Minimum Wage --Prevents-- Wealth Acquisition!

[Dad2three]

Right. Which means the cost of everything across the board is raised accordingly.

82 years ago, FDR said corporations who couldn't pay a "living wage" didn't deserve to exist in America. This was his reasoning for adopting the minimum wage in 1933. Today, we hear the same cries for a "living wage" and calls to raise the minimum wage dramatically. So for 82 years, your "solution" has failed and your answer is to do more of it on a larger scale.

Interesting ... I've just connected some ideas :
A) Productivity and product demand the main factor allowing higher wages.
B) The last years have seen a rise in employee productivity due to automation, and interconnection
C) Nevertheless the rise in productivity will probably not be the same around all sectors / company sizes.
D) If productivity is not coupled with a rise in purchasing power or export growth , eventually you get stagnation.

Theliq has said Australia has several minimum wages by sector. And by my previous post, some countries ( like switzerland , Germany until recently and Singapore have no minimum wage).
So maybe a one size fits all policy is what really is wrong : productivity has not risen evenly nor the cost of living is the same across the US. There might be a need to have minimum wages with a finer granullarity.

"There might be a need to have minimum wages with a finer granullarity."

It's called the Dirty Souths min wage laws now, most of the blue states have higher than fed min wage laws, why do you think the poor and ignorant bastards of the Southern states suckoff the teet of the Blue states today?

 

[Boss]

Right. Which means the cost of everything across the board is raised accordingly.

82 years ago, FDR said corporations who couldn't pay a "living wage" didn't deserve to exist in America. This was his reasoning for adopting the minimum wage in 1933. Today, we hear the same cries for a "living wage" and calls to raise the minimum wage dramatically. So for 82 years, your "solution" has failed and your answer is to do more of it on a larger scale.

Interesting ... I've just connected some ideas :
A) Productivity and product demand the main factor allowing higher wages.
B) The last years have seen a rise in employee productivity due to automation, and interconnection
C) Nevertheless the rise in productivity will probably not be the same around all sectors / company sizes.
D) If productivity is not coupled with a rise in purchasing power or export growth , eventually you get stagnation.

Theliq has said Australia has several minimum wages by sector. And by my previous post, some countries ( like switzerland , Germany until recently and Singapore have no minimum wage).
So maybe a one size fits all policy is what really is wrong : productivity has not risen evenly nor the cost of living is the same across the US. There might be a need to have minimum wages with a finer granullarity.

I disagree that product demand or productivity are the main factors allowing higher wages. I have another thread going at the moment regarding how to get better paying jobs. Demand for labor has to be greater than supply. We can look at any field of employment and find this is true.

I don't really care what other countries are doing or have done. It's one of my pet peeves when people cite "other countries" in an argument for what America should do. We are the LEADERS of the world, not FOLLOWERS. Are Australians smarter people than Americans? Are Germans or Belgians? Why do you have this obsession with looking at what others are doing and thinking it's smart to follow them? Is that lack of confidence in yourself or your fellow Americans?

These "other countries" are not US! They don't have the same circumstances. The problems they have are different than ours. They don't have a U.S. Constitution and in some cases, aren't even constitutional democracies. Their laws are different. Their standards of living are different. Their expectations are different. Their cultures are different. Different things drive their economies. I don't think ANY of them have a problem with 11 million illegal immigrants flooding across their borders and half their society cheering that on like it's a wonderful thing.

So we can't genuflect to other countries, we have to make our own way. We're not going to eliminate the MW, it's here to stay. What we need to do is make the MW irrelevant by increasing demand for skilled labor. Jacking up the MW doesn't do that. It effectively does the opposite.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I disagree that product demand or productivity are the main factors allowing higher wages. I have another thread going at the moment regarding how to get better paying jobs. Demand for labor has to be greater than supply. We can look at any field of employment and find this is true.

