The Dirty Little Truth About the Minimum Wage

[Boss]

Most of you, like myself, have learned about the Great Depression through the prism of public education. We were taught that FDR came into office, implemented his New Deal policies and saved the day... Right? Or, at least that's the way it is portrayed. The actual reality is quite different. As we get older and go to college, we are able to read different accounts of what happened and we learn that many of his policies actually prolonged the Great Depression.

I know you done heard that on Hate Radio, Cleetus.

The problem is, no professional or accredited Historian subscribes to that view.

But I'm sure you learned that in the college you went to right after they told you about the Talking Snake.

Joe quit fibbing they were doing it all over the world, to screw minority from underbidding for jobs


On The Historically Racist Motivations Behind Minimum Wage

The business-friendly National Center for Policy Analysis points out “the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act, requiring ‘prevailing’ wages on federally assisted construction projects, was supported by the idea that it would keep contractors from using ‘cheap colored labor’ to underbid contractors using white labor.”

African-American economist Thomas Sowell with Stanford University’s Hoover Institution gives an uncomfortable historical primer behind minimum wage laws:


“In 1925, a minimum-wage law was passed in the Canadian province of British Columbia, with the intent and effect of pricing Japanese immigrants out of jobs in the lumbering industry.

A Harvard professor of that era referred approvingly to Australia’s minimum wage law as a means to “protect the white Australian’s standard of living from the invidious competition of the colored races, particularly of the Chinese” who were willing to work for less.

In South Africa during the era of apartheid, white labor unions urged that a minimum-wage law be applied to all races, to keep black workers from taking jobs away from white unionized workers by working for less than the union pay scale.”

In today’s South Africa, The New York Times reported on poor workers, many of them black, angry at government leaders enforcing labor laws the price them out of a job

BING-BANG-BOOM!

Thank you!! Game over!

 

[Wyatt earp]

Most of you, like myself, have learned about the Great Depression through the prism of public education. We were taught that FDR came into office, implemented his New Deal policies and saved the day... Right? Or, at least that's the way it is portrayed. The actual reality is quite different. As we get older and go to college, we are able to read different accounts of what happened and we learn that many of his policies actually prolonged the Great Depression.

I know you done heard that on Hate Radio, Cleetus.

The problem is, no professional or accredited Historian subscribes to that view.

But I'm sure you learned that in the college you went to right after they told you about the Talking Snake.

Joe quit fibbing they were doing it all over the world, to screw minority from underbidding for jobs


On The Historically Racist Motivations Behind Minimum Wage

The business-friendly National Center for Policy Analysis points out “the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act, requiring ‘prevailing’ wages on federally assisted construction projects, was supported by the idea that it would keep contractors from using ‘cheap colored labor’ to underbid contractors using white labor.”

African-American economist Thomas Sowell with Stanford University’s Hoover Institution gives an uncomfortable historical primer behind minimum wage laws:


“In 1925, a minimum-wage law was passed in the Canadian province of British Columbia, with the intent and effect of pricing Japanese immigrants out of jobs in the lumbering industry.

A Harvard professor of that era referred approvingly to Australia’s minimum wage law as a means to “protect the white Australian’s standard of living from the invidious competition of the colored races, particularly of the Chinese” who were willing to work for less.

In South Africa during the era of apartheid, white labor unions urged that a minimum-wage law be applied to all races, to keep black workers from taking jobs away from white unionized workers by working for less than the union pay scale.”

In today’s South Africa, The New York Times reported on poor workers, many of them black, angry at government leaders enforcing labor laws the price them out of a job

BING-BANG-BOOM!

Thank you!! Game over!

You're welcome...

 

[Boss]

The thing I've noticed is that when I absolutely CRUSH you with logic, you start whining about me personally... which I always take as a sign I've won.

Someone will have to point me to the post where you crushed something with logic. I'd love to say that I've seen that. In the meantime, I think bear just obliterated any hopes of a defense you presented for your racist policy.

 

[JoeB131]

Someone will have to point me to the post where you crushed something with logic. I'd love to say that I've seen that. In the meantime, I think bear just obliterated any hopes of a defense you presented for your racist policy.

Pretty much every time you open your mouth...

