Ideas for fixing minimum wage.

[Toronado3800]

The obvious fix is to get rid of the minimum wage altogether. Individuals should be free to set the the price for their labor.

Ideally yes.

But we don't live in that ideal world where socialism or capitalism really work in their pure form. Too much of a minimum wage and people get lazy. None and you have this race to the bottom and the power of money takes over.

So I argue about things in the middle.

This seems to be the history of how "high" the minimum wage is. Them peaks and valleys are stupid and just make busy work for politicians.

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia

So what you are promoting is a corrupt distortion of natural market forces.

Capitalism and Socialism are not morally equivalent systems. The former is based on Freedom. The Latter is based on Authoritarian Slavery. Compromising by mixing the two doesn't improve natural markets. In reality, it just makes more poor people.

The last three centuries are what you get from Capitalism; the prior periods are what you get under authoritarian regimes.

View attachment 228352

Sometimes I think on here we find battles where they are not necessary. I'm not advocating we return to a system where some king's whim makes right or whatever.

Are you arguing for lawless capitalism where the ability to pay folks makes might?

What you are advocating for is the socialist bureaucrat's whim, which is even worse than the king's. At least with a King, there is one throat to cut. Anonymous bureaucrats are never held accountable and do a great deal of damage.

What I'm advocating for is for our elected representatives or us to give some degree of automation to the system erstwhile a group of really pro minimum wage folks might be in office in a decade and really jack it up. Or the other way.

 

[Oddball]

Of course someone will. Its a fallacy though that we should not try. Certainly something on my 98 Lincoln is going to go and break in the near future. Doesn't mean I shouldn't do a little maintenance today.

Also I would argue by tying it to CPI (or whatever) we would be making it LESS necessary for folks to have to go in and readjust it every so often.

Ah, the old fallacy of "we have to try something"....The unspoken "at gunpoint if necessary" comes next when you're talking about central economic planning.

Your '98 Lincoln is a mechanical contraption that can be properly quantified and repaired....Economic conditions aren't as easily contained and malleable, as you're trying to force the behavior of millions of subjective and fickle people.

 

[boedicca]

The obvious fix is to get rid of the minimum wage altogether. Individuals should be free to set the the price for their labor.

Ideally yes.

But we don't live in that ideal world where socialism or capitalism really work in their pure form. Too much of a minimum wage and people get lazy. None and you have this race to the bottom and the power of money takes over.

So I argue about things in the middle.

This seems to be the history of how "high" the minimum wage is. Them peaks and valleys are stupid and just make busy work for politicians.

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia

So what you are promoting is a corrupt distortion of natural market forces.

Capitalism and Socialism are not morally equivalent systems. The former is based on Freedom. The Latter is based on Authoritarian Slavery. Compromising by mixing the two doesn't improve natural markets. In reality, it just makes more poor people.

The last three centuries are what you get from Capitalism; the prior periods are what you get under authoritarian regimes.

View attachment 228352

Sometimes I think on here we find battles where they are not necessary. I'm not advocating we return to a system where some king's whim makes right or whatever.

Are you arguing for lawless capitalism where the ability to pay folks makes might?

What you are advocating for is the socialist bureaucrat's whim, which is even worse than the king's. At least with a King, there is one throat to cut. Anonymous bureaucrats are never held accountable and do a great deal of damage.

What I'm advocating for is for our elected representatives or us to give some degree of automation to the system erstwhile a group of really pro minimum wage folks might be in office in a decade and really jack it up. Or the other way.

Sorry, bub. I don't trust the government to decide anything by algorithm driven automation.

 

[Toronado3800]

Ideally yes.

But we don't live in that ideal world where socialism or capitalism really work in their pure form. Too much of a minimum wage and people get lazy. None and you have this race to the bottom and the power of money takes over.

So I argue about things in the middle.

This seems to be the history of how "high" the minimum wage is. Them peaks and valleys are stupid and just make busy work for politicians.

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia

So what you are promoting is a corrupt distortion of natural market forces.

Capitalism and Socialism are not morally equivalent systems. The former is based on Freedom. The Latter is based on Authoritarian Slavery. Compromising by mixing the two doesn't improve natural markets. In reality, it just makes more poor people.

The last three centuries are what you get from Capitalism; the prior periods are what you get under authoritarian regimes.

View attachment 228352

Sometimes I think on here we find battles where they are not necessary. I'm not advocating we return to a system where some king's whim makes right or whatever.

