Analyzing A Practical Minimum Wage

[Jackinthebox]

So you support illegal immigration then too I expect?

Absolutely not.

Why not? If a Mexican agrees to work for 50 cents a day. It's none of your business.

It's my business if he's not here legally.

Oh, so it's okay to regulate the free market in some places but not others? We can regulate it to ban foreign workers, but not for the benefit of domestic workers or the national economy?

For someone who seems to be here to just promote your blog, you are awfully presumptive.
Try again if you want to have a conversation. I never said any of those things.

Ad hominem, you fail. That blog is half dead. But the material is interesting.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Clearly you are blinded by political rhetoric and not at all interested in historical data.

why be so afraid to share the data?? What does your fear teach us about liberalism?

Maybe you missed the OP:


Using data by the U.S. BLS, the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not. Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker. -Source

Based on consumption growth since 1968, the minimum wage today would have to be $25.05 to represent the same share of the country's total consumption. Based on national income growth, the minimum wage should be $22.08. Based on personal income growth, it should be $21.16. -Source

After adjusting for inflation, minimum wage workers today are paid about 26 percent less than they were in 1974.

At the top 1 percent of the American income distribution, average incomes rose 194 percent between 1974 and 2011. Had U.S. minimum wages risen at the same pace as U.S. maximum wages, the minimum wage would now be $26.96 an hour. -Source


Read more: Analyzing a Practical Minimum Wage Minimum Wage Workers Union of America

can you say what the point is??

 

[Jackinthebox]

Why do union advocates always want to roll back 60 years of progress?

I see your point. A grocery bagger is a grocery bagger. They are not any more efficient than they were in 1950. But at the same time, their rate of pay should have kept up with the average productivity of American business. They are doing the same work, for a smaller piece of the pie.

Why? If they aren't more productive why should the job pay more? The job should pay what customers will accept.

Do you honestly believe that the top 1% are that much more productive now than int he past?

Someone is being more productive and not being paid for it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We can regulate it to ban foreign workers,

yes that is called maintaining borders or preserving your country.

but not for the benefit of domestic workers or the national economy?

yes capitalist regulation for workers and economy is fine becuase it makes everyone rich at the fastest possible rates. Chinese workers used to slowly starve to death under liberalism now thanks to capitalism they buy cars. Capitalism forces wages up and product quality up at the fastest possible rate.

Econ 101. Sorry to rock your world.

 

[Jackinthebox]

yawn......less than 2% of working people earn minimum wage....

Want to earn more? Become WORTH more.

What about the EMT coming to save your life that only earns a dollar more per hour but still has to work 80 hours a week to make the rent. Better hope you get sick at the start of their shift.

Supply and demand. EMTs make $28 per hour starting wage here (with generous benefits), maybe they should do what I did, move to an area that had better jobs for me (then I started my own company and moved back).

First of all, you show me where EMT's are making that. Not advertised, but hiring and paying that. I call bullshit, because I went and got my EMT, along with my CDL and BOTH were a waste of time and money.

As far as moving goes, shuffling the deck does not solve the problems in our economy.

 

[dblack]

Why do union advocates always want to roll back 60 years of progress?

I see your point. A grocery bagger is a grocery bagger. They are not any more efficient than they were in 1950. But at the same time, their rate of pay should have kept up with the average productivity of American business. They are doing the same work, for a smaller piece of the pie.

Why? If they aren't more productive why should the job pay more? The job should pay what customers will accept.

Do you honestly believe that the top 1% are that much more productive now than int he past?

Someone is being more productive and not being paid for it.

I certainly don't. I think they've learned how to use government to secure their privilege.

 

[dblack]

yawn......less than 2% of working people earn minimum wage....

Want to earn more? Become WORTH more.

What about the EMT coming to save your life that only earns a dollar more per hour but still has to work 80 hours a week to make the rent. Better hope you get sick at the start of their shift.

Supply and demand. EMTs make $28 per hour starting wage here (with generous benefits), maybe they should do what I did, move to an area that had better jobs for me (then I started my own company and moved back).

First of all, you show me where EMT's are making that. Not advertised, but hiring and paying that. I call bullshit, because I went and got my EMT, along with my CDL and BOTH were a waste of time and money.

