Minimum Wage --Prevents-- Wealth Acquisition!

[Dad2three]

Libertarian "theory" NOT based in ANY historical proof. Weird right?

100% stupid of course. America was libertarian and the greatest in human history while USSR and Red China were liberal and worst in human history!!

See why we say dumbto3??

Yes, WE see why EVERYONE calls Ed the low info King Bubs


(Re-)Introducing: The American School of Economics

When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.



Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:

1. protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
2. government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
3. a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation

It is a capitalist economic school based on the Hamiltonian economic program. The American School of capitalism was intended to allow the United States to become economically independent and nationally self-sufficient.

Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.


The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton, was to ensure that dearly won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce, was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.


American School (economics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

THE ENTIRE EU HAS A HIGHER MIN WAGE. Weird right Bubs?

yes and they average 10% unemployment on average and have the per capita income of Arkansas, about our poorest state thanks to the disincentives to work and hire.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton,

a Federalist defeated by Jeffersonion Republicans and never heard from again!!

THe liberal is a total illiterate. What a surprise

 

[CultureCitizen]

What exactly are you trying to argue?

The OP is regarding how an artificial baseline on cost of labor is not beneficial to individuals in the long run because it removes their ability to negotiate.

Well , that an artificial baseline in labour cost is beneficial in the long run to individuals and to society as a whole if some rules are followed.
Those rules would include setting a baseline which is neither too high or too low.
If it is too low internal market growth will become stagnated.
If it is too high there will be a serious problem of unemployment.

Therefore I tried to set the limits according to a percent of per capita gdp based on the stats from other countries.

 

[Dad2three]

The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton,

a Federalist defeated by Jeffersonion Republicans and never heard from again!!

THe liberal is a total illiterate. What a surprise

LOL, THE GUYS WHO MOST DIRECTLY USED THE AMERICAN SCHOOL POLICY UNDER GOPer Abe and the GOP PARTY? LOL


Keep it up Low Info Ed (small bus Ed)

 

[Boss]

What exactly are you trying to argue?

The OP is regarding how an artificial baseline on cost of labor is not beneficial to individuals in the long run because it removes their ability to negotiate.

Well , that an artificial baseline in labour cost is beneficial in the long run to individuals and to society as a whole if some rules are followed.
Those rules would include setting a baseline which is neither too high or too low.
If it is too low internal market growth will become stagnated.
If it is too high there will be a serious problem of unemployment.

Therefore I tried to set the limits according to a percent of per capita gdp based on the stats from other countries.

You're still establishing an artificial baseline which does not conform to free market laws of supply and demand. You are imagining some sort of "Goldilocks" zone where the baseline is "not too low, not too high," but just right. However, things change and the baseline doesn't change. It still serves as an excuse not to raise wages. It still hampers the individual's ability to negotiate. And the artificial baseline is used to calculate wages higher up the ladder without regard for value of the individual employee.

Trying to copy European (socialist) countries is pointless. First of all, most of them are failing. They don't have 350 million people with 60% of the population set to retire soon. They don't have 11-20 million illegal aliens flooding into their country. They're not carrying a $20 trillion national debt.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton,

a Federalist defeated by Jeffersonion Republicans and never heard from again!!

THe liberal is a total illiterate. What a surprise

LOL, THE GUYS WHO MOST DIRECTLY USED THE AMERICAN SCHOOL POLICY UNDER GOPer Abe and the GOP PARTY? LOL


Keep it up Low Info Ed (small bus Ed)

Hamilton was a Federalist whose ideas were defeated by Jeffersonion Republicans in what Jefferson called the Second American Revolution. Hamilton's ideas were never heard from again until the Marxist influence.

Welcome the liberal to his first lesson in American History!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Trying to copy European (socialist) countries is pointless..

exactly, Denmark is small and odd, and even Europe cant copy it despite being an ideological and geographic neighbor. Could the USA do it? Never. Almost all of the inventions that comprise economic progress come from the USA so being like Europe would almost kill economic progress on earth. Who would hope for that except a very stupid liberal!!

 

[CultureCitizen]

You're still establishing an artificial baseline which does not conform to free market laws of supply and demand. You are imagining some sort of "Goldilocks" zone where the baseline is "not too low, not too high," but just right. However, things change and the baseline doesn't change. It still serves as an excuse not to raise wages. It still hampers the individual's ability to negotiate. And the artificial baseline is used to calculate wages higher up the ladder without regard for value of the individual employee.

Indeed , its an artificial baseline.
My post is related to income distribution and internal market expansion.

As I said , I understand eliminating the minimum wage part for a small startup, hell even a cooperative which is starting.

But what happens when the market equilibrium price for wages is too low ( specially if there is an oversupply of labour due to mass amounts of immigrants)?

Many honest people will work for a very small salary (arguably most of them) , but an increasing number of workers will decide they might find other more proffitable venues : racketeering , robbery , drug trafficking , flea markets, human trafficking or they might decide to emigrate ( which might be a mixed blessing in the case of the US ).

