws and the substitution effect).


Nope, you are letting the tail wag the dog again.

Minimum wage is not about maintaining business or creating jobs or any other ephemeral cause. It is about ensuring that people who work get to live basic but decent lives for their efforts.

The rest is for the market to determine. MY argument, which you keep pretending doesnā€™t exist, is that the idea that someone can pay others less than it takes them to survive and still be providing anything for the economy is just false, particularly in a society which has determined that allowing people to just die on street corners of hunger is not a good idea. (i.e. most civilized societies)


We've already been through this. What's the wage at which "it takes them to survive" and how many hours per week would that be? If you say, $10.00 per hour and 40 hours a week, that's just silly.

The main point the buyers still value low-skilled workers, and those workers, as sellers, still value the money/whatever received, but you have to examine what distorts those values (minimum wage and substitution effect). Imposing a minimum wage doesn't do minimum wage workers any favors--well, except for the ones that aren't fired.
Partially, you are reciting a standard, but highly disputed set of concepts.
Ultimately, I say it does matter, because peopleā€™s lives are improved, they pay more taxes and business adjusts, and many economists agree with that, though not all do. You disagree. Ultimately, there just is no set, firm answer itā€™s a debate.

Partly, itā€™s a ā€œtail/dogā€ argument. What ultimately sets the success or failure of an economy tends to be basics like natural resource availability, rise of technology. Investment is secondary to that. Right now, we have major problems on both those fronts. We are using up and not replacing or finding alternatives for many natural resources ranging from farmland to oil to clean water. Also, we have likely reached a plateau technologically. That last one is hard, because there is always the chance of some brand new, never before thought of invention. Exceptā€¦ nothing truly phenomenal is in the ā€œpipelineā€, and in this country, the things that lead to that kind of innovation are specifically being destroyed -- creativity and high levels of knowledge in a wide range of areas is being replaced by a kind of ā€œefficiency modelā€. Specialization might be good if your goal is to put out a known quantity quickly, but not to find new options or new products.

Its OK to talk about waiting for the new technological fix when the problem is not impending doom (literally) OR when there just are no other alternatives at all. Neither is the case here. By the time there is the kind of absolute firm proof some folks want, it will be far, far too late. In fact, it could be we are already almost at that point.. but we all hope not.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:58 pm

I'll just wait for you to address the substitution effect and how that's related to minimum wage.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:48 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/1 ... 00984.html

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) made a case for increasing the minimum wage last week during a Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions hearing, in which she cited a study that suggested the federal minimum wage would have stood at nearly $22 an hour today if it had kept up with increased rates in worker productivity.

"If we started in 1960 and we said that as productivity goes up, that is as workers are producing more, then the minimum wage is going to go up the same. And if that were the case then the minimum wage today would be about $22 an hour," she said, speaking to Dr. Arindrajit Dube, a University of Massachusetts Amherst professor who has studied the economic impacts of minimum wage. "So my question is Mr. Dube, with a minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, what happened to the other $14.75? It sure didn't go to the worker."

Dube went on to note that if minimum wage incomes had grown over that period at the same pace as it had for the top 1 percent of income earners, the minimum wage would actually be closer to $33 an hour than the current $7.25.

It didn't appear that Warren was actually trying to make the case for a $22 an hour minimum wage, but rather highlighting the results of a recent study that showed flat minimum wage growth over the past 40-plus years coinciding with surging inequality across a number of economic indicators.

Warren went on to argue that raising the federal minimum wage to over $10 an hour in incremental steps over the next two years -- a cause championed by President Barack Obama in his State of the Union address and since taken up in the Senate -- would not be as damaging for businesses as some critics have argued.

Adjust the minimum wage for inflation, and it should be over $10 an hour. Adjust it for productivity and it should be over $20 an hour. Adjust it to match the rise in income for the 1%, and it should be over $30 an hour.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:54 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:I'll just wait for you to address the substitution effect and how that's related to minimum wage.

It doesn't.

That is an artificial concept used by people who already have a set belief to justify their ideas.

I am saying we need to look beyond.

The basis of an economy is not Kenesian, Australien or whatever school of economics. The basis of an economy is natural resources, technology and damages. Weather has more to do with the economy than any negative impact of minimum wage, seriously!
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:00 am

Juan_Bottom wrote: Adjust the minimum wage for inflation, and it should be over $10 an hour. Adjust it for productivity and it should be over $20 an hour. Adjust it to match the rise in income for the 1%, and it should be over $30 an hour.

