2nd Worst Financial Crisis In History: Who gets credit?

There is no excuse, in the supposedly freest country in the world, for workers and employers not to be able to come to a mutually agreeable wage for a job without government interference.

Some jobs simply aren't meant to be lived off of. Flipping burgers and delivering newspapers for instance. Do we really see those as jobs that people should be making enough to own their own home? As I said, some jobs simply aren't going to be worth the minimum wage.

As I said, the lowest paid job should be a living wage and everything should go up from there. Why do you think the guy that delivers your newspaper or gives you your burger, shouldn't be able to put a roof over his head or food in his belly?

Well it's economically impossible, first and foremost, to give every single person a living wage. Secondly, not all jobs are created equal. Delivering newspapers and flipping burgers are not difficult jobs. They're jobs designed for those who need experience in the job market such as teenagers, or children in the case of newspapers, and those who have little education or skills. These jobs simply aren't worth a living wage.

When is the last time you saw a child delivering a newspaper? more than 70% of those making minimum wage are ADULTS, not teenagers and certainly not children.

Why is it economically impossible to provide a living wage to those on the lowest end of the pay scale when those on the highest end are making $billions?
 
☭proletarian☭;2060632 said:
If Obama really wanted to fix the economy, instead of figuring out how to spend more of our money, he'd work on raising the minimum wage, putting more money into the hands of the people that would spend it, increasing our economy. Of course that won't work until all the illegals are sent home.


Actually, he'd require imported goods to meet our environmental laws, crackdown on illegal immigration, invest in American manufacturing, and de-incentiveize outsourcing while cutting taxes to the middle class and slashing federal spending.

that too.
 
☭proletarian☭;2060652 said:
So some people don't deserve to get paid when they work?


Please enumerate the jobs you think should be reserved for slaves.


The claim was that a job should provide a "living wage", i.e. an income sufficient to support a certain lifestyle.

Not all jobs create enough economic benefit to justify that level of expense; they garner wages, albeit not enough to support a "living wage" lifestyle. Why does everything have to be A Career? Some jobs are part time or entry level stepping stones. There is a place in our society for such jobs.

In case you haven't been paying attention over the last 40 years, the middle part of the ladder is missing, making it impossible to use those jobs as a stepping stone to something better.
 
☭proletarian☭;2060680 said:
What level of expense are you talking about? a living wage is a wage that lets people live above poverty level. You've said that they don't deserve to be paid enough to live.
they garner wages, albeit not enough to support a "living wage" lifestyle.

A '"living wage"lifestyle'? :wtf: You mean shopping for food at the dollar store, living paycheck-to-paycheck and praying you don't get sick and lose a week of work and end up homeless? :cuckoo:


Not all jobs justify paying a wage that would fully support an individual or a family. Saying they "should" doesn't change the economic value of such jobs.

There are a lot of teenagers and part timers who want money for some other purpose than paying for all of their food, clothing, shelter, and other needs. As they are supported by someone else, they can do a job with lower economic value. Trying to twist those jobs into "living wage" ones just distorts the labor market, lowers the supply of starter jobs, and keeps young people from having the opportunity to develop good work habits.
 
In case you haven't been paying attention over the last 40 years, the middle part of the ladder is missing, making it impossible to use those jobs as a stepping stone to something better.


And what "middle ladder" would that be?

The missing link is getting an education or vocational training in a trade. Thinking that someone is going to go from working the drive thru window at Burger King to CEO is rather silly.
 
In case you haven't been paying attention over the last 40 years, the middle part of the ladder is missing, making it impossible to use those jobs as a stepping stone to something better.


And what "middle ladder" would that be?

The missing link is getting an education or vocational training in a trade. Thinking that someone is going to go from working the drive thru window at Burger King to CEO is rather silly.

The price of a college education has skyrocketed. Again, in 1968 a person making minimum wage could afford his own apartment, a car AND take college classes part time. Today they can't even afford an apartment.

In the 1960's the average CEO worked his way up in the company, his concern was for the good of the company. They made 50-57 times what their workers make. Today the average CEO is hired from outside of the company and their goal is to get as much money as possible and get out before the corporation falls apart. They don't care about the workers at all, and apparently, neither do you.
 
When is the last time you saw a child delivering a newspaper? more than 70% of those making minimum wage are ADULTS, not teenagers and certainly not children.

I don't see anybody delivering papers any more; the print industry is dying, having been largely replaced by the internet.

Why is it economically impossible to provide a living wage to those on the lowest end of the pay scale when those on the highest end are making $billions?

Many of those low paying jobs are in small businesses whose owners make far far less than $billions. All the minimum wage accomplishes is to raise costs to the point where those business owners cut back on employees.
 
When is the last time you saw a child delivering a newspaper? more than 70% of those making minimum wage are ADULTS, not teenagers and certainly not children.

I don't see anybody delivering papers any more; the print industry is dying, having been largely replaced by the internet.

Why is it economically impossible to provide a living wage to those on the lowest end of the pay scale when those on the highest end are making $billions?

Many of those low paying jobs are in small businesses whose owners make far far less than $billions. All the minimum wage accomplishes is to raise costs to the point where those business owners cut back on employees.

I've already shown that claim to be a myth. The last several times the minimum wage was increased there was no net loss of jobs. That's a FACT, Jack.

Myth #8: "The wage increase will lead to job loss."
FACT: Once again, the increase did not lead to job loss. In fact, the conclusion of The Sky Hasn't Fallen report ends with, "Given the statistically and economically insignificant (and mostly positive) employment effects of the change, it might be more useful if the next debate spends less time focusing on the cost of the increase and more on the benefits to low-income families." (The report was supported by grants from the Rockefeller, and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundations and the US Department of Labor.)
 