Unemployment is not the only alternative to employment, and that's something many economists fail to see.
Furthermore if the average wage is artificially high because of a minimum wage and it is reduced by eliminating that artificial barrier. Wouldn't that cause a decrease in aggregate demand ?
This might be good in a country where exports are the main source of source of income , but a danger where internal market is the main fuel for economy.

So your proposal might work in very specific scenarios:
a) Exports are the main source of revenue
b) Personal income tax is not the main source of income for the government
c) Informal employment is high

 

[CultureCitizen]

Yes, WE see why EVERYONE calls Ed the low info King Bubs

I disagee :
I usually call him spambot Ed , though more polite users just call him special Ed.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes, WE see why EVERYONE calls Ed the low info King Bubs

I disagee :
I usually call him spambot Ed , though more polite users just call him special Ed.

culture creep making another great argument in support of liberalism!!! Ever see a conservative run from a debate?? What does that teach you??

 

[Boss]

You're still establishing an artificial baseline which does not conform to free market laws of supply and demand. You are imagining some sort of "Goldilocks" zone where the baseline is "not too low, not too high," but just right. However, things change and the baseline doesn't change. It still serves as an excuse not to raise wages. It still hampers the individual's ability to negotiate. And the artificial baseline is used to calculate wages higher up the ladder without regard for value of the individual employee.

Indeed , its an artificial baseline.
My post is related to income distribution and internal market expansion.

As I said , I understand eliminating the minimum wage part for a small startup, hell even a cooperative which is starting.

But what happens when the market equilibrium price for wages is too low ( specially if there is an oversupply of labour due to mass amounts of immigrants)?

Many honest people will work for a very small salary (arguably most of them) , but an increasing number of workers will decide they might find other more proffitable venues : racketeering , robbery , drug trafficking , flea markets, human trafficking or they might decide to emigrate ( which might be a mixed blessing in the case of the US ).

Unemployment is not the only alternative to employment, and that's something many economists fail to see.
Furthermore if the average wage is artificially high because of a minimum wage and it is reduced by eliminating that artificial barrier. Wouldn't that cause a decrease in aggregate demand ?
This might be good in a country where exports are the main source of source of income , but a danger where internal market is the main fuel for economy.

So your proposal might work in very specific scenarios:
a) Exports are the main source of revenue
b) Personal income tax is not the main source of income for the government
c) Informal employment is high

I haven't proposed we eliminate the minimum wage. I don't know that we can do that at this point... toothpaste is out of the tube... genie is out of the bottle. My OP is more of a 'hypothetical' analysis of what may have happened had we not adopted a minimum wage. I am a free market capitalist, I believe in the principles of free market capitalism because they work.

I think people are better off when they can negotiate their wages on the basis of the value of their personal labor, as opposed to everyone being paid a standardized rate set by the government. The MW took labor cost out of the hands of free market capitalism and established an artificial baseline.

Certain jobs are not effected by this and still adhere to principles of free market capitalism... Nursing, for example. There is a nationwide shortage of nurses. Those with experience can make upwards of $30 an hour or more, depending on locale. However, even in the case of nurses, they are paid based on years of experience and not "free market" negotiation of wages.

When FDR enacted the MW back in 1933, the problem it sought to address was providing a "living wage" to people... did it work? It's 2015 and we have Democrats moaning and whining about the lack of a "living wage" so you tell me... has it worked? I would think that 82 years is enough time to objectively evaluate if a program was successful.

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, WE see why EVERYONE calls Ed the low info King Bubs

I disagee :
I usually call him spambot Ed , though more polite users just call him special Ed.

culture creep making another great argument in support of liberalism!!! Ever see a conservative run from a debate?? What does that teach you??

"Ever see a conservative run from a debate?? What does that teach you??"


ONE POLICY CONSERVATIVES HAVE EVER BEEN ON THE CORRECT SIDE OF US HISTORY ON BUBS. Get off party labels, give me a Gov't POLICY CONServatives were correct on?

RUN BABY RUN, LOL

 

[Dad2three]

You're still establishing an artificial baseline which does not conform to free market laws of supply and demand. You are imagining some sort of "Goldilocks" zone where the baseline is "not too low, not too high," but just right. However, things change and the baseline doesn't change. It still serves as an excuse not to raise wages. It still hampers the individual's ability to negotiate. And the artificial baseline is used to calculate wages higher up the ladder without regard for value of the individual employee.

Indeed , its an artificial baseline.
My post is related to income distribution and internal market expansion.

As I said , I understand eliminating the minimum wage part for a small startup, hell even a cooperative which is starting.

But what happens when the market equilibrium price for wages is too low ( specially if there is an oversupply of labour due to mass amounts of immigrants)?

Many honest people will work for a very small salary (arguably most of them) , but an increasing number of workers will decide they might find other more proffitable venues : racketeering , robbery , drug trafficking , flea markets, human trafficking or they might decide to emigrate ( which might be a mixed blessing in the case of the US ).

Unemployment is not the only alternative to employment, and that's something many economists fail to see.
Furthermore if the average wage is artificially high because of a minimum wage and it is reduced by eliminating that artificial barrier. Wouldn't that cause a decrease in aggregate demand ?
This might be good in a country where exports are the main source of source of income , but a danger where internal market is the main fuel for economy.

