Minimum wage

[KimGordon67]

Thank You for your articulate comments. I do like to read other opinion besides my own and add my 2¢. I do so far too infrequently because there are too many keyboard warriors that jump you with vulgar responses.

I do believe in trickle down economics. I think everything is like that. I own a business (I don’t) I hire people and pay them a fair wage in regards to the skill level of the work. I get contracts to do work I pay my people, they pay their people who pay their people. It’s also the same with taxes. Who ever is at the end of the chain pays.

If trickle down economics worked like people said it would, the gap wealth gap wouldn't be growing at an exponential rate. I recommend this video for getting a handle on the extent of the issue.

 

[KimGordon67]

True, inheritances are unearned. However, as I see it, it is the right of the deceased to say how their assets will be distributed. So the relevant right belongs to the person giving the money, not the person receiving it. That same dynamic should apply while a person is alive.


"State intervention levels the playing field so that everyone really does have access to opportuniyy ."

A claim you parrot, but do not seriously address, and one that I greatly question. How much state intervention did Hong Kong, its heyday, or Taiwan provide? While purporting to do so (thereby gaining votes for the re-distributionists), it reduces opportunities, particularly, I would say, for young people without marketable skills other than a willingness to work. For example, raising minimum wage encourages automation, thereby reducing a range of entry level jobs.

Being disadvantaged in some way or other in no way excludes you from embracing opportunities that are available to you. True, you may not have the opportunity for, say, a college education- well there are many forms of education in this world. For example my husband chose the considerable opportunity offered by the US Army (ok, he got a degree later, while on active duty, a degree for which he has little respect, but it was needed for advancement). Frankly, I don't believe there are a surplus of skilled machinists and plumbers, at least in the USA.

I agree, poverty is a problem- we may disagree on what constitutes poverty. America's poor generally have more in the way of material possessions and access to a range of benefits than most people in the world would envy. The lack of opportunity is certainly correlated with poverty, but is far from the only contributor. No, it is not that America's poor WANT to be "dirt poor"- but neither, for the most part, do they want to take those sustained actions necessary to alleviate their poverty. Well with the cradle to grave welfare state, why should they make the hard changes required to improve themselves? By and large, America's poor- and not so poor- are perfectly happy to live off the wealth generated by others, and I submit that that attitude is a major reason why poverty spans generations in the USA.


I do notice you didn't bother to answer the question I asked you about why an adult, by virtue of his or her existence, is entitled to the benefit of someone else's work. I will hazard a guess you prefer to avoid such issues, on the grounds that addressing them would cause you to question your world view. Since your claim lacks any specificity, I can only wonder what "evidence" you think I "interpreted according to [my] own ideology."

In closing, capitalism has been the greatest wealth generator in the history of humanity- can you point to anything that comes close? To the extent it is allowed to flourish, societies prosper. True, people will share in its bounty unequally- so be it. That is superior- morally, as well as economically- than an economic system such as you advocate, based on plundering the wealth of those who create it. Like a great many people on the Internet, you show every sign of not wanting to carefully consider your positions. Well I'm sure life is easier that way.

Responses to bolded comments in sequence:
Huzzah - a 'here's someone who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, so obviously everyone can' bit of anecdotal evidence. Exactly as I predicted.

How do you know this? Have you asked them?

Because some people are more advantaged than others. And because greater equality is better for the whole society, not just the disadvantaged (unless you are using 'material wealth of the individual and screw everyone else' as the barometer of a successful society).

We are 'prospering' according to a very specific metric. We're destroying the planet in the process. I don't consider that 'progress'.

Actually, I think about this stuff a lot, and read a lot.
You might find this strip a useful way of getting a handle on how inequality is transferred generationally. Spoiler alert - it's not because poor people are lazy.

 

[Goldenfinger]

If trickle down economics worked like people said it would, the gap wealth gap wouldn't be growing at an exponential rate. I recommend this video for getting a handle on the extent of the issue.

Could it be people want more and more but want to do less for it? It used to be you wanted to do better than your parents. But now people want to make a career of flipping burgers. Are we pushing a higher minimum wage to offset Mediocrity?

