or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Minimum wage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Minimum wage

post #1 of 53
Thread Starter 
I just heard Obama promise $9.80 minimum wages...are these people insain?

Do the politicians not understand inflation?

Furthermore, you are not SUPPOSED TO be working a minimum wage job when you have a family...they call it the ladder because you are supposed to climb! These people make it sound like there are 30 year olds making $5/Hr and raising a family on it: I grew up in a poorer home but my folks always made at least double minimum wage!

Basically what I want to know is why in the hell would a person with a wife and kids take a minimum wage job?
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #2 of 53
does the fed understand inflation?

see.... if you understand inflation, you are alone...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #3 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

I just heard Obama promise $9.80 minimum wages...are these people insain?

Do the politicians not understand inflation?

Let me see here. Where I live in CA, the average rental for a studio apartment is about $1200-$1500 a month. With minimum wage at that $5 an hour you quoted....this brings in about $800 a month, perhaps down to $650 after deductions. People on minimum wages working a full 40 hour week thus will make about half their monthly rent.. and thats before the other essential expenses of life are even considered. So a minimum wage worker working two full 40 hour week jobs can just about make the rent, if he/she is lucky. However, working three full 40 hour jobs per week and he/she has the princely sum of $300-$500 per month to live on. Wow! There are 168 hours in a week, so that leaves a person working 3 fulltime jobs with over TWO hours per day to sleep, eat, and not to forget of course, commuting to and from 3 jobs, (etc etc)... when they should be working! Perhaps there should be a training course that allows minimum wage workers to be able to bilocate, so they can work two jobs in two places at the same time. If yogis can do it, then there's no excuse.

Working people never had it so good!

~ ~

Be real. Wages paid by minimum wage jobs are for those living at home with mom and dad. End of story.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #4 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Basically what I want to know is why in the hell would a person with a wife and kids take a minimum wage job?

Er, don't get married or have kids until you get a real job?
post #5 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Er, don't get married or have kids until you get a real job?

Some people screw up young, but still try to take responsibility for it and raise their kids. Even if they have ambitions and plans to do better, they might be stuck with minimum wage work for quite some time while they work their way through school.

Some people might have a good job and then lose it, and the spouse and kids don't automatically go away to make that situation more affordable.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #6 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Let me see here. Where I live in CA, the average rental for a studio apartment is about $1200-$1500 a month. With minimum wage at that $5 an hour you quoted....this brings in about $800 a month, perhaps down to $650 after deductions. People on minimum wages working a full 40 hour week thus will make about half their monthly rent.. and thats before the other essential expenses of life are even considered. So a minimum wage worker working two full 40 hour week jobs can just about make the rent, if he/she is lucky. However, working three full 40 hour jobs per week and he/she has the princely sum of $300-$500 per month to live on. Wow! There are 168 hours in a week, so that leaves a person working 3 fulltime jobs with over TWO hours per day to sleep, eat, and not to forget of course, commuting to and from 3 jobs, (etc etc)... when they should be working! Perhaps there should be a training course that allows minimum wage workers to be able to bilocate, so they can work two jobs in two places at the same time. If yogis can do it, then there's no excuse.

Working people never had it so good!

~ ~

Be real. Wages paid by minimum wage jobs are for those living at home with mom and dad. End of story.

So I guess th moral of the story is that if you're single, not depending on anyone and have limited earning potential, they better move the hell out of California.
post #7 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Let me see here. Where I live in CA, the average rental for a studio apartment is about $1200-$1500 a month. With minimum wage at that $5 an hour you quoted....this brings in about $800 a month, perhaps down to $650 after deductions. People on minimum wages working a full 40 hour week thus will make about half their monthly rent.. and thats before the other essential expenses of life are even considered. So a minimum wage worker working two full 40 hour week jobs can just about make the rent, if he/she is lucky. However, working three full 40 hour jobs per week and he/she has the princely sum of $300-$500 per month to live on. Wow! There are 168 hours in a week, so that leaves a person working 3 fulltime jobs with over TWO hours per day to sleep, eat, and not to forget of course, commuting to and from 3 jobs, (etc etc)... when they should be working! Perhaps there should be a training course that allows minimum wage workers to be able to bilocate, so they can work two jobs in two places at the same time. If yogis can do it, then there's no excuse.

Working people never had it so good!

~ ~

Be real. Wages paid by minimum wage jobs are for those living at home with mom and dad. End of story.

That is not the average studio rental price for the Los Angeles metro area. No one is expecting some one making minimum wage to live in Westwood.

Get real.
post #8 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Let me see here. Where I live in CA, the average rental for a studio apartment is about $1200-$1500 a month. With minimum wage at that $5 an hour you quoted....this brings in about $800 a month, perhaps down to $650 after deductions. People on minimum wages working a full 40 hour week thus will make about half their monthly rent.. and thats before the other essential expenses of life are even considered. So a minimum wage worker working two full 40 hour week jobs can just about make the rent, if he/she is lucky. However, working three full 40 hour jobs per week and he/she has the princely sum of $300-$500 per month to live on. Wow! There are 168 hours in a week, so that leaves a person working 3 fulltime jobs with over TWO hours per day to sleep, eat, and not to forget of course, commuting to and from 3 jobs, (etc etc)... when they should be working! Perhaps there should be a training course that allows minimum wage workers to be able to bilocate, so they can work two jobs in two places at the same time. If yogis can do it, then there's no excuse.

Working people never had it so good!

~ ~

Be real. Wages paid by minimum wage jobs are for those living at home with mom and dad. End of story.

Your assumptions are as bad as Barbara Ehrenreich.

First the minimum wage is not $5 in California. The higher rents reflect the fact that people earn more and can pay more. Illegal immigrants are able to live here, work for near or above this wage and still remit BILLIONS of dollars back to their home countries. The income from remittances is second only to revenue from oil production in Mexico. In otherwords, illegal aliens working at or near minimum age is their second largest "industry."

California minimum wage just became $8 an hour. No one who earns it is going to live in the studio alone at $1200-1500 a month. Studios are actually the most expensive housing option. Each bedroom you add only brings in $100-150 more rent. Now I just now easily found $1200-$1500 two bedrooms in Santa Ana or Long Beach. I don't know where you are looking but these units do exist.

Here is one.

Here is another.

So let's take the high end number there just to be fair. There are plenty of two bedroom apartments available at $1500 a month. You take that and divide it by four adults. Your rent for the month is $375 which at $8 an hour you make in 47 hours. This amounts to 30% of your gross earnings which is not excessive. From my experience, any apartment building that has to advertise with color photographs in any web or paper publication often does so because they are trying to fetch top rents relative to their amenities and location. So again, $1500 is a high number. You go to any place with the generic hardware store For Rent sign, any place that has a price that can be filed with a newspaper ad or word of mouth and the rents are more reasonable. I see this as a landlord and as a former renter.

