What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

[Toddsterpatriot]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense. only the right, never gets it.

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

Exactly! Kill all the business owners who pay less than $20/hour, eh comrade?

 

[dblack]

Minimum wage is a kind of gentrification - a move to push out the poor, or at least consign them to state dependency.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

same if any price is raised. People cant afford to buy as much.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes the employer offers you a job if you refuse you do not have the right to unemployment compensation if you accept (at will) then you have a righteous claim to collect unemployment as long as you were not fired for cause or if you quit

you are wrong; you have that right since you have not abandoned it. it is inalienable. that is why no one takes the right seriously about economics or the law.

show me where in the constitution it says you have a right to a job

dear, employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer. it is simple, theft from the poor so the rich can get richer, faster.

Sweety, the employer owns the job. it is his to give or take away.

so what; why so much litigation about for-cause and at-will, if it is so simple?

only the right wing, never gets it. and, they wonder why it costs so much to do business.

What litigation?
Not too many people who get laid off go to court

I've owned businesses have you? It seems to me you do not understand the costs involved in running a business not me

 

[Skull Pilot]

you are wrong; you have that right since you have not abandoned it. it is inalienable. that is why no one takes the right seriously about economics or the law.

show me where in the constitution it says you have a right to a job

It's right after the section on your right to have your condoms paid for by the taxpayer. You know, in the section written in crayon.

nothing but diversion while claiming equality for pay purposes in the non-porn sector, gentlemen?

it is about, equal protection of the law.

Which we have. You don't have a right to a job, and if you voluntarily leave a job, you don't have the right to force someone else to continue paying you. It's equal.

I guess we could give you what you want and eliminate UI altogether.

do you always argue in a vacuum of special pleading?

we have paying paying for War on Poverty for over a generation, with no end in sight.

we could be solving simple poverty on an at-will basis, but for right wing fantasy.

Yeah we have the richest poor people on the fucking planet right here
Tell me if people can get paid not to work like you want where will all the money come from to pay them?

 

[Skull Pilot]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense. only the right, never gets it.

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

OK so how does a company make a better product at a lower cost when an artificial raise in wages will make everything more expensive to produce?

What you don't understand that if labor costs are raised across the board for all industries that all the raw materials needed to produce products will also go up in price. All the products used by a service business will go up in price. The employers FICA, Wokers' Comp,SUTA and FUTA taxes go up it will cost more to heat and cool the buildings more to have trash removed etc etc

all those cost increases will be passed on to the consumer

 

[danielpalos]

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

if they are not good then you and other fools like you all over the world would go into business against them and get rich while paying their workers a ton. 2+2=4

the Gravity Payments model is still working.

The Gravity of the $70K Decision

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

They make what consumers demand and will pay for. If consumers demanded higher pay for workers and were willing to pay higher prices to get it, they would meet that demand. That's not, however, what consumers demand. Consumers demand the lowest prices possible. Thus, in order to remain profitable, companies cannot afford to pay workers more than their work is worth.

Unionization is frowned upon, in some circles.

In any case, social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

That is the reason for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

to privatize costs by having Individuals spend their own money instead of socializing costs via welfare.

 

[danielpalos]

how many jobs are there, with a natural rate of unemployment?

we have full employment at 4.3 % so no worries about that.

that is not, full employment. full employment means wages are outpacing inflation.

 

[danielpalos]

no, it isn't. it is a social correction to capitalism's laissez-fair laziness regarding full employment. There is no means testing as a condition, only employment.

Solving for simple poverty means capitalism will be better not worse. The right wing Only has fantasy, not any form of solutions.

It's a matter of terminology. What you are advocating is quite simply welfare for when you are not working for whatever reason. That means that a large number of people will decide that they prefer collecting a paycheck but not working a job and society will bear that cost.

not at all; what I am advocating is improving the efficiency of our economy, in favor of the general welfare instead of a private profit motive.

Apparently your understanding of human nature takes second place to your ideology. Do you seriously think a system in which people get paid whether they work or not will result in most people working?

how many jobs are there, with a natural rate of unemployment?

why should labor have to overcome that hurdle in Any first world economy.

Good question, here is the answer. The lower the MW, the more jobs there are. The higher the MW, the fewer jobs there are. Proof? Raise the MW to $100/hr. Will that eliminate poverty? Nope. Will it destroy jobs? Yup.

What you MEAN to ask, is how many GOOD jobs there are. That's a completely different proposition. Good jobs require training and education, and not every applicant has that.

We have a natural rate of unemployment due to capitalism. Thus, we should be compensating Labor via eminent domain for capitalism's, natural rate of unemployment with unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed in any at-will employment State.

It is more cost effective than means tested welfare for Individuals.

 

[danielpalos]

, companies cannot afford to pay workers more than their work is worth.

and lets never forget that a libcommie wants a higher minimum wage and 1001 other interventions in the economy too becuase he lacks the IQ to understand how capitalism works!!

Capitalism Only works because it is constantly bailed out by socialism.

