|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
posted July 09, 2016 04:14 AM |
|
|
Bribery isn't mainstream until it becomes tax deductible.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 04:16 AM |
|
|
Ebonheart said:
2. Pull out and do something else.
Definitely would not choose this option. Ever.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 05:13 PM |
|
|
|
The Democrats’ platform committee late Friday approved an amendment that formalizes the party’s commitment to a $15 minimum wage, with indexing for inflation. Well done Bernie.
|
|
Ebonheart
Famous Hero
Rush the rush
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 05:18 PM |
|
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 05:46 PM |
|
|
Minion said:
The Democrats’ platform committee late Friday approved an amendment that formalizes the party’s commitment to a $15 minimum wage, with indexing for inflation. Well done Bernie.
It's an idiotic platform.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 05:50 PM |
|
Edited by Minion at 18:54, 09 Jul 2016.
|
Oh I remember how much you dislike minimum wage laws 
Edit: Oh just noticed the Skype idea, I guess the answer is "no thanks". I'll have a cold beverage though 
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
Ebonheart
Famous Hero
Rush the rush
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 07:12 PM |
|
|
Minion said:
Oh I remember how much you dislike minimum wage laws
Edit: Oh just noticed the Skype idea, I guess the answer is "no thanks". I'll have a cold beverage though
Kinda of a anti social bunch we have here on the HC forums.
Oh well hide behind your texts then, I for one cba to destroy my fingers for something I now have the answer to.
Best of luck in the debate you guys.
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 07:40 PM |
|
|
Minion said:
The Democrats’ platform committee late Friday approved an amendment that formalizes the party’s commitment to a $15 minimum wage, with indexing for inflation. Well done Bernie.
HC has been invaded by pessimistic drama queens in the past 2 years, but Bernie's economic focused campaign has been very successful. People are annoyed by him not being more supportive about Hillary, but they don't understand that it's not about November 2016. It's about the long-term shift in the US political landscape. The 2016 election happens to be a means to an end to attract a lot of attention. Hillary is 4 or 8 years and then it's over, and it's not as though a Democrat or Republican in the executive office means they can achieve their goals.
A 70+ year old Vermont Jew has more popular support in the general election than Hillary or Trump. If he managed to get the nomination, he would be the most electable major candidate. That says a lot about how America wants a flourishing middle class.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 09, 2016 11:13 PM |
|
|
There are a plethora of invisible benefits to artificially setting a minimum wage that nullify (and them some) the harmful effect it has just from its arithmetic. Businesses have to raise costs to not go out of business, which will indirectly effect the lower class, but not enough to undo the much higher wage.
The reality right now is that there are lot of places where you can work 40 hours a week and still be almost humanely incapable of paying rent for the smallest apartment available with other necessary payments.
The harm of a purely market based wage are:
A country with an unemployment rate and yet businesses all over the country having vacancies for low skill jobs. Restaurants, stores, hotels, etc, along with a high turnover rate in all of the above. This hurts productivity.
High stress situations. Poor people living together to pay rent. Children receiving an education that might as well be segregated. Etc. I've said before that radicalism is bred through desperation and this is as true for terrorism as it is for any civilian. You pay low skill jobs an unlivable market wage and it indirectly costs hundreds of billions of dollars or more in damage: crime, unhealthy lifestyles, domestic abuse, drugs; they're all fueled through living in ongoing high stress conditions. Human beings need outlets to feel good, and harsh conditions turn people towards outlets that are analogous to an all Pepsi diet: a rush of pleasure and energy followed by crashing, followed by an ever more demanding craving for that rush. Or venting in dangerous ways, like screaming at the top of your lungs with your children in the next room. The examples are endless and they're all augmented by living like an animal. The part of your brain that sends these signals for relief can actually override your reasoning faculties and put you in a state of temporary quasi insanity. This is why so many people at or near poverty spend their tax refund on something like a TV. It might have to do with incompetence but more than likely it's an escape combined with judgment that has been physically temporarily suspended. We're evolved creatures but only up to a certain limit. We can be pitiful managers of our own well being and towards the well being of people we love.
And of course, Americans pay for it anyway. A person can't actually survive on certain hourly wages so government benefit programs are created, which has to be funneled through a system and even more money disappears from the cut.
Any decision reasoned purely through economic math is an irrational (and simpleton) explanation. If it was as simple as analyzing the data, why would it even be a debate? This is why financial policy is very much a soft science, because it is integrated with psychology and sociology along with economics. It can't provide "yes or no" conclusions for policy. The DoL has been on board with higher minimum wages for a long time because any evidence that it's harmful for the country is scant.
There are some liberal constructions that are divorced from solid, tried and true attempts and successes, like rampant absenteeism and ruthlessly strict labor laws that almost turn employers into 2nd class citizens. A high minimum wage isn't one of them. It works.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 07:26 AM |
|
|
Quick snippet of indisputable truth.
Both Hillary and Bill have lied under oath
____________
What are you up to
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 07:28 AM |
|
|
Celfious said:
Quick snippet of indisputable truth.
Both Hillary and Bill have lied under oath
"i swear on my mom's tits". - george carlin
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 10:41 AM |
|
|
BB said:
Any decision reasoned purely through economic math is an irrational (and simpleton) explanation.