I'll add that no one need commute any sort of long distance to obtain or keep a minimum wage job. You also cannot have your cake and eat it too. If you live in an area where the number of inhabitants is high enough to drive the rents for a two bedroom to $12-1500, then you also live in an area where there are bus and metro rail lines. A monthly pass is $70 and allows you to ride every bus and rail line in L.A. county.

Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Er, don't get married or have kids until you get a real job?

That is what all the pro-abortion people say.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #9 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

That is what all the pro-abortion people say.

I blame Maury Povich.
post #10 of 53
I blame a culture that can't figure out the importance of a properly filled out mortgage application, for assuming they can do the math on minimum-wage theory.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #11 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

I blame a culture that can't figure out the importance of a properly filled out mortgage application, for assuming they can do the math on minimum-wage theory.



I'd throw in automobile loan applications too. The next bubble to burst.
post #12 of 53
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #13 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Basically what I want to know is why in the hell would a person with a wife and kids take a minimum wage job?

Because they have no other choice? Not everybody has a salary. Think about how many people have no high school or college diploma, have families, and the only jobs they CAN take are minimum wage jobs. In addition, tons of people hold more than one jobs just to get by. It's the second job that pays minimum wage where it would benefit them to have a higher minimum wage.

And: insain -> insane
post #14 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

Because they have no other choice? Not everybody has a salary. Think about how many people have no high school or college diploma, have families, and the only jobs they CAN take are minimum wage jobs. In addition, tons of people hold more than one jobs just to get by. It's the second job that pays minimum wage where it would benefit them to have a higher minimum wage.

And: insain -> insane

In a country with free public education, who is to blame because someone is not educated enough to hold down more than a minimum wage job?!! I'm supposed to feel sorry for, or somehow to blame, because some nimrod couldn't be bothered to stay awake during Math much less English?

They had the same educational opportunities I did. They chose not to take advantage. Sorry. I went to school with too many people with same opportunities, but different results. Heck, I'm related to plenty of them.

To move on to Economic theory, increasing the minimum wage does NOTHING except raise the cost of living and increase unemployment. If you don't increase supply, then all you do is increase the cost, period. You have the same number of goods to provide, but more people with the cash to pay, thus the price goes up until the amount supplied can equal demand. On the employment side, other means of "production" become more cost effective, reducing the number of people employed. So sure, some people find themselves with a pay raise, but others find themselves jobless. Raising the minimum wage actually helps few people.

I mean, take a poll. How many people actually posting on this forum HAVE minimum wage jobs? Of those, how many over the age of 25? 30? I haven't had a minimum wage job in over 20 years. Hmm. Make that 24. I passed minimum wage by 17. If you can't be more productive than a 17 year old, you need to stop and take a long, hard look at yourself.
The Mom
Reply
The Mom
Reply
post #15 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fangorn View Post

In a country with free public education, who is to blame because someone is not educated enough to hold down more than a minimum wage job?!! I'm supposed to feel sorry for, or somehow to blame, because some nimrod couldn't be bothered to stay awake during Math much less English?

They had the same educational opportunities I did. They chose not to take advantage. Sorry. I went to school with too many people with same opportunities, but different results. Heck, I'm related to plenty of them.

To move on to Economic theory, increasing the minimum wage does NOTHING except raise the cost of living and increase unemployment. If you don't increase supply, then all you do is increase the cost, period. You have the same number of goods to provide, but more people with the cash to pay, thus the price goes up until the amount supplied can equal demand. On the employment side, other means of "production" become more cost effective, reducing the number of people employed. So sure, some people find themselves with a pay raise, but others find themselves jobless. Raising the minimum wage actually helps few people.

I mean, take a poll. How many people actually posting on this forum HAVE minimum wage jobs? Of those, how many over the age of 25? 30? I haven't had a minimum wage job in over 20 years. Hmm. Make that 24. I passed minimum wage by 17. If you can't be more productive than a 17 year old, you need to stop and take a long, hard look at yourself.

Fangorn... and the rest of course...

The minimum wage isn't meant to be the salary pursued by people taking benefit of society... it is the salary given to people who cannot take benefit -- the unemployed person whose skills are no longer desired, the mentally handicapped person who cannot work in a higher paying job etc... This is borne out in the fact that very few people work for minimum wage. Raising minimum wage to keep with inflation only accounts for the challenges these people face in their everyday lives. To ignore this fact is to be callously ignorant of how difficult it is to live at or below the *local* poverty line...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #16 of 53
Freaking lazy ass po' folk.
post #17 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fangorn View Post

In a country with free public education, who is to blame because someone is not educated enough to hold down more than a minimum wage job?!! I'm supposed to feel sorry for, or somehow to blame, because some nimrod couldn't be bothered to stay awake during Math much less English?

They had the same educational opportunities I did. They chose not to take advantage. Sorry. I went to school with too many people with same opportunities, but different results. Heck, I'm related to plenty of them.

To move on to Economic theory, increasing the minimum wage does NOTHING except raise the cost of living and increase unemployment. If you don't increase supply, then all you do is increase the cost, period. You have the same number of goods to provide, but more people with the cash to pay, thus the price goes up until the amount supplied can equal demand. On the employment side, other means of "production" become more cost effective, reducing the number of people employed. So sure, some people find themselves with a pay raise, but others find themselves jobless. Raising the minimum wage actually helps few people.

I mean, take a poll. How many people actually posting on this forum HAVE minimum wage jobs? Of those, how many over the age of 25? 30? I haven't had a minimum wage job in over 20 years. Hmm. Make that 24. I passed minimum wage by 17. If you can't be more productive than a 17 year old, you need to stop and take a long, hard look at yourself.

There are TONS of jobs that pay only minimum wage. And the fact is, the only reason why your life is so privileged and comfortable is because someone ELSE has those jobs, not you. Someone has to do those jobs.

Now let's also look at the teen and college market. There are tons of middle class teens and college students who have minimum wage paying jobs just to earn a little extra cash and they are too busy for a full-time job. Raising minimum wage puts more money in the pockets of the 16-24 age demographic. This demographic has a MUCH higher percentage of their spendable income because their parents generally pay for much of their living expenses. When this demographic spends more, the economy is stimulated. Apart from a poverty standpoint, increasing the minimum wage does more than just raise the cost of living.

And on the subject of inflation, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Sure raising the minimum wage might cause the cost of living to go up, but what's the alternative? Have the cost of living go up (as it always does regardless) and have wages lag behind? Think about the rubber-band theory. The rubber band gets stretched too far, it breaks.
post #18 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Fangorn... and the rest of course...