As far as moving goes, shuffling the deck does not solve the problems in our economy.

This sort of debate just means nothing to me. If EMTs want to work for peanuts, that's their business. Not mine. Not yours.

 

[asterism]

Why do union advocates always want to roll back 60 years of progress?

I see your point. A grocery bagger is a grocery bagger. They are not any more efficient than they were in 1950. But at the same time, their rate of pay should have kept up with the average productivity of American business. They are doing the same work, for a smaller piece of the pie.

But at the same time, their rate of pay should have kept up with the average productivity of American business.

Why?

Because decreasing their spending power dilutes market liquidity.

Artificially propping up low skilled workers inhibits growth. It all depends on where the money is coming from.

The primary issue is that the low-skilled US worker cannot compete with the global low-skilled worker. That's what has changed since the "golden age of the unionists," the world has modernized and billions are now out of actual starvation conditions. So just like workers everywhere, subsistence still requires a combination of work, skill, and not having a guarantee.

It's strange that the ever-increasing set of entitlements have shifted from basic survival (not starving) to now living a completely independent life. As that set of entitlements has maxed out, now there's a push to force companies to pay more, even though that will end up with even more people living completely on the government dole.

Isn't that what the Cloward-Piven strategy calls for?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Do you honestly believe that the top 1% are that much more productive now than int he past?

yes they have more machines than ever and more international markets than ever. Liberals screw our workers with liberal corporate taxes and liberal unions that drive jobs away.

 

[Roadrunner]

Do you think things will be better when those jobs are illegal?

If your business operates on welfare subsidized labor, GTFO. And then yes, things will be better. China-Mart infiltration is coming in through the Republican party. Ironic.

How is that ironic?

As I've said repeatedly, businesses shouldn't be able to hire people who are on welfare. But if someone wants to work for less than your idea of the 'minimum', it's really none of your fucking business.

You r solution is to leave everyone living at home with their parents?

No. What are you talking about? My solution is, essentially, "live and let live". I just don't understand the authoritarian impulse to tell everyone else how to live.

I don't believe in telling anyone how to live, as long as they are living on their money; if they live on assistance, the government has every right to get into their lives.

 

[Jackinthebox]

No. What are you talking about? My solution is, essentially, "live and let live". I just don't understand the authoritarian impulse to tell everyone else how to live.

I have very libertarian views. But I am not an anarchist. I do believe that the govt has the right to mandate policies which will be economically constructive to our society.

A min wage worker should be paid enough to live on. That is not at all unreasonable. No more unreasonable than saying that slave should be paid for their work, and not treated to some grits.

 

[dblack]

Do you think things will be better when those jobs are illegal?

If your business operates on welfare subsidized labor, GTFO. And then yes, things will be better. China-Mart infiltration is coming in through the Republican party. Ironic.

How is that ironic?

As I've said repeatedly, businesses shouldn't be able to hire people who are on welfare. But if someone wants to work for less than your idea of the 'minimum', it's really none of your fucking business.

You r solution is to leave everyone living at home with their parents?

No. What are you talking about? My solution is, essentially, "live and let live". I just don't understand the authoritarian impulse to tell everyone else how to live.

I don't believe in telling anyone how to live, as long as they are living on their money; if they live on assistance, the government has every right to get into their lives.

I disagree. Public assistance should not be a synonym for slavery.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

yawn......less than 2% of working people earn minimum wage....

Want to earn more? Become WORTH more.

What about the EMT coming to save your life that only earns a dollar more per hour but still has to work 80 hours a week to make the rent. Better hope you get sick at the start of their shift.

Supply and demand. EMTs make $28 per hour starting wage here (with generous benefits), maybe they should do what I did, move to an area that had better jobs for me (then I started my own company and moved back).

First of all, you show me where EMT's are making that. Not advertised, but hiring and paying that. I call bullshit, because I went and got my EMT, along with my CDL and BOTH were a waste of time and money.

As far as moving goes, shuffling the deck does not solve the problems in our economy.

This sort of debate just means nothing to me. If EMTs want to work for peanuts, that's their business. Not mine. Not yours.

yes, and liberals don't just want to set the minimum wage they want union wages too plus a soviet level of interference in all aspects of the economy. Obamacare is just one huge example. Liberals are too stupid to know they are communist dupes.