 

[KimGordon67]

Could it be people want more and more but want to do less for it? It used to be you wanted to do better than your parents. But now people want to make a career of flipping burgers. Are we pushing a higher minimum wage to offset Mediocrity?

Who are these people who want to 'make a career of flipping burgers'? I'm yet to meet one.

 

[Rightguide]

Here’s a story. I know a guy who was very excited that they were raising minimum wage.

All labor contract use The prevailing Minimum Wage as the baseline for their contractual wage progression schedules. If the Minimum Wage goes up 10% that becomes the baseline for the next wage negotiation, even though nobody in the big labor unions actually works for the Minimum Wage, lowest wage in the progression being typically established as a percentage above MW to begin with.

In the next wage negotiation the wage level in the entire wage progression schedule will go up by the same amount, this will be conceded by management before real increases are actually negotiated.

One can see when viewing a typical wage progression running from say $8.00 per hr to $25 per hr that a 10% increase is a lot more at the top than at the bottom hourly rate. This is why unions who do not work for Minimum Wage will always support a government effort to increase it. As members at the top wage level will benefit the most.

 

[KimGordon67]

There's very little point having this discussion with people who are coming from the 'poor people are poor because of some character flaw' position, topped off with the 'all rich people got that way through the dint of hard work' argument. I'll bow out unless someone comes up with something a bit more insightful.

 

[srgreene]

Responses to bolded comments in sequence:
Huzzah - a 'here's someone who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, so obviously everyone can' bit of anecdotal evidence. Exactly as I predicted.

How do you know this? Have you asked them?

For the most part (plenty of exceptions to this generality), I do not see certain sub-populations in the USA taking the steps necessary to move out of the cycle of poverty. When, for example, 70% of Negro babies born in the USA are born out of wedlock, with all the problems that widespread, female dominated, single parent families pose, civilized norms are likely to not be upheld. Inconvenient and troublesome as they are at times, fathers are important. I know- I lost mine at 13, and paid a price for it, I would say. Having had two sons and two daughters, I'd be inclined to say that fathers are even more important to boys than girls .... it certainly acts in different ways. When the most respected members of a society are its athletes, entertainers, and drug pushers, children lack a vital role model.

Because some people are more advantaged than others. And because greater equality is better for the whole society, not just the disadvantaged (unless you are using 'material wealth of the individual and screw everyone else' as the barometer of a successful society).

I have no idea what you are driving at here- what is because some people are more advantaged than others? In general, I would say it is a very bad idea to deny some children an particular opportunity because not all children can have it. I do not see equality as important as you do- in fact, I doubt that any human society beyond the tribe has experienced it (and even then, there were those of privilege). Poverty is more a state of mind, a cultural phenomenon, than it is a material condition, at least in the USA.

We are 'prospering' according to a very specific metric. We're destroying the planet in the process. I don't consider that 'progress'.

You and I seem to agree that environmental destruction is a huge problem, one that we are bequeathing the future. I will guess, though, that you consider computers and cell phones to be a sign of 'progress' ... they inevitably come with a certain environmental cost. But I'm not sure what its relevance is to this topic, so I'm not sure why you refer to it, unless its as a distraction (I do notice you steadfastly refuse to address questions I ask you).

Actually, I think about this stuff a lot, and read a lot.
You might find this strip a useful way of getting a handle on how inequality is transferred generationally. Spoiler alert - it's not because poor people are lazy.

Thank you. I do not typically find comic strips to be useful in shaping my world view. I don't know what you would like me to learn from it that I don't already know. I have never claimed "poor people are lazy" .... but they tend to make decisions when young that reinforce their poverty.

 

[KimGordon67]

For the most part (plenty of exceptions to this generality), I do not see certain sub-populations in the USA taking the steps necessary to move out of the cycle of poverty. When, for example, 70% of Negro babies born in the USA are born out of wedlock, with all the problems that widespread, female dominated, single parent families pose, civilized norms are likely to not be upheld. Inconvenient and troublesome as they are at times, fathers are important. I know- I lost mine at 13, and paid a price for it, I would say. Having had two sons and two daughters, I'd be inclined to say that fathers are even more important to boys than girls .... it certainly acts in different ways. When the most respected members of a society are its athletes, entertainers, and drug pushers, children lack a vital role model.