The minimum wage isn't meant to be the salary pursued by people taking benefit of society... it is the salary given to people who cannot take benefit -- the unemployed person whose skills are no longer desired, the mentally handicapped person who cannot work in a higher paying job etc... This is borne out in the fact that very few people work for minimum wage. Raising minimum wage to keep with inflation only accounts for the challenges these people face in their everyday lives. To ignore this fact is to be callously ignorant of how difficult it is to live at or below the *local* poverty line...

Unemployed persons who skills are no longer desired can be retrained.

Mentally handicapped persons who cannot work at a higher wage receive social security disability.

To ignore these facts is not callous, but reality that you are making your assertions up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Freaking lazy ass po' folk.

You are the only person who has asserted this. Have you become a walking, talking strawman now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

There are TONS of jobs that pay only minimum wage. And the fact is, the only reason why your life is so privileged and comfortable is because someone ELSE has those jobs, not you. Someone has to do those jobs.

Now let's also look at the teen and college market. There are tons of middle class teens and college students who have minimum wage paying jobs just to earn a little extra cash and they are too busy for a full-time job. Raising minimum wage puts more money in the pockets of the 16-24 age demographic. This demographic has a MUCH higher percentage of their spendable income because their parents generally pay for much of their living expenses. When this demographic spends more, the economy is stimulated. Apart from a poverty standpoint, increasing the minimum wage does more than just raise the cost of living.

And on the subject of inflation, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Sure raising the minimum wage might cause the cost of living to go up, but what's the alternative? Have the cost of living go up (as it always does regardless) and have wages lag behind? Think about the rubber-band theory. The rubber band gets stretched too far, it breaks.

Do they really have to do those jobs? According to economics they don't. Reality dictates that an employer will not hire an employee to lose money. The job must add value to the employer. If it does not add value then the employer will find some way to raise productivity and purchase machinery, automate the job, etc.

You also have your statistics backwards. The unemployment rate is quite high among the teen and college set because as minimum wage is increased, more people choose the jobs they are seeking on a full time basis. Secondly the employer also seeks full time employees since the regulations make it harder to employ someone on a part-time basis.

When I walk into a setting today that I would have worked at as a teen, the place is no longer filled with teens. It is filled with immigrants who work there full-time. A McDonald's that had 10-12 employees working in the restaurant will now have 5-6 employees, all immigrants who work there full time.

The restaurant instead invested in all new equipment in the kitchen and the previous 5-7 jobs are just gone.

Also Icfireball, if you studied inflation at all, you would know it is the worst and most destructive thing you can do to middle class people. You let the newly inflated home values raise their property taxes and drive the elderly out of their own homes. You watch your pension lose purchasing value because it is fixed and inflation destroys it. People running on the treadmill might have a chance to keep up, but everyone else gets crushed. Inflation is the most destructive force you can unleash on people and the economy.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #19 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Unemployed persons who skills are no longer desired can be retrained.

Mentally handicapped persons who cannot work at a higher wage receive social security disability.

To ignore these facts is not callous, but reality that you are making your assertions up.

Retrained at whose expense, Nick?

I should have expanded my mentally handicapped statement to be more generic... by mentally handicapped i meant emotionally, psychologically, and intellectually... only one of these groups receives the paltry social security disability coverage. and it is paltry -- the coverage is well below the cost of living in most places.

But whatever, you slap one progressive social program (minimum wage) by defending another (social security)... you're silly.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #20 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Retrained at whose expense, Nick?

I should have expanded my mentally handicapped statement to be more generic... by mentally handicapped i meant emotionally, psychologically, and intellectually... only one of these groups receives the paltry social security disability coverage. and it is paltry -- the coverage is well below the cost of living in most places.

But whatever, you slap one progressive social program (minimum wage) by defending another (social security)... you're silly.

Government expense. Education is one part of government that yields a return so people are often not opposed to it. Social Security Disability applies to the array of issues you mentioned. However the reality is you just aren't happy with any solution. I note that the combination of the two should take care of the types of people you mentioned and you reply is that it is "paltry" based off of... I guess your opinion.

The government gives an array of services to supplement income. The real problem is that class warfare folks like yourself insist that the government not call such services and benefits income. Someone can work minimum wage, receive section 8 housing vouchers for $1200 a month, food stamps of $800 a month and that $2000 is never called income. Then folks like yourself keep coming along a decrying how people cannot get by when they only earn X dollars a month.

Earned Income Tax Credit
Section 8 housing
Food stamps

None of those are considered income but are available for low income folks. Stop being dishonest or just dismissing something because you don't like it. Someone claimed it was impossible and I used the actual minimum age, linked to actual apartments, and cited the actual price of the public transportation pass for the month. You dismiss all these things with platitudes about the poor and opinions like "paltry."

Yourself and others also refuse to address the reality that you cannot add value by fiat. This is true whether it is currency or a job paid by that currency. Platitudes and intentions are not value.

Since you fail to realize this hardy, I suggest you simply draw some large denomination Hardy dollars and pay people in them. The true value proposition won't be changed, but you will like the solution because it features big pretty numbers.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #21 of 53
Originally posted by Trumptman

Quote:
I'll add that no one need commute any sort of long distance to obtain or keep a minimum wage job. You also cannot have your cake and eat it too. If you live in an area where the number of inhabitants is high enough to drive the rents for a two bedroom to $12-1500, then you also live in an area where there are bus and metro rail lines. A monthly pass is $70 and allows you to ride every bus and rail line in L.A. county.

My post was deliberately citing the worse side of the situation, whereas yours was equally in the opposite direction. By the way, I don't know how familiar you are with public transport in the L.A. metro area.. the last time I used it involved getting a bus from Northridge in the Valley to West Hollywood. It took the best part of 1.5 hours each way to cover the 15 mile trip, on 4 different buses... and many of the buses stop running in the early evening. The nature of L.A. and the layout of every other drunkenly-random sprawling city in the nation covering hundreds or even thousands of square miles, public transport will always be a severe compromise.

Quote:
That is what all the pro-abortion people say.

I don't think there is a single person in the world who is "pro-abortion", unless you are trying to make a cheap political point.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #22 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


The government gives an array of services to supplement income. The real problem is that class warfare folks like yourself insist that the government not call such services and benefits income. Someone can work minimum wage, receive section 8 housing vouchers for $1200 a month, food stamps of $800 a month and that $2000 is never called income. Then folks like yourself keep coming along a decrying how people cannot get by when they only earn X dollars a month.

Earned Income Tax Credit
Section 8 housing
Food stamps

Great Nick! Talk about an idiotic argument created by an ****** *****. You are essentially arguing that since A poor person could also win the lottery, there is no reason to provide any safety net for them ALL.

