The Living Wage, Shot down in Switzerland.

[Andylusion]

BBC News - Switzerland rejects world's highest minimum wage

It's amazing how many times the left point to Europe, as being a bastion of Leftist Utopia. Granted they are not a leftist Utopia, by any stretch, and are very much Capitalist in many regards.

Apparently having Nestle and Novartis, collecting a cool $130 Billion in revenue a year, making billions in profit, is completely socialist.

Nevertheless, I came across this. Switzerland had a national referendum on the "living wage". The whole deal was shot down in public vote. Now look at the reasons.

Under the plan, employers would have had to pay workers a minimum 22 Swiss francs (about $25; £15; 18 euros) an hour.

Supporters said the move was necessary for people to live a decent life.

But critics argued that it would raise production costs and increase unemployment.

The minimum wage proposal was rejected by 76% of voters.

The same reasons we've been pointing out here. It will raise prices, and kill employment.

So even the supposed socialist utopia, can figure out how destructive raising the minimum wage is, and they are moving away from it.

Meanwhile the ignorant and retarded here, are moving toward it.

 

[blackhawk]

They won't be pointing this one out.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Swiss seem to get it right. They passed anti Muslim legislation. They have the lowest rate of Muslim immigration in Europe. The shot down gun control. And now this.

 

[frigidweirdo]

BBC News - Switzerland rejects world's highest minimum wage

It's amazing how many times the left point to Europe, as being a bastion of Leftist Utopia. Granted they are not a leftist Utopia, by any stretch, and are very much Capitalist in many regards.

Apparently having Nestle and Novartis, collecting a cool $130 Billion in revenue a year, making billions in profit, is completely socialist.

Nevertheless, I came across this. Switzerland had a national referendum on the "living wage". The whole deal was shot down in public vote. Now look at the reasons.

Under the plan, employers would have had to pay workers a minimum 22 Swiss francs (about $25; £15; 18 euros) an hour.

Supporters said the move was necessary for people to live a decent life.

But critics argued that it would raise production costs and increase unemployment.

The minimum wage proposal was rejected by 76% of voters.

The same reasons we've been pointing out here. It will raise prices, and kill employment.

So even the supposed socialist utopia, can figure out how destructive raising the minimum wage is, and they are moving away from it.

Meanwhile the ignorant and retarded here, are moving toward it.

Minimum wage can work, however it can't be too high as it leads to inflation. The UK brought in minimum wage under the Labour govt and it seems to have worked, they have different levels for different ages, and it's about the level you'd expect low level workers to get.

 

[Andylusion]

BBC News - Switzerland rejects world's highest minimum wage

It's amazing how many times the left point to Europe, as being a bastion of Leftist Utopia. Granted they are not a leftist Utopia, by any stretch, and are very much Capitalist in many regards.

Apparently having Nestle and Novartis, collecting a cool $130 Billion in revenue a year, making billions in profit, is completely socialist.

Nevertheless, I came across this. Switzerland had a national referendum on the "living wage". The whole deal was shot down in public vote. Now look at the reasons.

Under the plan, employers would have had to pay workers a minimum 22 Swiss francs (about $25; £15; 18 euros) an hour.

Supporters said the move was necessary for people to live a decent life.

But critics argued that it would raise production costs and increase unemployment.

The minimum wage proposal was rejected by 76% of voters.

The same reasons we've been pointing out here. It will raise prices, and kill employment.

So even the supposed socialist utopia, can figure out how destructive raising the minimum wage is, and they are moving away from it.

Meanwhile the ignorant and retarded here, are moving toward it.

Minimum wage can work, however it can't be too high as it leads to inflation. The UK brought in minimum wage under the Labour govt and it seems to have worked, they have different levels for different ages, and it's about the level you'd expect low level workers to get.

That depends greatly on how you define "can work".

Most of the minimum wage supporters on this forum, would consider the minimum wage in the UK, to be a complete failure.

The purpose of the minimum wage, according to those on this forum, is to make sure that everyone has the utopian and ambiguous ideal of a livable wage.

Now not a single one has bothered to explain what exactly, that ideal livable wage is, but the popular claim is $15 an hour.

https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates

The UK minimum wage, is far from that. Converted to USD, 18 or younger $5.08/hr. 18-20 is $6.86/hr. And $8.61/hr.

The upper level minimum wage is roughly about the same as our own. The lower minimum wage is far lower than our own.