I have no idea what you are driving at here- what is because some people are more advantaged than others? In general, I would say it is a very bad idea to deny some children an particular opportunity because not all children can have it.






You and I seem to agree that environmental destruction is a huge problem, one that we are bequeathing the future. I'm not sure what its relevance is to this topic, so I'm not sure why you refer to it, unless its as a distraction (I do notice you steadfastly refuse to address questions I ask you).



Thank you. I do not typically find comic strips to be useful in shaping my world view, thank you.

Are you actually kidding me?

I'm just not even going to bother responding to the rest of this. See my previous comment.

 

[srgreene]

Are you actually kidding me?

I'm just not even going to bother responding to the rest of this. See my previous comment.

Oh, did I say something incorrect .... or was it merely "politically incorrect".

Yes, I do believe that the breakdown of the Negro family structure in the United States- which has been greatly abetted by the welfare state- has been an enormous restraint on the productivity and social integration of that part of American society. By the way, I think Drs. Thomas Sowell and the late Walter Williams would agree with me (even though the latter was raised largely by a single mom).

You appear to have no effective rebuttal to make to me, so you simply abandon the field of intellectual exchange in some sort of sense of moral superiority. Hmmmm .... I am not surprised in the slightest. I would say, in your "enlightened state" you choose to ignore an elephant in the room simply because you find it inconvenient to your worldview.

 

[KimGordon67]

Oh, did I say something incorrect .... or was it merely "politically incorrect".

Yes, I do believe that the breakdown of the Negro family structure in the United States- which has been greatly abetted by the welfare state- has been an enormous restraint on the productivity and social integration of that part of American society. By the way, I think Drs. Thomas Sowell and the late Walter Williams would agree with me (even though the latter was raised largely by a single mom).

You appear to have no effective rebuttal to make to me, so you simply abandon the field of intellectual exchange. Hmmmm .... I am not surprised in the slightest.

If it was an INTELLECTUAL exchange, maybe. But you're just trotting out ridiculous rhetoric. Your previous post effectively insulted the entire African American population AND single parents in one go. There is just literally no point talking to someone who thinks that's OK.

 

[srgreene]

If it was an INTELLECTUAL exchange, maybe. But you're just trotting out ridiculous rhetoric. Your previous post effectively insulted the entire African American population AND single parents in one go. There is just literally no point talking to someone who thinks that's OK.

I insulted nobody. I adduced a fact that you consider inconvenient, and for some reason consider yourself my moral and/or intellectual superior for noting. Oh, tell me Drs Sowell and Williams are (were) raaaaaaaaaaaaaacist.

A society ignores an "elephant in the room" as its peril.


Added: I may have confused Williams' upbringing with that of another distinguished American Negro: Robert Woodson. Not going to look it up just now- it's pretty late- but apologies if I erred.

 

[KimGordon67]

I insulted nobody. I adduced a fact that you consider inconvenient, and for some reason consider yourself my moral and/or intellectual superior for noting. Oh, tell me Drs Sowell and Williams are (were) raaaaaaaaaaaaaacist.

A society ignores an "elephant in the room" as its peril.

No, I'm telling you you're racist.

 

[srgreene]

No, I'm telling you you're racist.

And I will call you a contemptible liar.

 

[KimGordon67]

And I will call you a contemptible damn liar.

Good-oh.

 

[mayfly13]

From describing how "she" 'pulled trains' and did gangbangs in "her" youth

to expressing comtempt about "the Negroes'" sexual and family ways.

 

[KimGordon67]

From describing how "she" 'pulled trains' and did gangbangs in "her" youth

to expressing comtempt about "the Negroes'" sexual and family ways.

LOL ... great post stalking.
But remember, it's important that "civilized norms are upheld".

 

[Saint Peter]

From describing how "she" 'pulled trains' and did gangbangs in "her" youth

to expressing comtempt about "the Negroes'" sexual and family ways.

you describe yourself.

 

[srgreene]

you describe yourself.

Thank you Peter. Yes, I recently did admit on this site to some experience with "trains" in my youth, while explicitly denying "gangbangs". Well I never claimed to be a saint.