The root reason is that the 1%, many others making over even 100K, is not based on work, it is based on investment.
That inherently moves money up to the top. Just like in monarchies, initially it is a good system for a reasonable cause. however, those in power keep demanding more and more until the system becomes exploitive. That is what we are seeing today.

It would not be so bad if we were just comparing the conditions of poor workers to the wealthy. Bad enough, when you have so many working people removed from their homes, unable to feed their families or afford health care. HOWEVER, what truly makes this system destructive is the environmental damage and natural resource overuse being utterly ignored as "mere externalities" that, basically, is just for looney hippies to worry about.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:56 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/18/elizabeth-warren-minimum-wage_n_2900984.html

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) made a case for increasing the minimum wage last week during a Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions hearing, in which she cited a study that suggested the federal minimum wage would have stood at nearly $22 an hour today if it had kept up with increased rates in worker productivity.

"If we started in 1960 and we said that as productivity goes up, that is as workers are producing more, then the minimum wage is going to go up the same. And if that were the case then the minimum wage today would be about $22 an hour," she said, speaking to Dr. Arindrajit Dube, a University of Massachusetts Amherst professor who has studied the economic impacts of minimum wage. "So my question is Mr. Dube, with a minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, what happened to the other $14.75? It sure didn't go to the worker."

Dube went on to note that if minimum wage incomes had grown over that period at the same pace as it had for the top 1 percent of income earners, the minimum wage would actually be closer to $33 an hour than the current $7.25.

It didn't appear that Warren was actually trying to make the case for a $22 an hour minimum wage, but rather highlighting the results of a recent study that showed flat minimum wage growth over the past 40-plus years coinciding with surging inequality across a number of economic indicators.

Warren went on to argue that raising the federal minimum wage to over $10 an hour in incremental steps over the next two years -- a cause championed by President Barack Obama in his State of the Union address and since taken up in the Senate -- would not be as damaging for businesses as some critics have argued.

Adjust the minimum wage for inflation, and it should be over $10 an hour. Adjust it for productivity and it should be over $20 an hour. Adjust it to match the rise in income for the 1%, and it should be over $30 an hour.


You're being an idiot for reasons already explained.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:57 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:I'll just wait for you to address the substitution effect and how that's related to minimum wage.

It doesn't.

That is an artificial concept used by people who already have a set belief to justify their ideas.

I am saying we need to look beyond.

The basis of an economy is not Kenesian, Australien or whatever school of economics. The basis of an economy is natural resources, technology and damages. Weather has more to do with the economy than any negative impact of minimum wage, seriously!


It's okay to admit that you don't know what you're talking about.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:31 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:You're being an idiot for reasons already explained.


Instead of throwing around some bitchy posts, maybe you could spend your time doing a little research about the topic at hand.
"Oh you stupid fucker there are other considerations other than inflation! I'm BBS! This is what I talk like!"
Oh junior... :roll:
Listen son, you're clickity-click posting away like you know something, but you don't know sh*t. And you're looking like a fool. Inflation, which is very important somehow, was not a major consideration of Congress the last time they indexed the minimum wage. As I explained, there is no universal formula. Therefor, an intelligent person, like Krugman, Obama, Warren, ECT, might find it important to adjust the new minimum based off of the old calculation and also the inflation index. This is why we say "adjusted for inflation." It's because those other considerations were already made. In fact thanks to inflation alone, people made more money on minimum wage in 1962 than they do today. I mean, it all goes back to the Fair Wage Act, to history. So things might have changed yeah, but that's not the point. If it was the point, then you could explain to us all exactly how the old calculation was made, and exactly needs to change in our considerations, other than inflation. If you actually know anything about this, feel free to roll out the projector. Otherwise just shut up already with your fake "I'm an economist" argument from authority.
This isn't even something new. People have been bitching (not to be confused with b*tchyness - BBS) about this since before the $7 hike. Verily, you should try to shut your mouth and you might learn something. I can't explain this shit to you if you wont listen because you're too busy being a jerk and making Holocaust jokes all of the time.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:25 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:You're being an idiot for reasons already explained.