Well, think of pre-industrial USA . Productivity was low, many farmers were land owners . Some self employed and some were slaves. The demand for labour was great, but productivity was low ( no fertilizers, no machinery , and little irrigation). So high wages were not possible even if demand for labour was high. So , productivity puts a ceiling to the wages. The same goes with demand, there is a point in which lack of demand causes prices to go down, utility goes down and so do wages.

You are looking at the problem from a correct point of view , but only taking into account the micro economy aspect.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I don't really care what other countries are doing or have done. It's one of my pet peeves when people cite "other countries" in an argument for what America should do. We are the LEADERS of the world, not FOLLOWERS. Are Australians smarter people than Americans? Are Germans or Belgians? Why do you have this obsession with looking at what others are doing and thinking it's smart to follow them? Is that lack of confidence in yourself or your fellow Americans?

The US has been the leader of the world for 150 years roughly. But before that it also borrowed ideas and technology from Europe ( language, form of government , etc).
It is not lack of confidence, its a pragmatic approach.

I work as a programmer and I use algorithms , software and code irrespective of where that code originated (many of the algorithms are produced by Americans , but not all ) . The particular software I work with is German, I've used Linux created by Linnus Torvalds who is Finnish American, and I've used xamarin, which was created by Miguel de Icaza. When I ask in programming forums I get answers from persons all around the world ( lately Indians answer lots of posts).

So , no doubt the USA is a great country , but I believe every country can contribute with something of value.
Culture & Citizen of the world ...

 

[Boss]

Weird, you thing paying min wage is failure? lol

In 1933, when FDR introduced it, the argument for it was that it would give people a "decent living wage" but what do we hear from today's liberal? For 82 years we've chased our tails trying to achieve this mythical "living wage" and all that has ultimately resulted is higher prices.

The MW has been a lot like a heroin addiction. Feels good when we bump that first fix... people have more money in their pockets for a little while, then the effect wears off. So we bump again... get that high... but again, it wears off. Each time, we are killing ourselves a little more. The cycle has to be broken for the addict to recover.

I personally feel that I can value my own labor better than the government. I can negotiate my own exchange for my labor and pay rate. If I am happy and my employer is happy, why does government have to be involved? Maybe I am willing to work for less than MW to gain experience or learn a new trade? IF so, why is it any business of the government? Maybe I don't need health insurance or 12 wks of paid family leave? Why should I be punished because of some government mandate on employers?

You see, the MW serves to hamper my ability to negotiate higher pay. I go to my boss (hypothetically) and say... "Boss, I am the most productive widget maker you have, I produced twice as many widgets last year than your next best employee, therefore I deserve to be paid more."

So the boss says, "Sorry man, we structure pay based on this artificial number over here (MW) and so there's really nothing we can do."

Then, I go out there and find another widget company and try to negotiate a better deal... but... same thing... "We base our starting pay scale on this arbitrary number set by the government, it's what everybody makes, sorry!"

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Yea__ no. GOP walks lock step with you Demtards on regulations and phony systems.

Oh another guy who hasn't outgrown his Randian fetish that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE EVER. Weird

STFU, tard.

You're a cornball whom I suspect is on the govt. dole one way or another.

You suspect? Oh right the usual right wing BS when they can't use reason, logic or honesty.

Moron I have more assets that about 95% of American's, though since I'm not a greedy right wing bastard, I don't charge a lot on my rentals!

Yea, a guy who doesn't know the difference between than and that and spends his days on message boards is surely filthy rich. Go wank off for someone who gives a fuck, fucker.

 

[Dad2three]

Weird, you thing paying min wage is failure? lol

In 1933, when FDR introduced it, the argument for it was that it would give people a "decent living wage" but what do we hear from today's liberal? For 82 years we've chased our tails trying to achieve this mythical "living wage" and all that has ultimately resulted is higher prices.