The price of a college education has skyrocketed. Again, in 1968 a person making minimum wage could afford his own apartment, a car AND take college classes part time. Today they can't even afford an apartment.

In the 1960's the average CEO worked his way up in the company, his concern was for the good of the company. They made 50-57 times what their workers make. Today the average CEO is hired from outside of the company and their goal is to get as much money as possible and get out before the corporation falls apart. They don't care about the workers at all, and apparently, neither do you.

You know nothing about me in real life - or about whom I care.

If you want to pin blame on the causes of the current environment:

Why does college cost so much? Academic inflation is even worse than health care, but for a similar cause - interference by the government. All that easy college loan money backed by the feds has accomplished is to make an education far more expensive.

As for the Average CEO, there is a big difference in pay for the CEOs at mega corporations vs. those who run small and mediums businesses. Thank the government for contributing to the distortion in pay for the mega corp CEOs - both due to tax policy that shifted comp to stock options and the cronyism which funnels taxpayer money into these companies in exchange for campaign donations.

I'd rather not begrudge anyone the wages they negotiate and earn, including those at the very top and very bottom of the income scales. The operative word being EARNED.
 
Here's the real life impact of your utopian equal outcome viewpoint:

Yesterday's September labor market report was lousy by any measure, with 263,000 lost jobs and the jobless rate climbing to 9.8%. But for one group of Americans it was especially awful: the least skilled, especially young workers. Washington will deny the reality, and the media won't make the connection, but one reason for these job losses is the rising minimum wage.

Earlier this year, economist David Neumark of the University of California, Irvine, wrote on these pages that the 70-cent-an-hour increase in the minimum wage would cost some 300,000 jobs. Sure enough, the mandated increase to $7.25 took effect in July, and right on cue the August and September jobless numbers confirm the rapid disappearance of jobs for teenagers.

The September teen unemployment rate hit 25.9%, the highest rate since World War II and up from 23.8% in July. Some 330,000 teen jobs have vanished in two months. Hardest hit of all: black male teens, whose unemployment rate shot up to a catastrophic 50.4%. It was merely a terrible 39.2% in July
....


Minimum Wage Increase Leads to Higher Teen Unemployment Rate - WSJ.com
 
The price of a college education has skyrocketed. Again, in 1968 a person making minimum wage could afford his own apartment, a car AND take college classes part time. Today they can't even afford an apartment.

In the 1960's the average CEO worked his way up in the company, his concern was for the good of the company. They made 50-57 times what their workers make. Today the average CEO is hired from outside of the company and their goal is to get as much money as possible and get out before the corporation falls apart. They don't care about the workers at all, and apparently, neither do you.

You know nothing about me in real life - or about whom I care.

If you want to pin blame on the causes of the current environment:

Why does college cost so much? Academic inflation is even worse than health care, but for a similar cause - interference by the government. All that easy college loan money backed by the feds has accomplished is to make an education far more expensive.

As for the Average CEO, there is a big difference in pay for the CEOs at mega corporations vs. those who run small and mediums businesses. Thank the government for contributing to the distortion in pay for the mega corp CEOs - both due to tax policy that shifted comp to stock options and the cronyism which funnels taxpayer money into these companies in exchange for campaign donations.

I'd rather not begrudge anyone the wages they negotiate and earn, including those at the very top and very bottom of the income scales. The operative word being EARNED.

so you believe that a ceo "earns" 500 to 1000 times what their employee earns while a Janitor doesn't even "earn" minimum wage?

Very few people in this world actually make what they "EARN".
 
seems the real debate is weather the 'market' is self regulating for the populace's benefit, or for the chosen few at the top.

one would think the disparity leading into another gilded age here would be indicative enough.....~S~
 
Last edited:
We’ve come through the second-worst financial crisis in the history of the world bruised and shocked, but on the road to recovery. Agree?

Who gets the credit for averting complete disaster, the invisible hand or Obama? If not Obama, who?

Unemployment is high, there is a sense of bewilderment clouding the minds of the public, but all signs say we are out of the wood and on the road to recovery. Are you better off now than where only a year ago, you thought you'd be?

Credit has to go to somebody. Why haven't Obama and the Democrats formulated a message around this?

some things need repeating
 
We’ve come through the second-worst financial crisis in the history of the world bruised and shocked, but on the road to recovery. Agree?

Who gets the credit for averting complete disaster, the invisible hand or Obama? If not Obama, who?

Unemployment is high, there is a sense of bewilderment clouding the minds of the public, but all signs say we are out of the wood and on the road to recovery. Are you better off now than where only a year ago, you thought you'd be?

Credit has to go to somebody. Why haven't Obama and the Democrats formulated a message around this?

some things need repeating


Agreed.


Like the entire works of Ludwig von Mises
 
☭proletarian☭;2062558 said:
We’ve come through the second-worst financial crisis in the history of the world bruised and shocked, but on the road to recovery. Agree?

Who gets the credit for averting complete disaster, the invisible hand or Obama? If not Obama, who?

Unemployment is high, there is a sense of bewilderment clouding the minds of the public, but all signs say we are out of the wood and on the road to recovery. Are you better off now than where only a year ago, you thought you'd be?

Credit has to go to somebody. Why haven't Obama and the Democrats formulated a message around this?

some things need repeating


Agreed.


Like the entire works of Ludwig von Mises

Ludwig von Mises would oppose a minimum wage.
 
Is that Donald Ducks rich uncle?

piaf.JPG
 

Forum List

Back
Top