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.
User avatar
Trephining
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Trephining »

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:First, definitely when it comes to the minimum wage, which should be higher, not lower. For that owner to take one penny and still expect we taxpayers to foot the bill of supporting his workers is wrong. If he cannot pay them a decent wage, then he needs to find another business. Its not my job to use my paycheck to subsidize his workers. That's his job, a cost of his doing business.


First of all, I agree with your stance on the minimum wage. However...do you tip? If you do, you're using your paycheck to subsidize their workers.
No, I am using my paycheck to pay for service that I, myself, receive. And, I do so voluntarily. This is really just a commission-based type of pay system, not a base wage issue.


It is interesting that you point out how when you tip, you do so voluntarily. Then you turn around and expect employers to pay more than they would otherwise do so voluntarily.

Funny how that works, eh? When it is your own money, you do things voluntarily and view that as good. But when you are telling other people how to spend their money, you don't value them being able to voluntarily decide things.
User avatar
Trephining
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Trephining »

thegreekdog wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:In all fairness, I do not believe I should be telling a business owner their business, but the Rich guy at the top of the pyramid needs to start considering a smaller profit margin. Given this will never happen, I only want to state that it seems that the corporate world is reaching their peak profit point, where-in labor costs stay flat or even decrease, health are cost stay flat or decrease, machine and technological efficiency have been squeezed as hard as they can, and the profits just keep getting bigger. and the only money the corporates put into the company is that which cuts costs, while doubly the workers pick up the slack to make the profits even bigger.


I would agree, except that companies can charge more for products and services. So there is an easy way out.


Your post makes you appear pretty clueless.

If a person running a business could easily raise prices by as much as it costs to pay extra wages, then don't you think they would do so even without the wages going up? If not, why not?

Next, pay attention to what you just said and think an extra step. If the business owner can just increase prices, then what happens? All those employees that just had wage increases get a little more money, but the prices they pay went up too, so what is the point of increasing the wage if all it does is result in higher prices?
User avatar
thegreekdog
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Gender: Male
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by thegreekdog »

Trephining wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:In all fairness, I do not believe I should be telling a business owner their business, but the Rich guy at the top of the pyramid needs to start considering a smaller profit margin. Given this will never happen, I only want to state that it seems that the corporate world is reaching their peak profit point, where-in labor costs stay flat or even decrease, health are cost stay flat or decrease, machine and technological efficiency have been squeezed as hard as they can, and the profits just keep getting bigger. and the only money the corporates put into the company is that which cuts costs, while doubly the workers pick up the slack to make the profits even bigger.


I would agree, except that companies can charge more for products and services. So there is an easy way out.


Your post makes you appear pretty clueless.

If a person running a business could easily raise prices by as much as it costs to pay extra wages, then don't you think they would do so even without the wages going up? If not, why not?

Next, pay attention to what you just said and think an extra step. If the business owner can just increase prices, then what happens? All those employees that just had wage increases get a little more money, but the prices they pay went up too, so what is the point of increasing the wage if all it does is result in higher prices?


Exactly. "Here, you get a $5 raise, but I'm raising the price of my product $5 too. That way, I can still make my millions every year. Everyone's happy."

Or, I'm just clueless.
Image
User avatar
Trephining
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Trephining »

Skittles! wrote:You're becoming more of a fucking idiot each post, Bebub.


Based on which post of his? The one about raising minimum wage to $25/hr?

If so, then you are the idiot. You don't have to take the idea to $25/hr to illustrate bedub's point.

Minimum wage is $7.25. Some on here argue it should be higher. Is $7.50 good? No? How about $8? No? How about $9.35? What is the right number? And who posesses the wisdom to determine that number?
User avatar
Night Strike
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Night Strike »

BigBallinStalin wrote:So you not getting a raise has everything to do with expected increases in minimum wage and nothing to do with your particular line of work, the boss, "internal politics," or your performance, or for that matter any other factor?


Considering I had high reviews every 3 months and did not get a raise every other review (as was the policy) while the minimum wage was increasing in that time, then yes, those at the very least correlate if it's not causation.
Image
User avatar
Trephining
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Trephining »

thegreekdog wrote:
Trephining wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:I would agree, except that companies can charge more for products and services. So there is an easy way out.


Your post makes you appear pretty clueless.