Instead of throwing around some bitchy posts, maybe you could spend your time doing a little research about the topic at hand.


substitution effect:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&start=240#p4090962

the knowledge problem:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&p=4092540&hilit=substitution+effect#p4092111


And I've already addressed your CPI rubbish. Here:

(at the end of the post)
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=255#p4092382


Public Choice at play:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=195#p4084120
(in Canada, but I bet similar exemptions are given in the US)


Marginal productivity and price distortions from minimum wage:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=15#p4063699
(BBS + kenington)
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=60#p4066698
(BBS w/ PLAYER)

Unintended consequences from well-intended, yet uninformed voters:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=30#p4063722
(last post by BBS)


etc., etc., etc.,

Keep going on about the $10/hour wage, and I'll keep repeating that your policies do not help poor and/or low-skilled workers.

But based on your history, you're not interested in learning anything that conflicts with your ideology, so after you iron out your personal issues, then we should take your positions seriously.

Until then, this is still true: you're being an idiot for reasons already explained.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:41 pm

Wait, that all together is your whole argument? 'The issue is too complex, some people aren't worth anything, giving people too much money will get a lot of people fired....'

Well, the actual discussion on capital hill would have the minimum wage raised to $9-10 specifically because it won't impact the job market much. Why the f*ck do you think Obama would grow the economy then just turn around and tank it?

And that's kinda irrelevant, if we just look at history. People on minimum wage have earned more historically than people on minimum wage earn today, yet I don't recall any recession that spawned from any hike in the minimum wage ever. In fact, Oregon has a law that ties their minimum wage to inflation, yet even the worst reviews say that they job market has shed only a few jobs, which are mainly low-paying food service jobs. And that's during the recession. Meanwhile the most optimistic economists say that it has increased the number of jobs.
All a person has to do is look at all the wealth that is being concentrated on the top, and they will know that any defense of that serf system is bat-sh*t stupid. There's plenty of wealth to be distributed honestly for honest work, and you're dead wrong about the existence of free labor or that an intern isn't worth anything. People are not commodities as you believe them to be.

Now if some wise guy wants to argue that we should have a pyramid minimum wage system like Australia, then that's a damn fine argument to make. But if someone wants to argue that "some people aren't worth much money" then those people are idiots. Fire your worker if you don't like the job they are doing. Don't take advantage of everyone by paying them shit wages while you make insane profits. That's the essence of fraud. BBS says that a person's value in the job market is tied to their productivity. Well, obviously that's not f*cking true if 50% of American's are low income or poor, while at the same time our stock market has never been more valuable.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Ray Rider on Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:10 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:You're being an idiot for reasons already explained.


Instead of throwing around some bitchy posts, maybe you could spend your time doing a little research about the topic at hand.


substitution effect:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&start=240#p4090962

the knowledge problem:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&p=4092540&hilit=substitution+effect#p4092111


And I've already addressed your CPI rubbish. Here:

(at the end of the post)
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=255#p4092382


Public Choice at play:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=195#p4084120
(in Canada, but I bet similar exemptions are given in the US)


Marginal productivity and price distortions from minimum wage:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=15#p4063699
(BBS + kenington)
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=60#p4066698
(BBS w/ PLAYER)

Unintended consequences from well-intended, yet uninformed voters:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=185845&hilit=consumer&start=30#p4063722
(last post by BBS)


etc., etc., etc.,

Keep going on about the $10/hour wage, and I'll keep repeating that your policies do not help poor and/or low-skilled workers.

But based on your history, you're not interested in learning anything that conflicts with your ideology, so after you iron out your personal issues, then we should take your positions seriously.

Until then, this is still true: you're being an idiot for reasons already explained.

BOOM!! Welcome to the school of BBS (quite literally).
Image
Image
Highest score: 2221
User avatar
Major Ray Rider
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:21 pm
Location: In front of my computer, duh!

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Night Strike on Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:56 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:Well, the actual discussion on capital hill would have the minimum wage raised to $9-10 specifically because it won't impact the job market much. Why the f*ck do you think Obama would grow the economy then just turn around and tank it?


ROFL!!!

This guy thinks Obama has actually done work to grow the economy!

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:13 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:I'll just wait for you to address the substitution effect and how that's related to minimum wage.

It doesn't.

That is an artificial concept used by people who already have a set belief to justify their ideas.

I am saying we need to look beyond.

The basis of an economy is not Kenesian, Australien or whatever school of economics. The basis of an economy is natural resources, technology and damages. Weather has more to do with the economy than any negative impact of minimum wage, seriously!