People like Kim Gordon have not a scintilla of integrity, to impugn someone the way he, she, or it did me with respect to the label of "racist". No, I'm sorry, it is not raacist to understand how devastating the considerable destruction of the American Negro family structure has been to, first and foremost, America Negroes. I take the percentage of out of wedlock births, and fatherless families, which provides fertile ground for a host of social problems, as evidence of that destruction.

Somehow, in Gordon's and mayfly's mind, recognizing reality makes a person a racist. It is abhorrent, but that is how the mindless left rolls today.

 

[sigh]

Minimum wage is the wedge issue created to hide the real issue. The fact is, since 1980, the wage gap between the richest Americans and the poorest has widened astronomically. Nearly a 300% increase for the top 1% and around 25% for the average worker. Even less for the poor. And the gap in who controls (owns) financial assets is even greater. I think arguing about the minimum wage is just a way to push this problem to the background, to hide it behind economic theory and noise. We created a economic climate in the latter part of the last century that hugely favors the rich. The numbers are obvious. That's what needs to be addressed.

I'm not saying that a minimum wage increase would be right or wrong. I'm saying I think it's a smoke screen. It's addressing the wrong problem, either through naiveté or deliberate misdirection. Probably both.

 

[bellisarius]

Minimum wage is the wedge issue created to hide the real issue. The fact is, since 1980, the wage gap between the richest Americans and the poorest has widened astronomically. Nearly a 300% increase for the top 1% and around 25% for the average worker. Even less for the poor. And the gap in who controls (owns) financial assets is even greater. I think arguing about the minimum wage is just a way to push this problem to the background, to hide it behind economic theory and noise. We created a economic climate in the latter part of the last century that hugely favors the rich. The numbers are obvious. That's what needs to be addressed.

I'm not saying that a minimum wage increase would be right or wrong. I'm saying I think it's a smoke screen. It's addressing the wrong problem, either through naiveté or deliberate misdirection. Probably both.

And just how do you go about addressing that problem?

 

[JohnsonLongwood]

The whole idea of minimum wage is a bad one. It actually hurts some of the people who it purports to help (e.g. it promotes automation of jobs that once were done by low skilled workers, thereby increasing unemployment.

Low wage jobs give young people their vital, first employment opportunities. If you are a career minimum wage worker, the problem is with you, not the market.

The market should decide your wage, not the government. You should think about this issue more deeply before blaming those nasty Republicans. Here's a presentation on the subject that is worth listening to.

https://mises.org/library/minimum-wage

This one is worth reading, if you can be bothered:

https://mises.org/library/repeal-minimum-wage

Given the trouble employers are having attracting workers at those low wage jobs and how they are offering signing bonuses and higher wages to entice people to work for them it seems the marketplace IS deciding on a new higher level for the bottom of the wage scale. The price of labor has fallen below the cost of delivering it (the "cost of living") and the marketplace law of price, supply, and demand is playing out as fewer sellers of labor are willing to sell at the old low price. Thus as demand rises so does the price.

 

[sigh]

And just how do you go about addressing that problem?

Don't know. First step would be to acknowledge it as a problem because it IS the problem, but since it started with Saint Ronald I doubt too many conservatives will buy in. Liberals seem to focus on legislative fixes but I don't think that's the way either. But we've redistributed the wealth over the last forty years tremendously in favor of those who already have plenty. Examine why that redistribution occurred would be my recommended second step. Then look for a fix to reverse distribution of wealth back to previous levels. Not asking to make everybody "equal", nor is this a call for "fairness". It's a call for return to normalcy.

 

[Sean]

And just how do you go about addressing that problem?

Eat the rich.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Silly issue. Only 7 states (all backwardass southern states) use the Federal minimum wage. All the rest have set their own higher than the Federal rate. Several are at $15 already.

 

[Rightguide]

Silly issue. Only 7 states (all backwardass southern states) use the Federal minimum wage. All the rest have set their own higher than the Federal rate. Several are at $15 already.

The problem is the establishment of a Minimum Wage, not what it happens to be from one locale to another. It's a wage and price control. They never work. They create shortages and unemployment.