Unfortunately, you and I both know that the reality of the situation is not the ideal you claim it is -- social security DOES NOT cover the basic necessities for MOST people and given our current administrations illogical approach to shoring up the system this safety net is on its last legs. But all of this is irrelevant to the discussion of minimum wage. Just because our social services exist and are used by some to make up for the deficits of minimum wage doesn't mean that that minimum wage shouldn't be increased.

The minimum wage is the FIRST defense against poverty in this nation. What you are essentially arguing is that we should fall on our secondary defenses and give up on the first ones. Minimum wage keeps people from having to depend upon social security and welfare. There is no evidence that minimum wage, itself, affects inflation the amount some conservative economist claim. More important is the fiat policy of the fed, the extent and efficiency of government and large corporate spending, and basic costs of materials and resources. Minimum wage is but a small small part of this inflationary juggernaut.

In addition, I find it laughable that you believe that increasing the minimum wage will have no effect on the value of the economy. Money is printed by the fed based upon the perceived value of the economy. Print too much and the associated value of the currency goes down, print too little and the value goes up. The value of the economy is something altogether different than the monetary value of our currency and while one (money) is representative of the other (the actual value) they are not directly correlated except by the actions of a group of prudish old men (thankfully).
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #23 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

The minimum wage is the FIRST defense against poverty in this nation.

No. No. No. And no again. Wrong. Simply, absolutely and exceedingly wrong.

The FIRST defense against poverty in this country (or any other) is productivity. If you want to raise the wages of people at any part of the income spectrum, find some way to make them more productive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

There is no evidence that minimum wage, itself, affects inflation the amount some conservative economist claim. More important is the fiat policy of the fed, the extent and efficiency of government and large corporate spending, and basic costs of materials and resources. Minimum wage is but a small small part of this inflationary juggernaut.

Inflation is an expansion in the money supply (typically caused by the Fed who prints money backed by nothing of value) and this leads to a general increase in the price of goods and services (translation: a decrease in the value of every previously existing monetary unit).

A "minimum wage" (by which I mean a legally mandated minimum wage rate), however, can cause unemployment when it is raised above the free market equilibrium wage rate, usually for those whose productivity is now lower than the newly mandated wage.
post #24 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The restaurant instead invested in all new equipment in the kitchen and the previous 5-7 jobs are just gone.


For every job technology cuts, a technology creates. So yes, we don't need as many farmers or factory workers. But now we need huge amounts of engineers and IT staff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Also Icfireball, if you studied inflation at all, you would know it is the worst and most destructive thing you can do to middle class people. You let the newly inflated home values raise their property taxes and drive the elderly out of their own homes. You watch your pension lose purchasing value because it is fixed and inflation destroys it. People running on the treadmill might have a chance to keep up, but everyone else gets crushed. Inflation is the most destructive force you can unleash on people and the economy.

Who are you to dictate what I should know if I have studied inflation at all? That is one of the most arrogant fallacies I've ever heard.

You talk about the increasing (inflating) cost of taxes, home values, etc. What is driving these up? Minimum wage is not raised randomly. Minimum wage is raised BECAUSE the cost of living is going up. Rising cost of living is inventible in healthy capitalist economy because it shows exactly where the buck is going: to the top. If you increase the minimum wage (the baseline), the poor now have a more purchasing power, and when they purchase more, where does the bulk of the money go in a capitalist economy? To the top.

Inflation in economics can be defined as:
Quote:
a general increase in prices and fall in the purchasing value of

If a loaf of bread cost $0.15 in 1950, and it costs $2.00 today, but the median salary was $11,000 back then, and the median salary is $45,000 today, you could say inflation is occurring. Raising the minimum wage actually causes the rate of inflation to temporarily decrease, even though it will in turn drives prices up (because this is a capitalist economy we are talking about). But what's the alternative? Just let the prices go up as they will regardless what the wages are?
post #25 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

No. No. No. And no again. Wrong. Simply, absolutely and exceedingly wrong.

The FIRST defense against poverty in this country (or any other) is productivity. If you want to raise the wages of people at any part of the income spectrum, find some way to make them more productive.

Huh? Productivity from an employee has never been correlated with the ability of that person to live. Maybe in some alternative society doesn't exist reality it does, but not here, not now, not ever.

Quote:
Inflation is an expansion in the money supply (typically caused by the Fed who prints money backed by nothing of value) and this leads to a general increase in the price of goods and services (translation: a decrease in the value of every previously existing monetary unit).

A "minimum wage" (by which I mean a legally mandated minimum wage rate), however, can cause unemployment when it is raised above the free market equilibrium wage rate, usually for those whose productivity is now lower than the newly mandated wage.

You don't actually understand economics. Inflation doesn't have to do with an expansion of the money supply -- it only has to do with the confidence of the people using that money supply in its value. Under MOST circumstances more money in circulation leads to an inflation of the cost of goods (relative to a standard dollar from some earlier time), but that isn't the ONLY way it can occur. A weakened government, a war, a plague can all cause the perceived value of money to decrease.

The free market equilibrium wage rate isn't a fixed point, and it certainly isn't below our current minimum wage. The implicit negotiation of value that occurs upon hiring people (with the caveat of limited flexibility, local costs of living, practicality and human psychology thrown into the mix) rarely produces an outcome of someone taking a job that will not provide them with the money to survive. It does however sometimes occur due to predatory employer practices or idiotic employees, and this is a part of the reason why the minimum wage exists.

Unemployment isn't the only boogie man out there...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #26 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Originally posted by Trumptman
My post was deliberately citing the worse side of the situation, whereas yours was equally in the opposite direction.

Mine was not the most optimal solution. We are still talking about beach communities for goodness sakes. You can always travel inland and make the same eight dollars an hour while watching the rents go down considerably. For goodness sakes I'm a landlord, you don't think I track rents?

You go to Riverside/Moreno Valley and the rents are down to $800-900 a month for that two bedroom apartment.

Quote:
By the way, I don't know how familiar you are with public transport in the L.A. metro area.. the last time I used it involved getting a bus from Northridge in the Valley to West Hollywood. It took the best part of 1.5 hours each way to cover the 15 mile trip, on 4 different buses... and many of the buses stop running in the early evening. The nature of L.A. and the layout of every other drunkenly-random sprawling city in the nation covering hundreds or even thousands of square miles, public transport will always be a severe compromise.

I guess we expect the word minimum to mean encompassing absolutely no trade-offs of any kind. If your car was getting 20 mpg, that trip would cost you around $5.00 of gas a day. Then add repairs, upkeep and insurance. Instead you get that trip and any others you need to make for $70 for the month. You trade time for savings. If you don't want the savings, call a cab, pay gas and lunch for a friend, simply make a different set of trade-offs.

Quote:
I don't think there is a single person in the world who is "pro-abortion", unless you are trying to make a cheap political point.