Raising the minimum wage will have the effect of improving our Standard of living to that extent. Along with solving simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

[danielpalos]

The lower the MW, the more jobs there are.

yep this is the law of supply and demand. Liberals have never heard of it. It is why there are fewer Rolls Royce's on the road than Fiats!! When the price goes up people can afford less. Believe it or not it has to be explained to a liberal. Can American survive when one Party can literally be described as stupid?

some on the left believe in actually solving simple social dilemmas, without making the poor work harder for less, just so the rich can get richer faster.

 

[danielpalos]

but for unemployment compensation.

it is more cost effective than means tested welfare. we could be lowering our tax burden; but, the right may have too high of a moral hurdle to overcome regarding a moral of, "goodwill toward men".

UI is means tested welfare. It gives a person who lost his job through no fault of his own something to live on until he gets another one. If society decides to pay people who are not working (for whatever reason), then society will bear the costs of that decision, whether through higher taxes or higher prices and inflation. You can't avoid it.

no, it isn't. it is a social correction to capitalism's laissez-fair laziness regarding full employment. There is no means testing as a condition, only employment.

Solving for simple poverty means capitalism will be better not worse. The right wing Only has fantasy, not any form of solutions.

It's a matter of terminology. What you are advocating is quite simply welfare for when you are not working for whatever reason. That means that a large number of people will decide that they prefer collecting a paycheck but not working a job and society will bear that cost.

not at all; what I am advocating is improving the efficiency of our economy, in favor of the general welfare instead of a private profit motive.

Yeah, because profit is bad. DERP!

profit is good, but a good economy is better. Derp!

 

[koshergrl]

Workers push for minimum wage to be raised (ethical or unethical)?

What would happen if the government and employers cooperate to boost the minimum wage to say, a very high figure. What would happen to the economy in the short and long run

We do all realize that the minimum wage is raised on a regular basis...right?

Next raise is Jan 1 for Oregon.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense. only the right, never gets it.

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

only the right has no use for Capitalism. it is about consolidating and re-tooling for greater efficiency, like Henry Ford.

only the right has no use for Capitalism.

Only the left totally misunderstands economics.

it is about consolidating and re-tooling for greater efficiency

After your mandatory $15 minimum wage, the surviving businesses will be much more efficient.....
after they learn how to exist without $15/hour unskilled labor.

Of course unemployment will be much, much higher.
At least the surviving business owners will make more money.

Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages as a form of competition. The right is claiming they can't do it, due to excessive corporate welfare and too many tax holidays.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it does; it makes the same sense.

It made sense for Ford to hike wages, it took too much time and money to train new workers.
It doesn't make sense for McDonalds to pay fry cooks $15/hour, that job is so simple, even you could do it.

You see, it's a matter of supply, demand and productivity.

Yes, it makes the same sense; to decrease turnover and increase productivity.

It does not make sense to pay low skilled workers $15/hour.
Their productivity is too low.

yes, a $15 minimum would make it illegal to hire anyone not worth $15. What a great way to create more unemployment and another liberal scam to correct unemployment.

so what; if Capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost; how Good can they be.

Exactly! Kill all the business owners who pay less than $20/hour, eh comrade?

We have the largest economy in the world and a first world economy. That costs; only the right wants it cheap.

 

[danielpalos]

Minimum wage is a kind of gentrification - a move to push out the poor, or at least consign them to state dependency.

Why is that, with a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage? Doesn't that mean, the working poor will have more money to spend, to create more demand, in the long run?

 

[danielpalos]

What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

same if any price is raised. People cant afford to buy as much.

except people who are making fifteen dollars an hour, minimum. only the right, never gets it. one plus one equals two.

 

[danielpalos]

you are wrong; you have that right since you have not abandoned it. it is inalienable. that is why no one takes the right seriously about economics or the law.

show me where in the constitution it says you have a right to a job

dear, employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer. it is simple, theft from the poor so the rich can get richer, faster.

Sweety, the employer owns the job. it is his to give or take away.

so what; why so much litigation about for-cause and at-will, if it is so simple?

only the right wing, never gets it. and, they wonder why it costs so much to do business.

What litigation?
Not too many people who get laid off go to court

I've owned businesses have you? It seems to me you do not understand the costs involved in running a business not me

it is a major expense for the employment sector. for-cause and at-will would not be so litigious, with unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis.

 

[danielpalos]

show me where in the constitution it says you have a right to a job

It's right after the section on your right to have your condoms paid for by the taxpayer. You know, in the section written in crayon.

nothing but diversion while claiming equality for pay purposes in the non-porn sector, gentlemen?

it is about, equal protection of the law.

Which we have. You don't have a right to a job, and if you voluntarily leave a job, you don't have the right to force someone else to continue paying you. It's equal.

I guess we could give you what you want and eliminate UI altogether.

do you always argue in a vacuum of special pleading?

we have paying paying for War on Poverty for over a generation, with no end in sight.

we could be solving simple poverty on an at-will basis, but for right wing fantasy.

Yeah we have the richest poor people on the fucking planet right here
Tell me if people can get paid not to work like you want where will all the money come from to pay them?

simple, a more efficient economy. we don't need a War on Drugs. and welfare will not be so expensive if people can go on unemployment compensation instead.