If a person running a business could easily raise prices by as much as it costs to pay extra wages, then don't you think they would do so even without the wages going up? If not, why not?

Next, pay attention to what you just said and think an extra step. If the business owner can just increase prices, then what happens? All those employees that just had wage increases get a little more money, but the prices they pay went up too, so what is the point of increasing the wage if all it does is result in higher prices?


Exactly. "Here, you get a $5 raise, but I'm raising the price of my product $5 too. That way, I can still make my millions every year. Everyone's happy."

Or, I'm just clueless.


Since you didn't even come close to answering the question in my post, yes, you are clueless on this.
User avatar
Skittles!
Posts: 14575
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:18 am
Gender: Male

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Skittles! »

Trephining wrote:
Skittles! wrote:You're becoming more of a fucking idiot each post, Bebub.


Based on which post of his? The one about raising minimum wage to $25/hr?

If so, then you are the idiot. You don't have to take the idea to $25/hr to illustrate bedub's point.

Minimum wage is $7.25. Some on here argue it should be higher. Is $7.50 good? No? How about $8? No? How about $9.35? What is the right number? And who posesses the wisdom to determine that number?

No, I mean the OP. The one where he says you should abolish the minimum wage, because it's 'taking your jobs to third world countries'.
KraphtOne wrote:when you sign up a new account one of the check boxes should be "do you want to foe colton24 (it is highly recommended) "
72o
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:04 am
Gender: Male

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by 72o »

I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.

Workers should be paid whatever they are worth. If they are worth 2 cents an hour, because either they suck at their job, or their efforts result in very low value added to the product or service they are contributing to, then they should be paid 2 cents. It's basic economics.

If the worker feels he is worth a million dollars a year, he has the right to refuse any job that doesn't pay that. So should the employer have the right to refuse to pay a million dollars a year if that doesn't make good business sense.

Arbitrarily mandating that workers should be paid X, no matter what value they add to the product or service, guarantees inflation and does nothing positive for the economy.
Image
User avatar
thegreekdog
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Gender: Male
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by thegreekdog »

Trephining wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
Trephining wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:I would agree, except that companies can charge more for products and services. So there is an easy way out.


Your post makes you appear pretty clueless.

If a person running a business could easily raise prices by as much as it costs to pay extra wages, then don't you think they would do so even without the wages going up? If not, why not?

Next, pay attention to what you just said and think an extra step. If the business owner can just increase prices, then what happens? All those employees that just had wage increases get a little more money, but the prices they pay went up too, so what is the point of increasing the wage if all it does is result in higher prices?


Exactly. "Here, you get a $5 raise, but I'm raising the price of my product $5 too. That way, I can still make my millions every year. Everyone's happy."

Or, I'm just clueless.


Since you didn't even come close to answering the question in my post, yes, you are clueless on this.


I think I did answer your questions. If you want, I can answer them more clearly.

If a person running a business could easily raise prices by as much as it costs to pay extra wages, then don't you think they would do so even without the wages going up? If not, why not?


Yes I do. The only impediment to increasing the prices for the particular product is the demand for the particular product. If a company wants to make more money it can do any number of things, including, but not limited to, raising prices. Among other things it could do without lowering the number of products it puts in the market - shipping jobs overseas, buying crappier (that's a technical term) supplies, paying its employees less, or paying the owners less.

All those employees that just had wage increases get a little more money, but the prices they pay went up too, so what is the point of increasing the wage if all it does is result in higher prices?


Exactly. What is the point indeed? Please see my last post. Because, really, and let's be honest here, this is what actually happens in real life. From a simple point of view (clueless maybe) - An increase in wages is demanded. The company either raises prices (which negates the increase in wages) or lowers the owners' salaries. How many companies do the latter? I don't know many.
Image
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by PLAYER57832 »

Night Strike wrote:
It's not best for the nation to keep raising the minimum wage. Keiths provided a great example of why this is not so. Most adults don't work for minimum wage, and if they do, it's THEIR responsibility to improve themselves to get a higher paying job. And raising the minimum wage inherently hurts the people who were already getting paid above the old minimum wage.