If you really wanted us to follow the UK model, we would have to cut the minimum wage for everyone under 21 years old.

Further, this the UK model also validates something that I've said a thousands times on this forum.

I have said for over 10 years now, that the primary reason all the apprenticeship jobs have all disappeared, is because of the minimum wage. Here the UK has a special apprenticeship minimum wage, that is lower than any of the others, at a mere $3.66/hr. If we had that, the apprenticeship programs would make a slow come back for sure.

But the main point again is, most of the 'liveable wage' people here, would call the UK minimum wages a failure.

Especially when you consider the fact that taxes and cost of living are drastically higher in the UK. For once, the UK is a great example we should follow, and immediately cut the minimum wage.

 

[frigidweirdo]

That depends greatly on how you define "can work".

Most of the minimum wage supporters on this forum, would consider the minimum wage in the UK, to be a complete failure.

The purpose of the minimum wage, according to those on this forum, is to make sure that everyone has the utopian and ambiguous ideal of a livable wage.

Now not a single one has bothered to explain what exactly, that ideal livable wage is, but the popular claim is $15 an hour.

https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates

The UK minimum wage, is far from that. Converted to USD, 18 or younger $5.08/hr. 18-20 is $6.86/hr. And $8.61/hr.

The upper level minimum wage is roughly about the same as our own. The lower minimum wage is far lower than our own.

If you really wanted us to follow the UK model, we would have to cut the minimum wage for everyone under 21 years old.

Further, this the UK model also validates something that I've said a thousands times on this forum.

I have said for over 10 years now, that the primary reason all the apprenticeship jobs have all disappeared, is because of the minimum wage. Here the UK has a special apprenticeship minimum wage, that is lower than any of the others, at a mere $3.66/hr. If we had that, the apprenticeship programs would make a slow come back for sure.

But the main point again is, most of the 'liveable wage' people here, would call the UK minimum wages a failure.

Especially when you consider the fact that taxes and cost of living are drastically higher in the UK. For once, the UK is a great example we should follow, and immediately cut the minimum wage.

Yes, it does depend on what you want the minimum wage to do. Realistically putting it up to $15 an hour is ridiculous.
If you work a 40 hour week in the UK, and you're sensible, you can live easily off minimum wage. If you have to bring up twenty five kids, that's another matter entirely, however if you're that stupid in the first place, you don't deserve any better anyway.

 

[Andylusion]

That depends greatly on how you define "can work".

Most of the minimum wage supporters on this forum, would consider the minimum wage in the UK, to be a complete failure.

The purpose of the minimum wage, according to those on this forum, is to make sure that everyone has the utopian and ambiguous ideal of a livable wage.

Now not a single one has bothered to explain what exactly, that ideal livable wage is, but the popular claim is $15 an hour.

https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates

The UK minimum wage, is far from that. Converted to USD, 18 or younger $5.08/hr. 18-20 is $6.86/hr. And $8.61/hr.

The upper level minimum wage is roughly about the same as our own. The lower minimum wage is far lower than our own.

If you really wanted us to follow the UK model, we would have to cut the minimum wage for everyone under 21 years old.

Further, this the UK model also validates something that I've said a thousands times on this forum.

I have said for over 10 years now, that the primary reason all the apprenticeship jobs have all disappeared, is because of the minimum wage. Here the UK has a special apprenticeship minimum wage, that is lower than any of the others, at a mere $3.66/hr. If we had that, the apprenticeship programs would make a slow come back for sure.

But the main point again is, most of the 'liveable wage' people here, would call the UK minimum wages a failure.

Especially when you consider the fact that taxes and cost of living are drastically higher in the UK. For once, the UK is a great example we should follow, and immediately cut the minimum wage.

Yes, it does depend on what you want the minimum wage to do. Realistically putting it up to $15 an hour is ridiculous.
If you work a 40 hour week in the UK, and you're sensible, you can live easily off minimum wage. If you have to bring up twenty five kids, that's another matter entirely, however if you're that stupid in the first place, you don't deserve any better anyway.

And there we have it folks. Logic and rational thinking. If only we still had that in the US.

 

[The Rabbi]

It can't work. If you set the wage over market rates, then you end up with lots of unemployed people, generally teenagers and low skilled workers. If you set it too low then the market will make it irrelevant.

 

[PredFan]

And a well deserved death at that.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Switzerland still has one of the highest minimum wages in the world and if you count healthcare and paid time off it might be higher. Not exactly the conservative Chinese paradise that Republicans dream of....