It's okay to admit that you don't know what you're talking about.

feel free....

knowing some economics doesn't make you an expert on the world
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:25 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:Wait, that all together is your whole argument? 'The issue is too complex, some people aren't worth anything, giving people too much money will get a lot of people fired....'

Well, the actual discussion on capital hill would have the minimum wage raised to $9-10 specifically because it won't impact the job market much. Why the f*ck do you think Obama would grow the economy then just turn around and tank it?

And that's kinda irrelevant, if we just look at history. People on minimum wage have earned more historically than people on minimum wage earn today, yet I don't recall any recession that spawned from any hike in the minimum wage ever. In fact, Oregon has a law that ties their minimum wage to inflation, yet even the worst reviews say that they job market has shed only a few jobs, which are mainly low-paying food service jobs. And that's during the recession. Meanwhile the most optimistic economists say that it has increased the number of jobs.
All a person has to do is look at all the wealth that is being concentrated on the top, and they will know that any defense of that serf system is bat-sh*t stupid. There's plenty of wealth to be distributed honestly for honest work, and you're dead wrong about the existence of free labor or that an intern isn't worth anything. People are not commodities as you believe them to be.

Now if some wise guy wants to argue that we should have a pyramid minimum wage system like Australia, then that's a damn fine argument to make. But if someone wants to argue that "some people aren't worth much money" then those people are idiots. Fire your worker if you don't like the job they are doing. Don't take advantage of everyone by paying them shit wages while you make insane profits. That's the essence of fraud. BBS says that a person's value in the job market is tied to their productivity. Well, obviously that's not f*cking true if 50% of American's are low income or poor, while at the same time our stock market has never been more valuable.


Pounding out logical fallacies and painting imaginative scenarios isn't doing you any favors. Try as you might, your imagination is not a good substitute for being quiet and learning something useful. I'll wait a few months and see if your level of gibberish has changed for the better.

Good luck with ironing out your personal issues! :D
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby stahrgazer on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:27 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote: There's plenty of wealth to be distributed honestly for honest work, and you're dead wrong about the existence of free labor or that an intern isn't worth anything.


While there is plenty of wealth to be distributed for honest work, an intern is getting valuable experience to be employed later. You wouldn't expect a college to pay that intern for sitting in class, would you? Well, WOULD YOU?

But raising the minimum wage simply squishes the middle because those at the top will raise prices, and aren't going to raise everyone's salaries by the equal percentage to compensate.

The problem isn't the minimum wage is too low.

The problem is, most higher-paying jobs got shipped overseas.

Raising the minimum wage is a political "looks good," maneuver that doesn't do jack shit to help the poor or near-poor, but ties everyone up in this argument so the majority don't argue for what could really work: put tariffs back into imports to make it just as profitable to make stuff here if you want to sell it here, as it is to pay Nike peanuts in Viet Nam yet still sell those two-buck shoes for Two Hundred Bucks here.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant stahrgazer
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 11:59 am
Location: Figment of the Imagination...

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:47 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:I'll just wait for you to address the substitution effect and how that's related to minimum wage.

It doesn't.

That is an artificial concept used by people who already have a set belief to justify their ideas.

I am saying we need to look beyond.

The basis of an economy is not Kenesian, Australien or whatever school of economics. The basis of an economy is natural resources, technology and damages. Weather has more to do with the economy than any negative impact of minimum wage, seriously!


It's okay to admit that you don't know what you're talking about.

feel free....

knowing some economics doesn't make you an expert on the world


Right, but it does help when you talk about something within the realm of economics: minimum wage, "the basis of an economy," etc. Simply saying "that's an artificial concept" doesn't explain away the unintended consequences of minimum wage, nor does it explain why the substitution effect is an artificial concept.

Even the underlined doesn't make much sense. Sure, there are other relevant variables which affect an economy other than minimum wage, but to go on your tangent, the foundation of an economy is more than capital, "natural" resources, technology, and damage.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:03 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:knowing some economics doesn't make you an expert on the world


I don't know anything about economics. I remember when I was very young, my relatives were discussing all sorts of economic and financial news at a thanksgiving or some type of meal, and it was boring me, so I told them all "I don't want to be a part of the economy."

Ah, to be young.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:46 pm

Ray Rider wrote:BOOM!! Welcome to the school of BBS (quite literally).