Are you arguing for lawless capitalism where the ability to pay folks makes might?

What you are advocating for is the socialist bureaucrat's whim, which is even worse than the king's. At least with a King, there is one throat to cut. Anonymous bureaucrats are never held accountable and do a great deal of damage.

What I'm advocating for is for our elected representatives or us to give some degree of automation to the system erstwhile a group of really pro minimum wage folks might be in office in a decade and really jack it up. Or the other way.

Sorry, bub. I don't trust the government to decide anything by algorithm driven automation.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying, "Reagan sucked, America sucks. We haven't figured out the best system on the planet and just need to tweak it here and there to make it better."

 

[Oddball]

Because you don't want lawless capitalism? You want regulated capitalism and we are just disagreeing on particulars of those regulations?

Again, "lawless capitalism" is a throwaway buzz phrase of the economic social engineer....Market capitalism (real laissez-faire, not the crony mercantilism that passes for "capitalism" of today) is a force of nature that is entirely beyond the grasp of mere political tinkerers....It is nothing more than human vanity that makes anyone think that they can fiddle over at one end, without having unforeseeable , and often deleterious, consequences in other areas.

 

[Toronado3800]

Because you don't want lawless capitalism? You want regulated capitalism and we are just disagreeing on particulars of those regulations?

Again, "lawless capitalism" is a throwaway buzz phrase of the economic social engineer....Market capitalism (real laissez-faire, not the crony mercantilism that passes for "capitalism" of today) is a force of nature that is entirely beyond the grasp of mere political tinkerers....It is nothing more than human vanity that makes anyone think that they can fiddle over at one end, without having unforeseeable , and often deleterious, consequences in other areas.

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

 

[Oddball]

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

 

[Toronado3800]

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

 

[boedicca]

So what you are promoting is a corrupt distortion of natural market forces.

Capitalism and Socialism are not morally equivalent systems. The former is based on Freedom. The Latter is based on Authoritarian Slavery. Compromising by mixing the two doesn't improve natural markets. In reality, it just makes more poor people.

The last three centuries are what you get from Capitalism; the prior periods are what you get under authoritarian regimes.

View attachment 228352

Sometimes I think on here we find battles where they are not necessary. I'm not advocating we return to a system where some king's whim makes right or whatever.

Are you arguing for lawless capitalism where the ability to pay folks makes might?

What you are advocating for is the socialist bureaucrat's whim, which is even worse than the king's. At least with a King, there is one throat to cut. Anonymous bureaucrats are never held accountable and do a great deal of damage.

What I'm advocating for is for our elected representatives or us to give some degree of automation to the system erstwhile a group of really pro minimum wage folks might be in office in a decade and really jack it up. Or the other way.

Sorry, bub. I don't trust the government to decide anything by algorithm driven automation.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying, "Reagan sucked, America sucks. We haven't figured out the best system on the planet and just need to tweak it here and there to make it better."

Don't push your projections on me.

I'm saying centralized planning in an increasingly complex world is an Epic Fail.

 

[boedicca]

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that businesses are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

 

[Toronado3800]

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that business are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

I really think our current systems just need tweaked, not abandoned. In the 1930's we had to adjust to not having a frontier for big government to give away as a safety net. No need to reinvent the wheel here, I'm just talking about saving this once a decade minimum wage spike tobmake business more predictable.

 

[boedicca]

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that business are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

I really think our current systems just need tweaked, not abandoned. In the 1930's we had to adjust to not having a frontier for big government to give away as a safety net. No need to reinvent the wheel here, I'm just talking about saving this once a decade minimum wage spike tobmake business more predictable.

In the 1930s, FDR seized upon the Great Depression as a pretext to expand the progressivism Wilson institutionalized under the cover of WWI. Just because we've done something stupid and damaging doesn't mean we should stick with it as a precedent.

 

[Toronado3800]

I don't think I want laissez-faire, that's the system where someone sells me pills for this and that, I take them and if something bad happens I have to go hunt them down with a gun, right?

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that business are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

I really think our current systems just need tweaked, not abandoned. In the 1930's we had to adjust to not having a frontier for big government to give away as a safety net. No need to reinvent the wheel here, I'm just talking about saving this once a decade minimum wage spike tobmake business more predictable.

In the 1930s, FDR seized upon the Great Depression as a pretext to expand the progressivism Wilson institutionalized under the cover of WWI. Just because we've done something stupid and damaging doesn't mean we should stick with it as a precedent.