 

[Roadrunner]

yawn......less than 2% of working people earn minimum wage....

Want to earn more? Become WORTH more.

What about the EMT coming to save your life that only earns a dollar more per hour but still has to work 80 hours a week to make the rent. Better hope you get sick at the start of their shift.

Supply and demand. EMTs make $28 per hour starting wage here (with generous benefits), maybe they should do what I did, move to an area that had better jobs for me (then I started my own company and moved back).

First of all, you show me where EMT's are making that. Not advertised, but hiring and paying that. I call bullshit, because I went and got my EMT, along with my CDL and BOTH were a waste of time and money.

As far as moving goes, shuffling the deck does not solve the problems in our economy.

If you are a trained EMT, and cannot find work in the GOUSA, you must have some serious character flaws, or a long rap sheet, or can't pass a piss test.

The sorriest son of a bitch I ever had in my GED classes in now an EMT making $30 an hour AND paid insurance.

 

[Jackinthebox]

Do you honestly believe that the top 1% are that much more productive now than int he past?

yes they have more machines than ever and more international markets than ever. Liberals screw our workers with liberal corporate taxes and liberal unions that drive jobs away.

Okay, so kick out the fuckin liberals. Pay your own operating expenses.

Let me pay my workers enough to eat and pay their rend, so that YOU don't have to!

 

[dblack]

No. What are you talking about? My solution is, essentially, "live and let live". I just don't understand the authoritarian impulse to tell everyone else how to live.

I have very libertarian views. But I am not an anarchist. I do believe that the govt has the right to mandate policies which will be economically constructive to our society.

A min wage worker should be paid enough to live on. That is not at all unreasonable. No more unreasonable than saying that slave should be paid for their work, and not treated to some grits.

No, you do not have "very libertarian views". What you refuse to acknowledge, is that you're saying that people who can't earn your idea of the minimum shouldn't be allowed to work. That's a real result of the policies you advocate. And it's dead wrong.

 

[Roadrunner]

If your business operates on welfare subsidized labor, GTFO. And then yes, things will be better. China-Mart infiltration is coming in through the Republican party. Ironic.

How is that ironic?

As I've said repeatedly, businesses shouldn't be able to hire people who are on welfare. But if someone wants to work for less than your idea of the 'minimum', it's really none of your fucking business.

You r solution is to leave everyone living at home with their parents?

No. What are you talking about? My solution is, essentially, "live and let live". I just don't understand the authoritarian impulse to tell everyone else how to live.

I don't believe in telling anyone how to live, as long as they are living on their money; if they live on assistance, the government has every right to get into their lives.

I disagree. Public assistance should not be a synonym for slavery.

I think everyone seeking public assistance should be given a job commensurate with their skills.

That is not slavery.

But, I was referring more to lifestyles.

People on welfare that are obese for example, should be required to lose weight, or lose benefits.

Welfare recipients should be drug and alcohol tested too.

 

[Jackinthebox]

I don't believe in telling anyone how to live, as long as they are living on their money; if they live on assistance, the government has every right to get into their lives.

Lets start with killing welfare labor, before we go shredding the Constitution.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Let me pay my workers enough to eat and pay their rend, so that YOU don't have to!

dear, everyone in America is free to pay their workers as much as they want. Point is, if you pay much more than competition they will drive you into bankruptcy.

 

[Roadrunner]

No. What are you talking about? My solution is, essentially, "live and let live". I just don't understand the authoritarian impulse to tell everyone else how to live.

I have very libertarian views. But I am not an anarchist. I do believe that the govt has the right to mandate policies which will be economically constructive to our society.

A min wage worker should be paid enough to live on. That is not at all unreasonable. No more unreasonable than saying that slave should be paid for their work, and not treated to some grits.

No, you do not have "very libertarian views". What you refuse to acknowledge, is that you're saying that people who can't earn your idea of the minimum shouldn't be allowed to work. That's a real result of the policies you advocate. And it's dead wrong.

Not being allowed to work because you are on the dole is about the stupidest thing I ever heard of.