So your proposal might work in very specific scenarios:
a) Exports are the main source of revenue
b) Personal income tax is not the main source of income for the government
c) Informal employment is high

I haven't proposed we eliminate the minimum wage. I don't know that we can do that at this point... toothpaste is out of the tube... genie is out of the bottle. My OP is more of a 'hypothetical' analysis of what may have happened had we not adopted a minimum wage. I am a free market capitalist, I believe in the principles of free market capitalism because they work.

I think people are better off when they can negotiate their wages on the basis of the value of their personal labor, as opposed to everyone being paid a standardized rate set by the government. The MW took labor cost out of the hands of free market capitalism and established an artificial baseline.

Certain jobs are not effected by this and still adhere to principles of free market capitalism... Nursing, for example. There is a nationwide shortage of nurses. Those with experience can make upwards of $30 an hour or more, depending on locale. However, even in the case of nurses, they are paid based on years of experience and not "free market" negotiation of wages.

When FDR enacted the MW back in 1933, the problem it sought to address was providing a "living wage" to people... did it work? It's 2015 and we have Democrats moaning and whining about the lack of a "living wage" so you tell me... has it worked? I would think that 82 years is enough time to objectively evaluate if a program was successful.

We spent tens of trillions on war (adjusted for inflation) has it stopped war?

Gawd YOU are a simple thinker Bubba


THERE IS NO HISTORICAL STATE/NATION TO EVER FOLLOW YOUR RANDIAN FETISH THAT HAS EVER EXISTED, MUCH LESS THRIVE. The reason FDR NEEDED to create the min wage was BECAUSE the US used the closest thing to "free markets" ever under Harding/Coolidge AND the "invisible hand" NEVER got slapped, instead it ran amok, like Reagan's S&L crisis and Dubya's 2008 subprime bubble, 2 OTHER times we tried that "markets self regulate" BS!

 

[ScienceRocks]

The minimum wage makes sure our workers don't make the same as south Asians or Africas do...Pennies.

All while the super rich are making a killing.

 

[Care4all]

Burger King and McDonald's Pay Fast Food Workers $20 an Hour in Denmark


Enough to pay their bills, save some money and even go out with friends. Why can't we do that here?


Burger King and McDonald's Pay Fast Food Workers $20 an Hour in Denmark

It is an irrelevant number fruit cake, since the cost of living is 18% higher.

By the way they have no minimum wage law



Cost Of Living Comparison Between United States And Denmark

18% higher costs and their wage is 250% higher than the US? lol

Weird they have that high of pay for fast food Comps right? Those evil unions right?

Denmark- Population 5.6 mil
About the size of Maine.

FYI- Actually, Denmark's population is about 4 times the size of Maine's, we only have 1.3 million in the State....(that's why I love it here, space/room to breathe)

 

[CultureCitizen]

When FDR enacted the MW back in 1933, the problem it sought to address was providing a "living wage" to people... did it work? It's 2015 and we have Democrats moaning and whining about the lack of a "living wage" so you tell me... has it worked? I would think that 82 years is enough time to objectively evaluate if a program was successful.

Looking at the rest of the countries in the world I would say it worked, if not in providing a living wage it did work by expanding the internal market and pushing industrialization. To this date the US market is still the largest in the world ( chinese boom notwithstanding).

Maybe you will not like this example , but before the American civil war, the south had plenty of "cheap" labour, while labour in the north was more expensive which drove industrialization ( clearly this was not the most important factor , but it did play an important role). The unindustrialized south didn't stand a chance against the north.

Two minimum wages are enough for DINKS ( double income no kids), but not for a single working parent with two kids.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Yes, WE see why EVERYONE calls Ed the low info King Bubs

I disagee :
I usually call him spambot Ed , though more polite users just call him special Ed.

culture creep making another great argument in support of liberalism!!! Ever see a conservative run from a debate?? What does that teach you??

A small digression in the thread to clarify that there are more fashionable names for a user that keeps rehashing the same arguments even when they are clearly false or out of context.

Now , if you allow me, I'll return with my discussion with Boss: we rarely agree on anything , but his arguments are a lot more interesting and he is more polite than you by several orders of magnitude.

 

[Boss]

We spent tens of trillions on war (adjusted for inflation) has it stopped war?

As far as I am aware, we've never fought ANY war with the objective of eliminating all wars.

Inflation? WOW... such a big word for such a simple-minded idiot.

 

[Boss]

The minimum wage makes sure our workers don't make the same as south Asians or Africas do...Pennies.

All while the super rich are making a killing.

I don't know about the "super rich" but corporations have no problem with a baseline labor cost.

South Asians and Africans don't live in a free democracy with free market capitalism. They live under the system you seem to adore, where everyone makes the same shitty wage and no one has the freedom to prosper or acquire wealth.

Again... for 82 years we've heard the same whine about a "living wage" from Democrats. Your MW idea only resulted in inflation and corporations prospering by having a baseline on labor costs. You want to continue the same policies even though they have not worked, because your politicians are in bed with the corporatists and you're a gullible sheep who faithfully follows the flock.