The MW has been a lot like a heroin addiction. Feels good when we bump that first fix... people have more money in their pockets for a little while, then the effect wears off. So we bump again... get that high... but again, it wears off. Each time, we are killing ourselves a little more. The cycle has to be broken for the addict to recover.

I personally feel that I can value my own labor better than the government. I can negotiate my own exchange for my labor and pay rate. If I am happy and my employer is happy, why does government have to be involved? Maybe I am willing to work for less than MW to gain experience or learn a new trade? IF so, why is it any business of the government? Maybe I don't need health insurance or 12 wks of paid family leave? Why should I be punished because of some government mandate on employers?

You see, the MW serves to hamper my ability to negotiate higher pay. I go to my boss (hypothetically) and say... "Boss, I am the most productive widget maker you have, I produced twice as many widgets last year than your next best employee, therefore I deserve to be paid more."

So the boss says, "Sorry man, we structure pay based on this artificial number over here (MW) and so there's really nothing we can do."

Then, I go out there and find another widget company and try to negotiate a better deal... but... same thing... "We base our starting pay scale on this arbitrary number set by the government, it's what everybody makes, sorry!"

SURE IS FUKKN WEIRD, YOUR THEORY DIDN'T SEEM TO WORK PRE MIN WAGE IN THE US RIGHT BUBS? lol

Message to Congress on Establishing Minimum Wages and Maximum Hours



The overwhelming majority of our population earns its daily bread either in agriculture or in industry. One-third of our population, the overwhelming majority of which is in agriculture or industry, is ill-nourished, ill-clad and ill-housed.

The overwhelming majority of this Nation has little patience with that small minority which vociferates today that prosperity has returned, that wages are good, that crop prices are high and that government should take a holiday.

The truth of the matter, of course, is that the exponents of the theory of private initiative as the cure for deep-seated national ills want in most cases to improve the lot of mankind. But, well intentioned as they may be, they fail for four evident reasons-first, they see the problem from the point of view of their own business; second, they see the problem from the point of view of their own locality or region; third, they cannot act unanimously because they have no machinery for agreeing among themselves; and, finally, they have no power to bind the inevitable minority of chiselers within their own ranks.




Though we may go far in admitting the innate decency of this small minority, the whole story of our Nation proves that social progress has too often been fought by them. In actual practice it has been effectively advanced only by the passage of laws by state legislatures or the National Congress.



...Enlightened business is learning that competition ought not to cause bad social consequences which inevitably react upon the profits of business itself. All but the hopelessly reactionary will agree that to conserve our primary resources of man power, government must have some control over maximum hours, minimum wages, the evil of child labor and the exploitation of unorganized labor.



...These rudimentary standards will of necessity at the start fall far short of the ideal.


http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15405

 

[Dad2three]

Oh another guy who hasn't outgrown his Randian fetish that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE EVER. Weird

STFU, tard.

You're a cornball whom I suspect is on the govt. dole one way or another.

You suspect? Oh right the usual right wing BS when they can't use reason, logic or honesty.

Moron I have more assets that about 95% of American's, though since I'm not a greedy right wing bastard, I don't charge a lot on my rentals!

Yea, a guy who doesn't know the difference between than and that and spends his days on message boards is surely filthy rich. Go wank off for someone who gives a fuck, fucker.

Weird you don't seem to EVER post ANYTHING of substance? Only biting at the ankles, why is that Bubba?

Super filthy rich? Oh no Bubs, but was lucky to start buying property as rentals in '93 after my divorce, couldn't afford to buy a home at the time in my area!

 

[Muhammed]

BZZ wrong Bubba, yes Dubya changed Clinton RULES that disallowed SUBPRIME LOANS QUALIFYING FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS, but ZERO to do with Dubya FORCING F/F TO PURCHASE THE $440 BILLION IN MBS'S FROM THE BANKSTERS IN THEIR WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE BUBBA!1!