 

[frigidweirdo]

Switzerland still has one of the highest minimum wages in the world and if you count healthcare and paid time off it might be higher. Not exactly the conservative Chinese paradise that Republicans dream of....

At the same time it has a really high cost of living too. You can't just use an exchange converter on this one.

 

[Noomi]

There is no way in hell I am working my butt off for $3.66 an hour. Go and fuck yourself with a razor blade first.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Seriously?

You cons barely know what's going on in our own government. And here you're pretending to care about whatever the hell is happening in Switzerland?

Wtf guys?

 

[Avorysuds]

Seriously?

You cons barely know what's going on in our own government. And here you're pretending to care about whatever the hell is happening in Switzerland?

Wtf guys?

1: Call cons stupid!

2: Debate won!

 

[Andylusion]

Switzerland still has one of the highest minimum wages in the world and if you count healthcare and paid time off it might be higher. Not exactly the conservative Chinese paradise that Republicans dream of....

Their health care is crap. The uninsured in the US, get on average better care, than those in Switzerland.

Although that might be changing under Obama Care.

Secondly, Switzerland doesn't have a minimum wage at all.

You failed to grasp the whole point of the "living wage" debate, was that the Unions were pushing for it.

Why were the Unions, which have collective bargaining pushing for the minimum wage?

The same reason the primary backers of the minimum wage in the US, is Unions.

Unions push up wages, which encourages employers to hire non-Union labor. This is exactly what is happening in Switzerland, which is exactly why the Union put the "livable wage" law on the ballot.

And equally, that's exactly why the public shot the measure down. The public knows that if they put in place those laws, millions of Swiss would lose their jobs, benefiting the Unions.

Unskilled labor in Switzerland, is paid in the low 5000 franks, which is $5,500 a year. And that number is high by some numbers I've found around the internet. Again, there is no concrete number, because there is no minimum wage.

By the way, the average Swiss Social Security payment is about 5,000 franks. (at least from the few sources I've found). Not exactly the socialist utopia people on the left seem to claim.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Switzerland still has one of the highest minimum wages in the world and if you count healthcare and paid time off it might be higher. Not exactly the conservative Chinese paradise that Republicans dream of....

Their health care is crap. The uninsured in the US, get on average better care, than those in Switzerland.

Although that might be changing under Obama Care.

I guess that's why they have a higher life expectancy

Switzerland's quality health system helps push up cancer rate - swissinfo.ch

"Cases of melanoma, prostate and breast cancer are higher in Switzerland than the European average - a side-effect of the top-notch Swiss health care system."

The reality is, it isn't that easy to compare two systems. Higher cancer death rate could be down to higher life expectancy, or due to less people being obese and therefore less likely to die of obesity, or lower traffic accidents etc.
They have a high level of people getting cancer, especially old people, because they live a long time.

Secondly, Switzerland doesn't have a minimum wage at all.

You failed to grasp the whole point of the "living wage" debate, was that the Unions were pushing for it.

Why were the Unions, which have collective bargaining pushing for the minimum wage?

The same reason the primary backers of the minimum wage in the US, is Unions.

Unions push up wages, which encourages employers to hire non-Union labor. This is exactly what is happening in Switzerland, which is exactly why the Union put the "livable wage" law on the ballot.

And equally, that's exactly why the public shot the measure down. The public knows that if they put in place those laws, millions of Swiss would lose their jobs, benefiting the Unions.

Unskilled labor in Switzerland, is paid in the low 5000 franks, which is $5,500 a year. And that number is high by some numbers I've found around the internet. Again, there is no concrete number, because there is no minimum wage.

By the way, the average Swiss Social Security payment is about 5,000 franks. (at least from the few sources I've found). Not exactly the socialist utopia people on the left seem to claim.

Switzerland is hardly socialist. It's just more in tune with its politics. Who's the leader of Switzerland? It's a tough question.

 

[The Rabbi]

There is no way in hell I am working my butt off for $3.66 an hour. Go and fuck yourself with a razor blade first.

What's your alternative?

 

[The Rabbi]

Switzerland still has one of the highest minimum wages in the world and if you count healthcare and paid time off it might be higher. Not exactly the conservative Chinese paradise that Republicans dream of....

Their health care is crap. The uninsured in the US, get on average better care, than those in Switzerland.

Although that might be changing under Obama Care.