I realize this is a traditional line of economic thought. I also realize it is now being roundly decried as just plain wrong.
Night Strike wrote:I stopped getting raises at work because the rise in minimum wage eclipsed what I was getting paid, so although I had done exceptional work for nearly 2 years, I was forced to get paid the same amount as a starting employee. It's a continuous circle that the public use to harm the economy: people raise minimum wage, prices have to go up to pay those wages, people claim wages have to go up more to pay for those prices. It's a stupid cycle that kills our economy.

Your employer taking advantage of you and your willingness to keep working there and not go out and as YOU said, improve yourself to get a higher wage, is not to be blamed on a rise in the minimum wage. Too many employers think that workers are superfolous. Too many employers fail to understand that a poor manager is the number one factor in poor performance and productivity, not "lazy workers". Lazy workers absolutely exist, but a good manager can motivate the overwhelming majority. A poor manager can only criticize everyone around and sees no problem in cutting wages. Sure, they may send out nice notices geared to get a their employees to go out and vote in ways that will benefit the employer, not themselves.

It is classic manipulation. Turn employees focus on the "other", and not toward the REAL causes.. namely folks at the top who take profit without reinvesting, managers who are incompetent (poor people managers, at any rate), etc.

The REAL truth is that most people in this country really ARE hard-working, really ARE honest. But, I don't care who you are. It takes a lot out of a person to know that they have to work over 40 hours a week to find that they STILL cannot pay basic bills, but the managers have no problem taking vacations to Bermuda, sending THEIR kids to private schools and colleges and taking 2 hour lunch breaks. This is not about a bit more education. It is certainly not about people who are lazy. Its about going from a society where work really mattered, where a person producing something .. be it a product OR a service.. meant something.

Today, all that matters is stock portfolios. A manager can be an absolute jerk, can make the company profitable SOLELY by cutting corners, forcing people to work 2-3 jobs at once, etc.. he gets a nice bonus and the workers are lucky if they aren't laid off. He gets away with it because so many jobs are moving overseas, moved by other people who could care less about workers or real production, they again just want high stock prices.

THAT is the real cycle AND, you see the result all around us. We have an economy built upon the utterly false idea of unlimited growth. Growth works for a while. It is wonderful while it does, but for the LONG term you have to look at sustainability. There is nothing at all about our economy that is sustainable, not even agriculture. And the sad part is too many people like you would rather read esoteric economics texts that have little bearing on real life, often don't even realize how limited they are, instead of looking around and just plain seeing what is in front of you.

What is around us is agricultural land that is beind destroyed in various ways, timber that is being harvested in completely unsustainable ways, companies that are built on the idea of "planned obscelescence" to make a profit, and an unemployment rate that, bad as it is, masks many, many, many people such as myself who are either underemployed or who have just left the job market entirely. What we have is a house of cards that is falling.

It has almost nothing to do with "entitlements" and the other garbage the right wing throws out. Those are merely symptoms of the REAL problem. The real problem is that our nation has revelled in a boom and bust economy, revelled in the boom and forgotten that a "bust" pretty much always follows. The real problem is that our nation has turned it back on, in many ways never bothered to embrace, sustainability, becuase we were founded on massive growth and exploitation of resources, both our own and those of other, third world countries.

Know what? Many of those now third world countries were themselves once mighty and great nations. Then too many people at the top got greedy and they fell. We ignore that to our perile.
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by PLAYER57832 »

Trephining wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:First, definitely when it comes to the minimum wage, which should be higher, not lower. For that owner to take one penny and still expect we taxpayers to foot the bill of supporting his workers is wrong. If he cannot pay them a decent wage, then he needs to find another business. Its not my job to use my paycheck to subsidize his workers. That's his job, a cost of his doing business.


First of all, I agree with your stance on the minimum wage. However...do you tip? If you do, you're using your paycheck to subsidize their workers.
No, I am using my paycheck to pay for service that I, myself, receive. And, I do so voluntarily. This is really just a commission-based type of pay system, not a base wage issue.


It is interesting that you point out how when you tip, you do so voluntarily. Then you turn around and expect employers to pay more than they would otherwise do so voluntarily.

Note the difference. I expect employers to pay for services they themselves recieve. Employers who decide to pay less than a living wage are asking the rest of us to support their private business. That's a pretty big difference.
Trephining wrote:Funny how that works, eh? When it is your own money, you do things voluntarily and view that as good. But when you are telling other people how to spend their money, you don't value them being able to voluntarily decide things.