That New Deal is America as it has been a functioning Super Power. Any other change is radical.

Also before we talk about the good ol small government days of the 1870's or whenever, remember the 19th century was one of exploiting out purchases/conquests. Instead of giving out welfare dollars big government gave away land across the continent to individuals and businesses alike.

It would be like FDR's work for welfare programs. Lay track or build any kind of house and you get land. Go to work for the CCC and you get money. FWIW I generally support THAT kind of this for that welfare more than some f our current programs.

 

[boedicca]

Government solipitence fallacy....Just because The State is currently doing something, doesn't automatically mean that they should be doing it, or that nobody would be doing it in absence of The State's meddling.

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that business are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

I really think our current systems just need tweaked, not abandoned. In the 1930's we had to adjust to not having a frontier for big government to give away as a safety net. No need to reinvent the wheel here, I'm just talking about saving this once a decade minimum wage spike tobmake business more predictable.

In the 1930s, FDR seized upon the Great Depression as a pretext to expand the progressivism Wilson institutionalized under the cover of WWI. Just because we've done something stupid and damaging doesn't mean we should stick with it as a precedent.

That New Deal is America as it has been a functioning Super Power. Any other change is radical.

Also before we talk about the good ol small government days of the 1870's or whenever, remember the 19th century was one of exploiting out purchases/conquests. Instead of giving out welfare dollars big government gave away land across the continent to individuals and businesses alike.

It would be like FDR's work for welfare programs. Lay track or build any kind of house and you get land. Go to work for the CCC and you get money. FWIW I generally support THAT kind of this for that welfare more than some f our current programs.

Translation: All that government spending is great graft for grifters.

 

[Toronado3800]

OK. Let's work on economic theory then.

If not our elected representatives, in laissez-faire world who would make sure the guy selling pills for heartburn really sells reasonably safe pills for fixing heartburn?

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that business are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

I really think our current systems just need tweaked, not abandoned. In the 1930's we had to adjust to not having a frontier for big government to give away as a safety net. No need to reinvent the wheel here, I'm just talking about saving this once a decade minimum wage spike tobmake business more predictable.

In the 1930s, FDR seized upon the Great Depression as a pretext to expand the progressivism Wilson institutionalized under the cover of WWI. Just because we've done something stupid and damaging doesn't mean we should stick with it as a precedent.

That New Deal is America as it has been a functioning Super Power. Any other change is radical.

Also before we talk about the good ol small government days of the 1870's or whenever, remember the 19th century was one of exploiting out purchases/conquests. Instead of giving out welfare dollars big government gave away land across the continent to individuals and businesses alike.

It would be like FDR's work for welfare programs. Lay track or build any kind of house and you get land. Go to work for the CCC and you get money. FWIW I generally support THAT kind of this for that welfare more than some f our current programs.

Translation: All that government spending is great graft for grifters.

Were the U.P. and C.P. grifters? On some level. I'm familiar with the Credit Mobilier scam. Was the cross country railroad a bad idea?

Were all them farmers grifters?

All them CCC employees?

Trading this for that sounds like Capitalism and the government had a very real interest in making the west feel like part of the country. FDR had a very real and immenant issue in preventing a socialist revolution. Remember the Depression started in 29.

 

[toomuchtime_]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

A minimum wage would for the most part only effect low skilled workers, and in the age of AI, a large number of these jobs could be eliminated by smart machines. The only reason these jobs exist at all now is that they cost less than the machines. A minimum wage of any significance would cost low skilled workers their jobs and create new jobs for higher skilled workers that design and build smart machines. The lesson here is forget about these political slogans about a minimum wage and encourage each worker to create his own minimum wage by acquiring higher paying skills.

 

[Toronado3800]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

A minimum wage would for the most part only effect low skilled workers, and in the age of AI, a large number of these jobs could be eliminated by smart machines. The only reason these jobs exist at all now is that they cost less than the machines. A minimum wage of any significance would cost low skilled workers their jobs and create new jobs for higher skilled workers that design and build smart machines. The lesson here is forget about these political slogans about a minimum wage and encourage each worker to create his own minimum wage by acquiring higher paying skills.

Then it should grow less relavent with time.

How about we adjust Federal minimum wage forbthe CPI since the last increase then leave it tied to the Consumer Price Index? Hopefully after awhile everyone is making more like u say

 

[boedicca]

It's not a good business plan to harm or kills one's customers.

Just sayin'.