BZZZ.. I've already corrected your stupidity regarding this. The actual problem started with the introduction of ARMs back in 1980, something that Carter did.... surprise, surprise! Then repealing Glass-Steagall in 1999, something Clinton did...surprise, surprise! Then you get to Dubya's non-conservative compassionism to make it easy for low-income families to purchase homes. When the bottom fell out on home prices, ALL OF THESE POLICIES resulted in a collapse of the financial sector. To try and blame it all on Bush is typical of the lying piece of shit hack you are.

"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.


PLEASE NAME THE LAW REQUIRING OVER HALF OF MORTGAGES TO BE SUBPRIME/LOW DOC LOANS IN 2006? PRETTY PLEASE?



Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them. And then they sold the loan and risk to investors and GSEs clamoring for the loans. Actually banks, pension funds, investment banks and other investors clamored for them. Bush forced Freddie and Fannie to buy an additional $440 billion in mortgages in the secondary market.


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative


Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Actually there were laws in force since the Carter Administration, in the 70s.

In practice, they gave the 3 most powerful (but non-productive) credit rating corporations free reign over the US economy.

Basically, via federal law, all of the 3 major credit reporting agencies decided who was credit-worthy enough to get a loan to buy real estate. Any bank was allowed to give someone a loan, and any insurance company was disallowed from saying, "Hey! this is bullshit!" to those people who obviously can't afford the payments to buy that house.

Didn't matter to the loan company salesmen because they are paid by commission. The more loans they approve, the more moola they get. And the insurance agents had the same motivation. Greed. The more insurance policies they sell, the more money they get paid.

Hell at least you get points for originality Bubba, lol

Hint NO FEDERAL LAW GAVE ANY COMP (MUCH LESS THE CREDIT RATING AGENCIES) " all of the 3 major credit reporting agencies decided who was credit-worthy enough to get a loan to buy real estate"

THAT'S NONSENSE

You just think it's nonsense because you're clueless.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

STFU, tard.

You're a cornball whom I suspect is on the govt. dole one way or another.

You suspect? Oh right the usual right wing BS when they can't use reason, logic or honesty.

Moron I have more assets that about 95% of American's, though since I'm not a greedy right wing bastard, I don't charge a lot on my rentals!

Yea, a guy who doesn't know the difference between than and that and spends his days on message boards is surely filthy rich. Go wank off for someone who gives a fuck, fucker.

Weird you don't seem to EVER post ANYTHING of substance? Only biting at the ankles, why is that Bubba?

Super filthy rich? Oh no Bubs, but was lucky to start buying property as rentals in '93 after my divorce, couldn't afford to buy a home at the time in my area!

You're worthless.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Had the US let mexico develop on its own instead making it a trading partner those 20 or 40 million would be in the other side of the border .
Still over your head Ed ?

1000% stupid and liberal as always. Mexico and all of Central South America were always dirt poor and always were coming here. How stupid are you? They are here only because liberals want their vote and because Trump hasn't built his wall yet!! It has nothing to do with NAFTA you total moron.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Oh another guy who hasn't outgrown his Randian fetish that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE EVER. Weird

too stupid and 100% liberal!! Our founders were very very Libertarian and they created greatest country in human history by far!! Dumbto3 is so dumb he think our founders were communists

 

[Boss]

SURE IS FUKKN WEIRD, YOUR THEORY DIDN'T SEEM TO WORK PRE MIN WAGE IN THE US RIGHT BUBS? lol

Well it seemed to work from 1642 until 1933.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Had the US let mexico develop on its own instead making it a trading partner those 20 or 40 million would be in the other side of the border .
Still over your head Ed ?

1000% stupid and liberal as always. Mexico and all of Central South America were always dirt poor and always were coming here. How stupid are you? They are here only because liberals want their vote and because Trump hasn't built his wall yet!! It has nothing to do with NAFTA you total moron.

Yes , Mexico has allways been a poor country.