You are wrong. The difference is not who is paying, the difference is who is benefitting. I benefit from a decent waitress, therefore it is correct that I pay. The employer wants to benefit from decent work, but then pay only the barest minimum for that work. The claim is ALWAYS that "we cannot afford to pay more". Well, mostly, that's pure baloney. Sure, they cannot "afford it", because first they have to take hefty bonuses and executive salaries, plus stock dividends, etc. oh, and let's not forget the new office decor, fancy lunches and other perks... etc, etc. etc. In the old days, most good managers knew that you paid your employees FIRST, then you took a profit. This has been turned on its head with stocks.

As for the minimum. I don't care what the job -- be it waitressing or anything else, there is a basic amount of money required to pay bills. Anyone who thinks its OK to hire someone to work fulltime and NOT pay them enough to live is being an exploiter. Pure and simple. If you work decently, you deserve to eat and have a roof over your head. You particularly deserve those things BEFORE your bosses get to take their vacations in Bermuda. The exceptions are few.. when the boss is basically starving himself (wartime, etc.). Even then, the boss makes sure his employees are doing at least as well as he.

You assume, incorrectly, that I have never been a boss or company owner. I was not a good one, and admit that. My personal people skills are not great (except for young kids.. they don't lie or play the same mind games). Unlike many, though, I acknowledge and admit that.
User avatar
keiths31
Posts: 2202
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by keiths31 »

What gets me in this discussion is the assumption that employers "make millions". Minimum wage going up, in my case to $10.2/hr, really hurts small business owners. Most "million dollar" companies don't employ minimum wage workers. It's the independent business owners that are getting pinched.
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by PLAYER57832 »

keiths31 wrote:What gets me in this discussion is the assumption that employers "make millions". Minimum wage going up, in my case to $10.2/hr, really hurts small business owners. Most "million dollar" companies don't employ minimum wage workers. It's the independent business owners that are getting pinched.

I don't believe I said anything about millions, except when talking specifically about CEOs & executives, some stockholders of major corporations. And most independent business owners I know, except those who hire kids, pay above minimum wage. Sometimes not much above, but they do pay above it. You want quality work, you pay for quality. This is, ironically enough, one of the reasons why small businesses have a hard time being profitable, becuase they cannot just pay minimum wage and still get a decent worker. Many corporations, to contrast, really don't care. Do you think Walmart really and truly cares an iota about its stockers? If you look at the number of lawsuits... er, make that setttled claims, many surrounded by privacy agreements (and therefore hard to find information on), well.. the evidence speaks for itself.

Oh, and I don't know what the exchange rate is right now, but our minimum wage is, I believe $7.35. Furthermore, none of you have to buy your own healthcare. You do tend to have higher heating costs, but also tend to have better education and a few other benefits.
User avatar
Woodruff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Woodruff »

Trephining wrote:
Skittles! wrote:You're becoming more of a fucking idiot each post, Bebub.


Based on which post of his? The one about raising minimum wage to $25/hr?
If so, then you are the idiot. You don't have to take the idea to $25/hr to illustrate bedub's point.
Minimum wage is $7.25. Some on here argue it should be higher. Is $7.50 good? No? How about $8? No? How about $9.35? What is the right number? And who posesses the wisdom to determine that number?


Because arguing from extremes never makes someone look like a fucking idiot...
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Woodruff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Woodruff »

72o wrote:I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.


For that matter, paying your employees at all is effectively wealth distribution. Bring back slavery!

(See how that's done?)
Last edited by Woodruff on Wed May 05, 2010 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by PLAYER57832 »

Night Strike wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:So you not getting a raise has everything to do with expected increases in minimum wage and nothing to do with your particular line of work, the boss, "internal politics," or your performance, or for that matter any other factor?


Considering I had high reviews every 3 months and did not get a raise every other review (as was the policy) while the minimum wage was increasing in that time, then yes, those at the very least correlate if it's not causation.

But you should know that correlation is absolutely not the same as causation.
(which is the point of the old joke about beds being the most dangerous places...)
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by PLAYER57832 »

72o wrote:I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.

It is wealth distribution at the most minimum level. Just like rules that you don't pollute, that you tell the truth about your products, and so forth are "interfering with capitolism". True in the rawest sense, but not in the sensible sense. The minimum wage is so low right now that a person cannot support themselves unless they have help. That's exploitation. Beyond that minimum, I do agree.