There are plenty of views that declare we have exceeded the capability of the planet to sustain us and advocate zero or less population growth. Quality of life is a common argument for both abortion and euthanasia. To suggest that if someone will not have a high enough quality of life, that they should not reproduce is certainly not a rare viewpoint and is far from a cheap political point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Great Nick! Talk about an idiotic argument created by an ****** *****. You are essentially arguing that since A poor person could also win the lottery, there is no reason to provide any safety net for them ALL.

I always find it humorous that your rant and attack that which you cannot comprehend.

Hahahaha... yes that is what I said... I said win the lottery and no safety net. Better still I said toss them into great ovens to be turned into pastries that the rich will dine on. I'm better than Marie Antoinette. Instead of letting them eat cake, I'll let them BE cake.

When we provide a safety-net, you call it a safety-net and when we give assistance that is either cash or in lieu of cash, we should call it income. You give someone $2000 a month of assistance, that is income.

Quote:
Unfortunately, you and I both know that the reality of the situation is not the ideal you claim it is -- social security DOES NOT cover the basic necessities for MOST people and given our current administrations illogical approach to shoring up the system this safety net is on its last legs. But all of this is irrelevant to the discussion of minimum wage. Just because our social services exist and are used by some to make up for the deficits of minimum wage doesn't mean that that minimum wage shouldn't be increased.

Increasing minimum wage does not increase quality of life nor does it increase purchasing power. It is impossible to create wealth by fiat. You could mandate someone be paid $20 at a fast food restaurant. All that will happen is the meal prices will triple, and the people purchasing those meals will in turn pass on their increased costs. It does nothing more than increase inflation. The first minimum wage was passed in 1938 for $.25 an hour. Why isn't everyone rich yet? Why haven't the poor disappeared now that it is $5.85 and soon to be $7.25 an hour? We've raised salaries by 2340%! Oh wait, perhaps all it does it raise the cost of everything, get passed through the system and show up as inflation while improving nothing.

Improving nothing while making you feel better, that really is the way to go.

Quote:
The minimum wage is the FIRST defense against poverty in this nation. What you are essentially arguing is that we should fall on our secondary defenses and give up on the first ones. Minimum wage keeps people from having to depend upon social security and welfare. There is no evidence that minimum wage, itself, affects inflation the amount some conservative economist claim. More important is the fiat policy of the fed, the extent and efficiency of government and large corporate spending, and basic costs of materials and resources. Minimum wage is but a small small part of this inflationary juggernaut.

Minimum wage is a meaningless number that is put out by the government around which supply and demand adjusts. The cost of commodities, labor, transport, all of it contributes to pricing which in turn registers as inflation. The only true way to increase wages is to increase productivity. When the wages cannot cover the value needed, the employer invests in mechanization and tosses the jobs. It is a closed system. There isn't a way to get around it.

Quote:
In addition, I find it laughable that you believe that increasing the minimum wage will have no effect on the value of the economy. Money is printed by the fed based upon the perceived value of the economy. Print too much and the associated value of the currency goes down, print too little and the value goes up. The value of the economy is something altogether different than the monetary value of our currency and while one (money) is representative of the other (the actual value) they are not directly correlated except by the actions of a group of prudish old men (thankfully)

This has got to be the truest definition of irony I have ever read. You note correctly that currency and the true value of the economy are independent of each other. You then assert that in manipulating currency (minimum wage) you can alter the relative worth of someone in the actual economy.

The reason the 1938 $.25 does not buy anymore than the 2007 $5.85 is because all those little numbers adjust, the currency is devalued, inflation occurs, and the person still ends up at the bottom of the ladder.

You are 100% correct that the little pieces of paper do not change the real economy. So stop worrying about them and focus on provides real value instead.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #27 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Huh? Productivity from an employee has never been correlated with the ability of that person to live.

It correlates to how much they can earn. This is fundamental. Increases income correlate to increases in productivity. Clearly there are times of disparity in this (where someone's income exceeds their productivity), but they tend to be relatively short-lived.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

You don't actually understand economics.

Careful. You're treading onto very thin ice, especially given your obvious lack of understanding of basic economic principles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Inflation doesn't have to do with an expansion of the money supply

Inflation is an increase in the money supply. You see it in the form of higher prices. Read up:

"Mainstream economists overwhelmingly agree that high rates of inflation are caused by high rates of growth of the money supply."

"the essence of inflation is not a general rise in prices but an increase in the supply of money, which in turns sets in motion a general increase in the prices of goods and services"


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

The free market equilibrium wage rate isn't a fixed point,

I didn't say it was. What's your point?


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

predatory employer practices

What are those?
post #28 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

It correlates to how much they can earn. This is fundamental. Increases income correlate to increases in productivity. Clearly there are times of disparity in this (where someone's income exceeds their productivity), but they tend to be relatively short-lived.

oh? and the opposite never ever occurs... I see.... in your fanciful imagination grad students don't exist...

Quote:
Careful. You're treading onto very thin ice, especially given your obvious lack of understanding of basic economic principles.

well with your basis, i am surprised you can put sentences together.


I'm sorry, when did anyone say exclusive... oh right, they didn't... tsk tsk... intellectual dishonesty at its worst...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #29 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

oh? and the opposite never ever occurs... I see.... in your fanciful imagination grad students don't exist...

Please explain what you mean here? Do you mean graduate students that are not earning much while they are graduate students? If you are, then we'd move our discussion to how these people's time getting education increases their future productivity (and future wages).


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

well with your basis, i am surprised you can put sentences together.

When you are losing arguments, do you always resort to insults?


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I'm sorry, when did anyone say exclusive... oh right, they didn't... tsk tsk... intellectual dishonesty at its worst...

I'm not sure what you mean. You said "Inflation doesn't have to do with an expansion of the money supply". I've pointed out some reading material that will help you understand why you are wrong.
post #30 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I always find it humorous that your rant and attack that which you cannot comprehend.

Hahahaha... yes that is what I said... I said win the lottery and no safety net. Better still I said toss them into great ovens to be turned into pastries that the rich will dine on. I'm better than Marie Antoinette. Instead of letting them eat cake, I'll let them BE cake.

When we provide a safety-net, you call it a safety-net and when we give assistance that is either cash or in lieu of cash, we should call it income. You give someone $2000 a month of assistance, that is income.

Irrelevant! Clearly you didn't learn how to not be lead by your own arguments. I never claimed they were anything. My only point is that not everyone earning below minimum wage gets them...


Quote:
Increasing minimum wage does not increase quality of life nor does it increase purchasing power. It is impossible to create wealth by fiat. You could mandate someone be paid $20 at a fast food restaurant. All that will happen is the meal prices will triple, and the people purchasing those meals will in turn pass on their increased costs. It does nothing more than increase inflation. The first minimum wage was passed in 1938 for $.25 an hour. Why isn't everyone rich yet? Why haven't the poor disappeared now that it is $5.85 and soon to be $7.25 an hour? We've raised salaries by 2340%! Oh wait, perhaps all it does it raise the cost of everything, get passed through the system and show up as inflation while improving nothing.