Here's the problem with your thinking: the type of people who think that business are devoted to screwing over their customers are people who operate that way themselves. They are also the ones who want to have power over the minute aspects of our private lives. Do you really want people like that telling you what job to have, where to live, what medicine to take?

I really think our current systems just need tweaked, not abandoned. In the 1930's we had to adjust to not having a frontier for big government to give away as a safety net. No need to reinvent the wheel here, I'm just talking about saving this once a decade minimum wage spike tobmake business more predictable.

In the 1930s, FDR seized upon the Great Depression as a pretext to expand the progressivism Wilson institutionalized under the cover of WWI. Just because we've done something stupid and damaging doesn't mean we should stick with it as a precedent.

That New Deal is America as it has been a functioning Super Power. Any other change is radical.

Also before we talk about the good ol small government days of the 1870's or whenever, remember the 19th century was one of exploiting out purchases/conquests. Instead of giving out welfare dollars big government gave away land across the continent to individuals and businesses alike.

It would be like FDR's work for welfare programs. Lay track or build any kind of house and you get land. Go to work for the CCC and you get money. FWIW I generally support THAT kind of this for that welfare more than some f our current programs.

Translation: All that government spending is great graft for grifters.

Were the U.P. and C.P. grifters? On some level. I'm familiar with the Credit Mobilier scam. Was the cross country railroad a bad idea?

Were all them farmers grifters?

All them CCC employees?

Trading this for that sounds like Capitalism and the government had a very real interest in making the west feel like part of the country. FDR had a very real and immenant issue in preventing a socialist revolution. Remember the Depression started in 29.

You have bought into the economic myths regarding the stock market crash, the Great Depression and the New Deal.

...
2. The New Deal Got the United States out of the Great Depression

The typical American history class has spread the notion that the New Deal was crucial to rein in the Great Depression. Although this assertion remains strong among the intelligentsia and general populace, it does not hold up to scrutiny of economic performance during that time.

While politically popular in areas where FDR performed poorly in elections, his Alphabet Soup of government agencies and programs did not even put a dent in the recession. In fact, the New Deal exacerbated and prolonged it.

Economist Stephen Moore provides a clear depiction of the New Deal, one where the United States was still stuck in the economic doldrums. During this period, the average unemployment rate hoveredaround 18 percent, and American industrial production and national income fell almost by one third. It wasn’t until the end of World War II that the US economy finally rebounded...

5 Myths about the Great Depression and New Deal

 

[toomuchtime_]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

A minimum wage would for the most part only effect low skilled workers, and in the age of AI, a large number of these jobs could be eliminated by smart machines. The only reason these jobs exist at all now is that they cost less than the machines. A minimum wage of any significance would cost low skilled workers their jobs and create new jobs for higher skilled workers that design and build smart machines. The lesson here is forget about these political slogans about a minimum wage and encourage each worker to create his own minimum wage by acquiring higher paying skills.

Then it should grow less relavent with time.

How about we adjust Federal minimum wage forbthe CPI since the last increase then leave it tied to the Consumer Price Index? Hopefully after awhile everyone is making more like u say

What I said was many of the people you claim to be helping will lose their jobs to smart machines and the new jobs created will be out of reach for the low skilled workers you would put out of work.

 

[Toronado3800]

For the life of me I can't figure out why we don't just tie minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index or something. Have it adjust yearly and leave it alone.

We COULD attach it to Gross Domestic Product, give everyone "skin in the game" so to say.

We COULD attach it to some measurement of Board of Directors pay/reimbursement packages for humorous effect.

Where would my first idea about the Consumer Price Index go wrong or is there a better measure?

A minimum wage would for the most part only effect low skilled workers, and in the age of AI, a large number of these jobs could be eliminated by smart machines. The only reason these jobs exist at all now is that they cost less than the machines. A minimum wage of any significance would cost low skilled workers their jobs and create new jobs for higher skilled workers that design and build smart machines. The lesson here is forget about these political slogans about a minimum wage and encourage each worker to create his own minimum wage by acquiring higher paying skills.

Then it should grow less relavent with time.

How about we adjust Federal minimum wage forbthe CPI since the last increase then leave it tied to the Consumer Price Index? Hopefully after awhile everyone is making more like u say

What I said was many of the people you claim to be helping will lose their jobs to smart machines and the new jobs created will be out of reach for the low skilled workers you would put out of work.

But all I'm talking about is holding the status quo on minimum wage?