72o wrote:Workers should be paid whatever they are worth. If they are worth 2 cents an hour, because either they suck at their job, or their efforts result in very low value added to the product or service they are contributing to, then they should be paid 2 cents. It's basic economics.

Actually, most workers would quite agree. The problem is that most managers feel that there needs to be such a huge gap between what they are paid and employees are paid, AND feel its "perfectly OK" to take out so many expenses before considering anything profit, that the point is effectively mute for most companies.

Companies that really DO use that model (many Japanese companies, for example) do quite well.

72o wrote:If the worker feels he is worth a million dollars a year, he has the right to refuse any job that doesn't pay that. So should the employer have the right to refuse to pay a million dollars a year if that doesn't make good business sense.

Except most workers just don't have that luxury. People need to eat and pay bills, so they take a job that pays too little, just to get by. And, the company never gets the full benefit of their attitude or productivity.

It has become far too fashionable to blame workers for a companies' failure. In truth, most people DO work very hard and well. But, it is pretty hard to keep a decent attitude when everyone around you, even the politicians really don't give a hoot about you, except in rhetoric.
72o wrote:Arbitrarily mandating that workers should be paid X, no matter what value they add to the product or service, guarantees inflation and does nothing positive for the economy.

No, it means that a minimum level is set to avoid employers taking complete advantage of very desperate workers. The minimum wage, right now, is actually below that level. Almost no one survives on minimum wage without either outside help or living in ways that most people would not consider "decent living".
User avatar
keiths31
Posts: 2202
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by keiths31 »

PLAYER57832 wrote:
keiths31 wrote:What gets me in this discussion is the assumption that employers "make millions". Minimum wage going up, in my case to $10.2/hr, really hurts small business owners. Most "million dollar" companies don't employ minimum wage workers. It's the independent business owners that are getting pinched.

I don't believe I said anything about millions, except when talking specifically about CEOs & executives, some stockholders of major corporations. And most independent business owners I know, except those who hire kids, pay above minimum wage. Sometimes not much above, but they do pay above it. You want quality work, you pay for quality. This is, ironically enough, one of the reasons why small businesses have a hard time being profitable, becuase they cannot just pay minimum wage and still get a decent worker. Many corporations, to contrast, really don't care. Do you think Walmart really and truly cares an iota about its stockers? If you look at the number of lawsuits... er, make that setttled claims, many surrounded by privacy agreements (and therefore hard to find information on), well.. the evidence speaks for itself.

Oh, and I don't know what the exchange rate is right now, but our minimum wage is, I believe $7.35. Furthermore, none of you have to buy your own healthcare. You do tend to have higher heating costs, but also tend to have better education and a few other benefits.


I never quoted you or said you said that. It was in the thread, posted by someone else. I just made note of it.
You are wrong about us not paying health care. In Ontario there is a Employee Health Tax that employees pay to help subsidize health care costs, pretty much like a monthly premium based on your income. As a business owner I pay this tax as well. The government is sneaky up here in that the premiums you pay down in the USA are not disguised as employee tax.
The exchange rate right now is almost at par. So you $7.35/hr where you are is still almost $3 less than what I have to pay my employees...minimum.
Wal-Mart? I am tired of that example. If Wal-Mart is such a bad place to work...don't apply there. I have busted my ass off the last 14 years to become a business owner. I treat my staff very well and I have a very low turnover rate. I pay them what they are worth...but when minimum wage goes up $0.75 a year for four years it is hard to compensate the employees they way they should be because the Province is doing it for me.
Minimum wage went up $3.00 the last four years...do you think the rate of inflation went up in relation? No. My employee costs went up 41.4% in the last four years...inflation is a low single digit number. If they tied minimum wage increases with the rate of inflation it would be easier to handle as my sales would reflect that.
72o
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:04 am
Gender: Male

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by 72o »

PLAYER57832 wrote:No, it means that a minimum level is set to avoid employers taking complete advantage of very desperate workers.


If the market were left alone, employers would not be able to "take advantage of very desperate workers". They would pay what the workers are worth. If they didn't, the workers would go elsewhere. If they fancy staying in business, and they need labor to do that, they'll have to pony up the cash to pay what it costs to produce their product or service.