Bull... wait for it.... shit... It incrementally increases the quality of life of people on the lowest rung, until it is sopped up by normal capitalist economic growth. The point is that the minimum wage should be set to grow and shrink with the cost of living. That is the least a civilized society can do...


Quote:
Minimum wage is a meaningless number that is put out by the government around which supply and demand adjusts. The cost of commodities, labor, transport, all of it contributes to pricing which in turn registers as inflation. The only true way to increase wages is to increase productivity. When the wages cannot cover the value needed, the employer invests in mechanization and tosses the jobs. It is a closed system. There isn't a way to get around it.

Um... It is a zero sum game all around -- you cannot possibly expect to increase the health of your economy by grounding people into the, er, um, ground. There is value in keeping civil unrest to a minimum, ensuring the comfort of your daily strolls outside, etc etc. To ignore the fact that hard nosed economic theories (which have ultimately failed in their fullest forms) are coupled to more than simply how some abstract individuals live, is to truly forget that the economy is not the only driving force in society. The crime rate, for instance, in Philadelphia (and elsewhere) has ebbed and flowed with the economic fortunes of those who do work minimum wage jobs. The vitality of the fraction of society on the bottom edge of our social structure demands an appreciation of the not-so-subtle greater social ills associated with a permanent underclass. Minimum wage and other social programs are our pounds of flesh for penances of our social success. We have them and we operate with them as a way to avoid the obvious impossibilities of trying to survive in a society with a large permanent underclass...

Technology will replace people and it should. The only way to increase wages is to increase the value of the employees (and not necessarily their output). Productivity is a limited and ultimately ruinous perspective on this value. We are in an economic reality in which goods are produced by entities that do not need to get paid -- that economic value is added by machine.




Quote:
This has got to be the truest definition of irony I have ever read. You note correctly that currency and the true value of the economy are independent of each other. You then assert that in manipulating currency (minimum wage) you can alter the relative worth of someone in the actual economy.

I said nothing of the sort. It does increase their worth. It increases their survivability, which in turn reduces, in essence, their drain on society.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #31 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

The only way to increase wages is to increase the value of the employees (and not necessarily their output).

And how do you measure this "worth"?

In economic terms it is measured by their output.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Productivity is a limited and ultimately ruinous perspective on this value.



Now I'm firmly convinced that you have no idea what you're talking about and that you're probably just making things up.
post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

Please explain what you mean here? Do you mean graduate students that are not earning much while they are graduate students? If you are, then we'd move our discussion to how these people's time getting education increases their future productivity (and future wages).

That's right... deferred value added... Now let's see... under your view of economics, these people are out of their minds because at a similar intellectual level and spending the prime of their lives in a low paying educational environment they are failing to take the highest monetary route to the end of their life as compared to someone who, say, works in an investment bank. The problem is that libertarian economic theory suggests these people shouldn't exist -- they risk much and gain little, and by doing so damage the economy by wasting their talents on such esoteric subjects as chemistry and history.

But whatever, graduate students aren't the only example of someone doing more work than they are getting paid to do and seeking no compensation for it. teachers, for instance, dilute their salaries by working when not on the clock...

Quote:
When you are losing arguments, do you always resort to insults?

it wasn't an insult.

Quote:
I'm not sure what you mean. You said "Inflation doesn't have to do with an expansion of the money supply". I've pointed out some reading material that will help you understand why you are wrong.

your reading comprehension is pretty low...

is this a common ailment of conservative ideologues?
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #33 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

And how do you measure this "worth"?

In economic terms it is measured by their output.

Not in all fields. How do you measure the output of, say, an artist?

What you fail to recognize is that there isn't a single class of workers in the economy.

Quote:


Now I'm firmly convinced that you have no idea what you're talking about and that you're probably just making things up.

Ok. Have a good afternoon.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #34 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

That's right... deferred value added... Now let's see... under your view of economics, these people are out of their minds because at a similar intellectual level and spending the prime of their lives in a low paying educational environment they are failing to take the highest monetary route to the end of their life as compared to someone who, say, works in an investment bank. The problem is that libertarian economic theory suggests these people shouldn't exist -- they risk much and gain little, and by doing so damage the economy by wasting their talents on such esoteric subjects as chemistry and history.

Nonsense. People who forgo current income by investing in the short-term in ways that will give them greater productivity (and income) in the long-term are the reason this country has become so amazingly wealthy. These people are to be greatly admired.

It should be noted however that formal education (including higher education) does not always correlate with higher productivity. It would be a fallacy to assume it does.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Not in all fields. How do you measure the output of, say, an artist?

An artist's economic productivity is measured by how quickly (e.g., 1, 10, 20 per month) they produce a demanded, salable product (e.g., paintings) and how much they can sell it for.

If one painter paints (and sells) 1 painting per month for $100 their productivity (and income) will be very low ($100 per month).

If another painter paints (and sells) 10 paintings per month for $100 each their productivity (and income) will be higher ($1,000 per month).

If still another painter paints (and sells) 5 paintings per month for $500 each their productivity (and income) will be even higher ($2,500 per month).


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

What you fail to recognize is that there isn't a single class of workers in the economy.

Wrong.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

i am surprised you can put sentences together

Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

your reading comprehension is pretty low...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

it wasn't an insult.




Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Ok. Have a good afternoon.

Yep. I caught you.
post #35 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

Nonsense. People who forgo current income by investing in the short-term in ways that will give them greater productivity (and income) in the long-term are the reason this country has become so amazingly wealthy. These people are to be greatly admired.

when you've got a spare half hour ish...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...74362583451279

note; the video stutters a bit for a few minutes around 4 minutes in, but sorts itself out after a moment.

What do you financial guys think of this? Aren't we all fucked when interest debt is increasing exponentially?
post #36 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

when you've got a spare half hour ish...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...74362583451279

note; the video stutters a bit for a few minutes around 4 minutes in, but sorts itself out after a moment.

What do you financial guys think of this? Aren't we all fucked when interest debt is increasing exponentially?

I'm heading out right now. I'll try to get to it tonight. Do you have a short (2-3 sentence) synopsis?
post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

Nonsense. People who forgo current income by investing in the short-term in ways that will give them greater productivity (and income) in the long-term are the reason this country has become so amazingly wealthy. These people are to be greatly admired.

It should be noted however that formal education (including higher education) does not always correlate with higher productivity. It would be a fallacy to assume it does.

Your logic is circular as seen by the artist example. Productivity is measured by what people are paid, and people are paid based upon their productivity. The truism here only exists because you actually have a circular definition. Define productivity independently from the amount people are paid.