Really?!? Sit down son, it's time we make a man out of you.
1st of all, none of that sh*t was even a concise argument. Why do you even think that it was? It wasn't even based on reality, just hypotheses that ignore both American history and the current discussion of the minimum wage on capitol hill. Do they teach labor history anywhere anymore, or what?

But let's be straight here: BBS isn't saying anything new or anything remotely profound. What he is doing is espousing first year economics vocabular in an attempt to lend himself an air of economic authority. And I get it, m*therfucker's use some big and unfamiliar words, they make a big bullet presentation, and nobody feels like arguing with them because nobody cares. That's how he get's away with it. But think about his message across the fora, and how it's all one big circular argument.

BBS ON POLITICS
"Politicians get votes from people who don't understand how minimum wage laws work." Voters are generally uninformed, which is the underlying problem that is destroying everything.

BBS ON UNIONS AND THE MINIMUM WAGE
With greater risk should come greater reward, however Unions snatch away part of the entrepreneur's reward. Unions use the Minimum wage to increase their earnings and raising the marginal labor product yadda yadda.

Don't you see why BBS' is illogical on point here? The difference between a Union member and a non-union worker is this: Knowledge. Unions know how much profit a company makes, and how much money each employee makes. Thanks to this knowledge, they are able to leverage the employer into sharing a fairer portion of the companies profits with those who create the profit.
So why is it that when Voters don't have information that is really bad, but when workers have information that is equally bad?

BBS' CONCLUSIONS AND HOW TO REPAIR THE SYSTEM

First, you cannot give people too much welfare, or free money, because they will lose all incentive to work.

Second, you cannot force a business to pay people more money because they will lose all incentive to hire people.

Third, you cannot punish big business without punishing small business/you cannot punish business or they will lose all incentive to invest.

Conclusion: BBS has no solution. Business should stand as it is. Minimum wage should remain at it's 40 year low, at the same time the stock market is making record profits.

As John Adams said of Thomas Paine: The man is great at tearing down ideas, but he offers none of his own.
Last edited by Juan_Bottom on Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:01 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:Conclusion: BBS has no solution.

BBS 2016


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:05 pm

And as far as BBS' conclusions, obviously I disagree with all of them, everything he has said here. I'm a liberal, which to a lot of people is synonymous with anti-business, pro-labor. But you can be pro-labor and pro-business at the same time. I do believe in low corporate tax rates, and high income taxes on people. What I'm against is our system of organized greed.




stahrgazer wrote:
While there is plenty of wealth to be distributed for honest work, an intern is getting valuable experience to be employed later. You wouldn't expect a college to pay that intern for sitting in class, would you? Well, WOULD YOU?

No. The college shouldn't pay, the employer should pay at least the minimum wage. Our society has decided that an American's time is worth at least $7.25 an hour. Internship is basically capitalist slavery, seemingly in violation of the spirit of the 13th amendment. Whether the intern is learning rocket science or not, they're still doing labor for you.
But in all honesty, if you require your workers to apprentice at their position before they are considered qualified to do the job, then wtf is the point of sending their ass to college in the first place? Run up their debt so they are more docile at work?

And lets say that for the sake of argument all of the apprentices and interns working for TV networks suddenly quit, and no one replaced them. What would happen?
Years from now would there be no more TV engineers to keep the broadcasts flowing. Interns and apprentices are important. They're human beings. They're not slaves or commodities.

stahrgazer wrote:But raising the minimum wage simply squishes the middle because those at the top will raise prices, and aren't going to raise everyone's salaries by the equal percentage to compensate.

Probably not true. This is a theory. Is this historically accurate?
Our economy already shed a whole bunch of jobs as business' tried to shore up their costs. There aren't a lot of jobs left to cut, and the economy is stable/improving. The only place left for most kinds of business to move is to ask their employees to work harder, but production is already at an all-time high while the minimum wage is at a 40-year low. We pretty much have to raise the minimum wage at this point. You can't ask American's to work harder than they did 20 years ago for less pay than they received 40 years ago. Where's our brighter future?

stahrgazer wrote:what could really work: put tariffs back into imports to make it just as profitable to make stuff here if you want to sell it here, as it is to pay Nike peanuts in Viet Nam yet still sell those two-buck shoes for Two Hundred Bucks here.

I agree.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ConfederateSS, karel