How is this hard to understand?

PLAYER57832 wrote:The minimum wage, right now, is actually below that level. Almost no one survives on minimum wage without either outside help or living in ways that most people would not consider "decent living".


Just because you don't consider 20 grand a year to be a "decent living" doesn't mean the government should intervene and play Robin Hood. Let workers make their own decisions about what they consider to be reasonable wages, and what a "decent living" is to them.
Image
User avatar
Trephining
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Trephining »

Woodruff wrote:
72o wrote:I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.


For that matter, paying your employees at all is effectively wealth distribution. Bring back slavery!

(See how that's done?)


You're making no sense. A minimum wage law is something forces economic activity to behave in ways that are contrary to what voluntary participants would do. Paying people is not.
User avatar
Trephining
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by Trephining »

A person making minimum wage in the US can live at a standard far higher than 90% of the world's people.
spurgistan
Posts: 1868
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:30 pm

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by spurgistan »

Well, not at all, but even if that were true, how much better do their bosses live?
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.


Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
72o
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:04 am
Gender: Male

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by 72o »

Trephining wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
72o wrote:I understand this may be hard to understand for the Communists at heart, but the minimum wage is effectively wealth distribution.


For that matter, paying your employees at all is effectively wealth distribution. Bring back slavery!

(See how that's done?)


You're making no sense. A minimum wage law is something forces economic activity to behave in ways that are contrary to what voluntary participants would do. Paying people is not.


He's arguing the semantics. Yes, all transactions are wealth distribution. I meant "Redistribution of Wealth", I guess that's the generally accepted softer term for socialism.
Image
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by PLAYER57832 »

72o wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:No, it means that a minimum level is set to avoid employers taking complete advantage of very desperate workers.


If the market were left alone, employers would not be able to "take advantage of very desperate workers". They would pay what the workers are worth. If they didn't, the workers would go elsewhere. If they fancy staying in business, and they need labor to do that, they'll have to pony up the cash to pay what it costs to produce their product or service.

How is this hard to understand?

Becuase its wrong, and history shows it.
Remember the turn of the century, the roaring 20's.... there was very good reason why unions arose, why we have mandated safety regulations, etc.

Wanting to make a profit doesn't make you greedy. Being greedy does not even necessarily make you "evil" (as some like to throw out), but there are just too many who fill both.. and the weatlhier someone is, the more removed they often become from what things are truly like for average workers.

The is why that new show here, where the bosses pretend to be just another worker, is so popular. And, if you watch it, you will begin to see a big part of what I mean. You see case after case of managers saying "hey, I just did not know..." Well, workers know. But workers have to feed their families.

PLAYER57832 wrote:The minimum wage, right now, is actually below that level. Almost no one survives on minimum wage without either outside help or living in ways that most people would not consider "decent living".


Just because you don't consider 20 grand a year to be a "decent living" doesn't mean the government should intervene and play Robin Hood. Let workers make their own decisions about what they consider to be reasonable wages, and what a "decent living" is to them.[/quote]
Actually, it does. Becuase its not just that I don't happen to think $20,000 is a decent living, its that anyone paid that low, particularly with kids, cannot rent an apartment, so they have to get a government subsidy. They cannot buy food (and many are not allowed to or just cannot grow it for may reasons), and cannot provide reasonable health care.

Like I said above, when you make comments like that, you are saying there is no problem with people working 40 hours and living on the street. Well, most of us do see a problem with that. Unless that employer is also living on the street, it is just plain exploitation.
72o
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:04 am
Gender: Male

Re: Minimum Wage

Post by 72o »

spurgistan wrote:Well, not at all, but even if that were true, how much better do their bosses live?


God, this is maddening.

This is not about how much your fucking boss makes. This is about you, and every other worker in this country, working for a wage they feel is compensatory for the work that they perform. If you think you should make more, go look for another job, and quit your current one. It's that fucking simple. Either you are correct, and you will find a job that pays you what you believe to be the correct amount, or you are wrong, and potential employers will not find the value in you that you see in yourself.

If Joe Bob decides he should make 9 bucks an hour because he quit jerking off in the mayonnaise at the burger joint he works at, he should be able to find out for himself. The government should not have to intervene to force the burger joint to pay Joe Bob $9 an hour.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Acceptable Content”