You have to understand that people don't go to grad school to get rich; to do so would be to ignore the mountains of evidence that suggests it isn't worth it economically. The reason our nation is wealthy is that people forgo compensation in order to do what they love doing and do it well. They add value to the economy without fair compensation voluntarily -- otherwise we wouldn't have teachers, or scientists, or pretty much any occupation which is directly involved in improving the economic chances of others. Now you may believe that because we have a pseudo-free market, the compensation of these individuals is fair, but this belief is also contrary to mountain of evidence that suggest people are more likely to be better compensated for bringing in money than for improving the quality of life of countless. Money is the driving force for salaries, the more you can bring in for others, the better you will be paid. Civil servants, who arguably do more work for the economy, aren't well paid because they don't bring in a cash flow...



Quote:
An artist's economic productivity is measured by how quickly (e.g., 1, 10, 20 per month) they produce a demanded, salable product (e.g., paintings) and how much they can sell it for.

If one painter paints (and sells) 1 painting per month for $100 their productivity (and income) will be very low ($100 per month).

If another painter paints (and sells) 10 paintings per month for $100 each their productivity (and income) will be higher ($1,000 per month).

If still another painter paints (and sells) 5 paintings per month for $500 each their productivity (and income) will be even higher ($2,500 per month).

Uh huh... So really, is a $500 painting adding as much to the economy as a $500 worth of vaccine? Prices aren't negotiated in a full economic scenario, to have equal valuation between these two items, everyone shopping for everything should know the values of everything else -- the free market implicitly requires that full knowledge is needed for people to make GOOD economic decisions. The person buying the $500 painting likely doesn't care about the health of the economy nor the fact that the $500 vaccine will in the end save three lives and result in countless thousands of dollars in added economic value. Pricing isn't so dynamic to make your productivity a valid measure of anything's economic worth. It is only a measure of the worth of that transaction between the party's aware of the transaction. In other words, it is MEANINGLESS.



Quote:
Wrong.

ok.






Quote:





Yep. I caught you.

No, really. Read it again...

It wasn't an insult. It was actually a compliment...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #38 of 53
double post... oops...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #39 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Irrelevant! Clearly you didn't learn how to not be lead by your own arguments. I never claimed they were anything. My only point is that not everyone earning below minimum wage gets them...

Seems like you have been caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Quote:
The minimum wage isn't meant to be the salary pursued by people taking benefit of society... it is the salary given to people who cannot take benefit -- the unemployed person whose skills are no longer desired, the mentally handicapped person who cannot work in a higher paying job etc... This is borne out in the fact that very few people work for minimum wage.

First you complain that the minimum wage should be raised because it is for those who will never rise above it due to the fact they "cannot take benefit."

Then it is pointed out that the government provides aid and benefits for those who cannot rise above minimum wage due to inherit limitations. You then complain that not everyone will receive these benefits. Obviously they will not receive them due to the fact that they are NOT limited and thus will be able to rise above the bottom rung.

So I've disproven your point completely. Those who are disabled receive benefits. Thus the minimum wage is offset for them if they cannot rise above it. Those who are not disabled earn it until their skills, productivity and education improve and move on. You've argued minimum wage is essentially a government wealth transfer to those who cannot earn more. The government has plenty of other means of transferring wealth without the minimum wage. For those who are able to be gainfully employed, their choices become more and more limited due to the government limitation on wages which imposes a level of productivity and commitment higher than they may desire to seek. The choice now is often full-time or unemployment. Choice has been removed in the name of social justice. Irony yet again.

Quote:
Bull... wait for it.... shit... It incrementally increases the quality of life of people on the lowest rung, until it is sopped up by normal capitalist economic growth. The point is that the minimum wage should be set to grow and shrink with the cost of living. That is the least a civilized society can do...

You've got two people cataloging your insults and dismissals posing as reasoning. The words irrelevant and bullshit do nothing to assert or support your claims. You sound like a bully who is getting more upset that we don't yield to your insults.

When a minimum wage raises the cost of living, and you then demand it rise again to meet the new cost which again rises because of the increased wage, it is a nightmarish version of circular reasoning posing as social justice. This isn't something I've made up. We've had a minimum wage for 70 years and the purchasing power has not changed during that time.

Perhaps we should be like our friends in France with their enlightened employment practices. Clearly they demand higher wages and have much higher unemployment as a result. They also have thousands of cars burned each year as protest against this enlightened social justice that keeps them unemployed. Of course it has recently dropped to less than 8% for the first time in almost six years but that nothing to do with that evil Sarkozy. It is just coincidence I am sure.

I'll be waiting for the incredible counterpoints you make like ... irrelevant and bullshit....

Quote:
Um... It is a zero sum game all around -- you cannot possibly expect to increase the health of your economy by grounding people into the, er, um, ground.

Why put them into the ground? Let's turn them into cake instead! Any more platitudes and hyperbole to toss out?

Quote:
There is value in keeping civil unrest to a minimum, ensuring the comfort of your daily strolls outside, etc etc.

Sure pay the looters at a loss or be prepared to be killed. Extortion by any other name stinks just as bad. Don't forget that Atlas can shrug as well.

Quote:
To ignore the fact that hard nosed economic theories (which have ultimately failed in their fullest forms) are coupled to more than simply how some abstract individuals live, is to truly forget that the economy is not the only driving force in society.

While economics cannot explain everything, it has certainly done a better job than say.. communism.

Quote:
The crime rate, for instance, in Philadelphia (and elsewhere) has ebbed and flowed with the economic fortunes of those who do work minimum wage jobs.

It has also ebbed and flowed with the government monies to pay for more enforcement during the more flush times. It has ebbed and flowed when government realizes that concentrating their social interventions via public housing and public assistance creates massive problems. Finally it ebbs and flows when government requires efforts be made of those receiving assistance versus no efforts.

Quote:
The vitality of the fraction of society on the bottom edge of our social structure demands an appreciation of the not-so-subtle greater social ills associated with a permanent underclass. Minimum wage and other social programs are our pounds of flesh for penances of our social success. We have them and we operate with them as a way to avoid the obvious impossibilities of trying to survive in a society with a large permanent underclass...

Vitality... I thought they were those who could not take benefit. You go from declaring them infirmed and incapable of work to being healthy mobs who have the will to extract that pound of flesh lest we give up all of our flesh and our lives as well in their mob rule.

Amazingly sad.

Quote:
Technology will replace people and it should. The only way to increase wages is to increase the value of the employees (and not necessarily their output).

Stop... stop... you are killing me.

The only way to increase their wages is to increase their value... unless of course we demand the employer pay a minimum value regardless of whether the job can provide that.