Try corralating this two images :
A) The purchasing power of mexican wages start collapsing after 1976, which causes immigration to start rising
B) By 1984 wages start to recover
C) In 1994 they collapse again , and never recover their pre-nafta levels

The number of illegals tripled after NAFTA from 4 to 12 million. The cause is the collapse in purchasing power.
But NAFTA has not helped at all in recovering that purchasing power.

Look at how immigration explodes after 1990 and it doesn't stop until Dubya's crisis. Oh , you can thank him on that he, single handedly halted immigration.

On top of that many small corn producers were displaced by cheap corn imports comming from the USA.
It is mostly peasents flooding the USA.

 

[Boss]

Had the US let mexico develop on its own instead making it a trading partner those 20 or 40 million would be in the other side of the border .
Still over your head Ed ?

1000% stupid and liberal as always. Mexico and all of Central South America were always dirt poor and always were coming here. How stupid are you? They are here only because liberals want their vote and because Trump hasn't built his wall yet!! It has nothing to do with NAFTA you total moron.

Actually... The one good thing that can be said for NAFTA is that it has probably curbed some illegal immigration by providing jobs in Mexico.

 

[Boss]

Had the US let mexico develop on its own instead making it a trading partner those 20 or 40 million would be in the other side of the border .
Still over your head Ed ?

1000% stupid and liberal as always. Mexico and all of Central South America were always dirt poor and always were coming here. How stupid are you? They are here only because liberals want their vote and because Trump hasn't built his wall yet!! It has nothing to do with NAFTA you total moron.

Yes , Mexico has allways been a poor country.

Try corralating this two images :
A) The purchasing power of mexican wages start collapsing after 1976, which causes immigration to start rising
B) By 1984 wages start to recover
C) In 1994 they collapse again , and never recover their pre-nafta levels

The number of illegals tripled after NAFTA from 4 to 12 million. The cause is the collapse in purchasing power.
But NAFTA has not helped at all in recovering that purchasing power.

Look at how immigration explodes after 1990 and it doesn't stop until Dubya's crisis. Oh , you can thank him on that he, single handedly halted immigration.

On top of that many small corn producers were displaced by cheap corn imports comming from the USA.
It is mostly peasents flooding the USA.

Why are you dishonestly showing graphs regarding legal immigrants from Mexico? No one is opposed to Mexican-born Americans. The argument is not about Mexican-born people. You have seemingly been a reasonable person in other threads. Someone with a little more intelligence than the average liberal and I appreciate that... but this is not characteristic of you, to be promoting a false liberal meme that Republicans are somehow racist against Mexicans. That OUR problem is them dirty Mexicans stinking up the place. No one I know has made that argument, at least not on a mainstream national stage. So why are we continuing to see this 'bait and switch' tactic?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes , Mexico has allways been a poor country.

I did not say that you liar fool creep liberal. I said much of the world has always been poor and billions would come here if they could!! It has nothing to do with recent free trade agreements.

 

[Boss]

The number of illegals tripled after NAFTA from 4 to 12 million. The cause is the collapse in purchasing power.

Purchasing power has jack squat to do with a our trade deal with Mexico. Because of NAFTA, we are interjecting about $50 billion into the Mexican economy every year. Because of NAFTA, we are providing thousands of jobs that would otherwise not exist in Mexico. We import far more than we export to Mexico.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Actually... The one good thing that can be said for NAFTA.

Well you can say many good things about free trade as our Constitution did with the commerce clause. Even back then our genius founders knew that economic development was being slowed because states were protecting themselves from free trade.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The number of illegals tripled after NAFTA from 4 to 12 million. The cause is the collapse in purchasing power.

Purchasing power has jack squat to do with a our trade deal with Mexico. Because of NAFTA, we are interjecting about $50 billion into the Mexican economy every year. Because of NAFTA, we are providing thousands of jobs that would otherwise not exist in Mexico. We import far more than we export to Mexico.

yes saying that poor countries like Mexico and China don't benefit from free trade is so ignorant that only a liberal could say it!!