Exactly. That's the Achilles' heel of Adam Smith.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Ebonheart
Famous Hero
Rush the rush
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 10:44 AM |
|
|
artu said:
BB said:
Any decision reasoned purely through economic math is an irrational (and simpleton) explanation.
Exactly. That's the Achilles' heel of Adam Smith.
True indeed.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 06:04 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 18:07, 10 Jul 2016.
|
Blizzardboy said:
Any decision reasoned purely through economic math is an irrational (and simpleton) explanation. If it was as simple as analyzing the data, why would it even be a debate? This is why financial policy is very much a soft science, because it is integrated with psychology and sociology along with economics.
So, basically you advocate overriding scientific assessments to base policy decisions on what makes (some) people feel good, even if it may result in a worse outcome for them (and everyone else) downstream. Unfortunately, it's impossible to qualify (much less quantify) aggregate "psychological effects" on a diverse population. Ultimately, this viewpoint only facilitates pandering by politician and demagogues - which, by the way, is what most declarations for raising the minimum wage come down to.
Imagine if we took this approach with policy decisions for, say, food and drug safety. Well, even though that cancer drug has low efficacy and is more likely to cause long term harm than good, we have to consider the psychological effects here, not just analyze the pharmacological data. People feel good about taking something, so we should go ahead and approve it anyway. At that point, why make scientific assessments at all, if we're just going to base policy decisions on what we think people's emotional reactions are likely to be?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 06:18 PM |
|
|
You are the one reducing the antithesis into emotions, not him.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 06:46 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 18:46, 10 Jul 2016.
|
And what would you call integrating "psychology" into science-based policy decisions?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 06:47 PM |
|
|
What went wrong with Adam Smith's plan was that he thought a wealthy Upper-Class Management would just sprinkle prosperity on the lower classes. iirc He was irate when this did not happen and tried to advocate for change but he met a brick-wall.
Today we are not operating in the comfy confines of a single nation and competing against other nations, instead it is a global market were Management is playing poor folk against each other with no respect to borders or nations.
<imo> Raising the minimum wage might seem a good thing to do but what about the enormous power for Multi-nationals to use the world's workers and always to their benefit?
i.e. Let's look at a "best case American" scenario. Company A pays Alice 10/hr. to answer phones and currently Indian-workers will do the same for 8/hr. Maybe the American outfit sees this 2/hr loss as keeping work in the States? However, now at the mandated 15/hr. it now means the company will have to pay twice as much as in India and says...to hell with it.
I think since the market is global and is keeping people poor and making others poorer all for CEOs, it should have a governing law over all the multi-nationals etc.
Fact...Years ago, CEOs in the US were making something like 50 times what employees made and at that time Japan's CEOs were making around 20 times. However, later I heard that CEO's in the USA were then making 250 times what their employees made. What the hell is it today...1000 times, more?
If they did aok with 50, why not today? Feel generous to the wealthy-greedmongers? Ok give them a 100! Now, with that as a law globally, with no GREEDY loopholes and "Golden-Parachutes" (look it up) profit would be passed down and actual Management-Skills come back into...USE again.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 07:00 PM |
|
|
Corribus said:
And what would you call integrating "psychology" into science-based policy decisions?
I get your objection, but any market is more than just what the numbers add up. Not in the sense that numbers are meaningless, but they are not as determinitive as "purist" economists claim. If masses lose trust and do X move because they lost trust, things collapse. Do you have a better word for such situations instead of "psychological?"
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 07:00 PM |
|
|
Broadly speaking, if there's unemployment, then wages are too high. There can be other factors, like skills mismatch and high fixed costs to employing a worker, but even in those cases, mandating increased wages won't make it better. The central determinants of wages are (on the pay side) productivity and labor market competitiveness and (on the spending side) the prices of what those wages buy. So to make people better off, make them more productive, make it easier for them to find and switch jobs, or eliminate policies that increase the costs of stuff they buy. For example, reducing zoning regulations that increase the cost of housing would help with both the second and third.
Being poor is bad for many of the reasons Blizzardboy mentioned, but what's raising the minimum wage going to do about it? Some people's wages would rise, but others would end up unemployed altogether, which is even worse. If you think people on the minimum wage use too many government programs, the unemployed will use even more. Besides, if that's your objection, shouldn't you be pushing for the abolition of those programs? Also, it's not clear why employers should be the ones to bear the costs of workers' above-market wages. If anything, this is an argument for tax-funded wage subsidies, rather than placing the burden directly on employers.
Besides, when looking at the causation between poverty and dysfunction, it's not all the former causing the latter - some of it is the other way around. For example, that's why lottery winners end up squandering their winnings. There are also social demands that make saving money difficult, e.g. "Hey, you have some money, so you can bail your cousin out of jail", and when you know that you won't be allowed to keep your money, you have a strong incentive to spend it immediately. Some people are bad at delayed gratification and spend all the money they have, regardless of their income. Others are miserable because of mental issues, and poverty is only a symptom. Etc, etc.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted July 10, 2016 07:14 PM |
|
|
|
Easily the greatest flaw of all economic theories based on the "classics" is that they assume rational behaviour as their base and pretend that no other social phenomenons exist outside of the economic sphere - otherwise they just fail to explain anything. If wages hit a low limit close or beyond the existence minimum, people just start looking into other source of income, usually illegal. No free market sorcery can fix that and what's unscientific is to ignore such facts because they make the world look not-so-predictable.
|
|
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