Quote:
Productivity is a limited and ultimately ruinous perspective on this value. We are in an economic reality in which goods are produced by entities that do not need to get paid -- that economic value is added by machine.

Productivity is ruinous... wow. I don't think I've ever heard that expressed by anyone before. What else is ruinous... printing presses... the electric light bulb... the internet?

Quote:
Raising minimum wage to keep with inflation only accounts for the challenges these people face in their everyday lives. To ignore this fact is to be callously ignorant of how difficult it is to live at or below the *local* poverty line...

What raising minimum wage does is make it harder to gain employment experience and makes flexibility impossible. When the cost of hiring someone becomes high, you end up with fewer people employed and that means those employed must choose to be very skilled and also likely full-time workers.

I've seen plenty of day-workers hired here in California. I can tell you that it would be impossible for you to get any manual labor done from them for less than $10 an hour. To get paid the minimum wage you really must have absolutely minimal skills. When you raise the wage you raise the skills necessary and as such some people are permanently forced into unemployment since they can never grab onto the bottom rung and begin moving up.

Quote:
I said nothing of the sort. It does increase their worth. It increases their survivability, which in turn reduces, in essence, their drain on society.

I believe your platitudes have tied themselves into an incomprehensible knot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

when you've got a spare half hour ish...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...74362583451279

note; the video stutters a bit for a few minutes around 4 minutes in, but sorts itself out after a moment.

What do you financial guys think of this? Aren't we all fucked when interest debt is increasing exponentially?

Yes we are screwed but this is what happens when you let the government play with currency in the name of platitudes. It is the government that outlawed private money and the ownership of gold in the United States. How do you think those folks felt with FDR signed the gold confiscation act which forced them to sell their gold at $20 an ounce and then immediately dropped the value of the dollar to $35 per ounce. All those people holding all that paper lost an awful lot of value with the swipe of a pen. Worse still as you have noted, the paper pile has been growing every since.

Money does not have to be based on gold but whatever is used does have to retain and hold value without the government manipulating it. No one wants to work for an hour and then with the swipe of a pen, have the benefits of that work be reduced to that which now requires two or three hours to garner the same value.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #40 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Seems like you have been caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Not so much. You are arguing another point altogether and continue to do so below.

Quote:
First you complain that the minimum wage should be raised because it is for those who will never rise above it due to the fact they "cannot take benefit."

Then it is pointed out that the government provides aid and benefits for those who cannot rise above minimum wage due to inherit limitations. You then complain that not everyone will receive these benefits. Obviously they will not receive them due to the fact that they are NOT limited and thus will be able to rise above the bottom rung.

It isn't so easy, Nick... For whatever reason, people who actually try don't make that transition.

Quote:
So I've disproven your point completely.

What point was that? Was it that the minimum wage is needed for people unable to take benefit? You will see below that you merely skirt the issue by suggesting that, in your idealized happy land, people will improve themselves and move on. This doesn't mean that minimum wage isn't essential.

Quote:
Those who are disabled receive benefits.

Some do... Only those whose activities are not gainful. Where gainful has no bearing to livable.

Quote:
Thus the minimum wage is offset for them if they cannot rise above it. Those who are not disabled earn it until their skills, productivity and education improve and move on.

I am glad you believe that our nation is so upwardly mobile. You're wrong, but hey, what's a little fact like that going to do to you?

Quote:
You've argued minimum wage is essentially a government wealth transfer to those who cannot earn more.

I have argued nothing of the sort. Try again. Conservatives should lambaste actual wealth transfer not secondary mandated quality of life adjustments. Get back in your box and stop defending welfare.

Quote:
The government has plenty of other means of transferring wealth without the minimum wage. For those who are able to be gainfully employed, their choices become more and more limited due to the government limitation on wages which imposes a level of productivity and commitment higher than they may desire to seek. The choice now is often full-time or unemployment. Choice has been removed in the name of social justice. Irony yet again.

Wrong. The small small fraction of workers actually employed at minimum wage don't represent the vast majority of people employed. At worst, an increase in the minimum wage will be equivalent to a change in the cost of crude oil by I don't know... a dollar (over estimated, I am sure)? At this point, there are better fish to fry than the minimum wage... It is the least influential part of inflation that we have a grasp of.

Quote:
You've got two people cataloging your insults and dismissals posing as reasoning. The words irrelevant and bullshit do nothing to assert or support your claims. You sound like a bully who is getting more upset that we don't yield to your insults.

Oooh. Trumptman and sslarson are cataloging... cataloging what exactly, but you read it here, they are CATALOGING!!!!

Quote:
When a minimum wage raises the cost of living, and you then demand it rise again to meet the new cost which again rises because of the increased wage, it is a nightmarish version of circular reasoning posing as social justice.

Prove it. Show that the MINIMUM WAGE causes the natural increase in cost of living. I will wager you $50 donated to kiva that you will at best be able to find some vague correlation but will fail miserably at showing causation.

Quote:
This isn't something I've made up. We've had a minimum wage for 70 years and the purchasing power has not changed during that time.

That's because it is the minimum wage, nick... You see, right now the minimum wage isn't high enough to provide people cost of living in many places. It will be adjusted. People who were barely scrapping by will be able to afford living. The natural tendency for inflation to occur will once again pass the minimum wage by and we will have this argument again in 10 years... Inflation existed before the minimum wage, btw...

Quote:
trumpt goes crazy, mentioning france, communism, objectivism, god know what else... fun fun stuff i am sure but does anyone care

no.

Quote:
Productivity is ruinous... wow. I don't think I've ever heard that expressed by anyone before. What else is ruinous... printing presses... the electric light bulb... the internet?

read it again, joe.


Quote:
What raising minimum wage does is make it harder to gain employment experience and makes flexibility impossible. When the cost of hiring someone becomes high, you end up with fewer people employed and that means those employed must choose to be very skilled and also likely full-time workers.

the minimum wage doesn't affect cost of hiring as much as the cost of fuel. sorry. you are wrong. you would only be right if the minimum wage was far above the so called local equilibrium value for employment for highly skilled jobs. it isn't, it won't be. the new limit isn't being set willy nilly.

Quote:
I've seen plenty of day-workers hired here in California. I can tell you that it would be impossible for you to get any manual labor done from them for less than $10 an hour. To get paid the minimum wage you really must have absolutely minimal skills. When you raise the wage you raise the skills necessary and as such some people are permanently forced into unemployment since they can never grab onto the bottom rung and begin moving up.

great, nick. and i have seen a headless chicken earning it's owners countless thousands of dollars... no i haven't but it did occur. when will conservatives ever realize that their justification through singular experience doesn't actually make statistical sense?


Quote:
I believe your platitudes have tied themselves into an incomprehensible knot.

Finally, you admit to not being able to understand reality...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Minimum wage