I guess that's why they have a higher life expectancy

Actually it's because of Swiss cheese.
THat makes as much sense as what you posted.

 

[Andylusion]

Switzerland still has one of the highest minimum wages in the world and if you count healthcare and paid time off it might be higher. Not exactly the conservative Chinese paradise that Republicans dream of....

Their health care is crap. The uninsured in the US, get on average better care, than those in Switzerland.

Although that might be changing under Obama Care.

I guess that's why they have a higher life expectancy

Life expectancy has absolutely nothing.... NOTHING to do with health care. I don't understand why people don't grasp this.

If I pull out a gun and shoot you dead....... that directly impacts life expectancy.

Now explain to me how that is health care's fault? Were the doctors supposed to magically fly to my location, and prevent me from shooting? Were they supposed to jump to you, and toss a bullet proof vest over you just before you were hit?

Of course not.

If you lose control and hit a tree in your car and die, or if I plow into you with my Grand Marquis and kill you.... that directly impacts life expectancy.

Now explain to me how that reflects on the quality of health care? Were the doctors supposed to pull along side with lug nuts, and zip them into your wheels while you were driving, to prevent you from losing control? Where they supposed to jump through the window of my car, grab the wheel to prevent me from hitting you?

Of course not.

If you are hooked on Heroin, and OD in your home and die.... that directly impacts life expectancy.

Now explain to me how higher quality health care would prevent that? Are doctors and nurses supposed to be going door to door, to find you, and rip the needles out of your hands, to prevent you from ODing?

There are millions of factors that all effect life expectancy. Very very few of which are related to health care.

The only statistic that directly relates to the ability of the health care system to diagnose, treat, and heal patients, is survival rates. You show me the 5-Year Survival rates, between the US and Switzerland, and I'll show you higher quality US care.

And not death rates either. If you and I are on islands with 20 people each. And you have only one person get sick, and you simply let them die. And I have 5 people get sick, and we heal and cure 3 of them, and two die. Would you conclude your health care was better? Of course not. My health care system is better, even though twice as many died.

Death rates are also meaningless. Again, only survival rates make any difference. Only survival rates actually show the quality of the care.

Switzerland's quality health system helps push up cancer rate - swissinfo.ch

"Cases of melanoma, prostate and breast cancer are higher in Switzerland than the European average - a side-effect of the top-notch Swiss health care system."

Again, I'm not sure what the point of that was. I don't care at all, how many are dected, if they die after being detected.

What matters isn't just "did we find cancer!". What matters is "did we find the cancer, and treat the cancer, and heal the patient".

The reality is, it isn't that easy to compare two systems. Higher cancer death rate could be down to higher life expectancy, or due to less people being obese and therefore less likely to die of obesity, or lower traffic accidents etc.
They have a high level of people getting cancer, especially old people, because they live a long time.

You explain to me then, why it's so hard to compare. To me, it's pretty easy. When you find someone who is ill.... are they alive in 5-years?

Britain, the sick man of Europe: Heart and cancer survival rates among worst in developed world | Mail Online

Who is at the top of the list, on 5 year survival rates for Breast and Bowel cancer? The US.

Who is so low, they are not even ranked? Switzerland among many others.

If you get either of those illnesses, and you shockingly, want to live... which country do you have the absolute best possible chance of being alive in 5 years or longer? The US.

Now if you want to save money, and have a higher risk of dying for the sake of your dollars, then by all means take your chances elsewhere. Most people would rather live, and get a bill in the mail, than die without a bill.

But don't tell me that they have higher quality of care. They simply do not. Not even close. Period.

 

[Andylusion]

There is no way in hell I am working my butt off for $3.66 an hour. Go and fuck yourself with a razor blade first.

It's that kind of attitude that results in people being poor for life.

One of the former CEOs of Goldman Sachs..... started out as a janitor, working for minimum wage, which at the time was LESS than $3.66 an hour.

Do realize that 75% of McDonald's franchise owners, started off as minimum wage crew members?

In fact.... 20 of the top 50 McDonald Corporate executives, on the executive board today, started out as entry level crew members at McDonald's restaurants, flipping burgers over.

If those executives had the same attitude you have shown now, they never would have made it to where they are today.

You people on the left, see everything in the short term. The people who succeed, look at the long term. Yes I have to do a crap job today, but that may lead to something better tomorrow.

The people who demand higher wages, for low value work, end up unemployed, and never move forward.