Then you whine about what a meanyhead I am because I don't love Plutocracy with the same battered wife subservience you do.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Someone will have to point me to the post where you crushed something with logic. I'd love to say that I've seen that. In the meantime, I think bear just obliterated any hopes of a defense you presented for your racist policy.

Pretty much every time you open your mouth...

Then you whine about what a meanyhead I am because I don't love Plutocracy with the same battered wife subservience you do.

Bear destroyed you......the min wage is a fucking joke.

 

[DGS49]

When I was a kid, a gas station attendant pumped your gas, cleaned your windshield, and checked the oil while the gas was being pumped. There was no cost for those services. But increases to the MW killed those jobs.

Every major skyscraper in Pittsburgh had full-time elevator operators. Making minimum wage. Gone.

Millions of security guard jobs have been lost to cameras, motion detectors, and enhanced locks and physical security. The technology was driven indirectly by increases in the MW and pushed automation.

Every store had clerks whose job it was to help you find what you needed. Now?

Anyone who claims that increases in the MW don't affect jobs is either blind, stupid, or a tool for the Leftists in government. Why is it that everyone can see the disaster that a $25/hr MW would be, but no one can see the incremental harms of more gradual increases?

 

[buckeye45_73]

When I was a kid, a gas station attendant pumped your gas, cleaned your windshield, and checked the oil while the gas was being pumped. There was no cost for those services. But increases to the MW killed those jobs.

Every major skyscraper in Pittsburgh had full-time elevator operators. Making minimum wage. Gone.

Millions of security guard jobs have been lost to cameras, motion detectors, and enhanced locks and physical security. The technology was driven indirectly by increases in the MW and pushed automation.

Every store had clerks whose job it was to help you find what you needed. Now?

Anyone who claims that increases in the MW don't affect jobs is either blind, stupid, or a tool for the Leftists in government. Why is it that everyone can see the disaster that a $25/hr MW would be, but no one can see the incremental harms of more gradual increases?

Exactally, you mention all the things what will happen and they deny it, you then say 100 per hour...then they shut up.

 

[Boss]

Why would anyone talk about it any other way? Wages are money. Money's value is directly connected to its buying power.
There's no other sensible way to talk about it.

You don't know it but you're actually making the argument for why the MW is a BAD thing. If not for the federally-mandated minimum wage, the employer who wants to hire the cheapest possible labor would pay based on the cost of living. If it rose, they would naturally pay more. However, because they have the excuse of an arbitrary minimum, they don't have to.

Now, you may argue that we should set the MW up so that it fluctuates with the cost of living... problem is, cost of living varies in different places. There is a great deal of difference in the cost of living for Pearl, Mississippi and Los Angeles, California. Okay... so what to do there? Well, we can make the MW adjustable to the region... in other words, the MW in California would be markedly higher than the MW in Mississippi. Now... let us speculate what the results of that policy might be? People go where they can make the most money... so they leave Mississippi.. the tax base dries up and the remaining people suffer. Infrastructure crumbles, businesses move out because there are no more people. The cost of living continues to decline but it's because there are no people and nothing to buy. Meanwhile, California booms, more people move there, the cost of living continues to rise because of demand. Pretty soon, businesses begin to collapse because they can't afford the workforce and infrastructure crumbles from the weight of all the incoming.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why would anyone talk about it any other way? Wages are money. Money's value is directly connected to its buying power.
There's no other sensible way to talk about it.

You don't know it but you're actually making the argument for why the MW is a BAD thing. If not for the federally-mandated minimum wage, the employer who wants to hire the cheapest possible labor would pay based on the cost of living. If it rose, they would naturally pay more. However, because they have the excuse of an arbitrary minimum, they don't have to.

Now, you may argue that we should set the MW up so that it fluctuates with the cost of living... problem is, cost of living varies in different places. There is a great deal of difference in the cost of living for Pearl, Mississippi and Los Angeles, California. Okay... so what to do there? Well, we can make the MW adjustable to the region... in other words, the MW in California would be markedly higher than the MW in Mississippi. Now... let us speculate what the results of that policy might be? People go where they can make the most money... so they leave Mississippi.. the tax base dries up and the remaining people suffer. Infrastructure crumbles, businesses move out because there are no more people. The cost of living continues to decline but it's because there are no people and nothing to buy. Meanwhile, California booms, more people move there, the cost of living continues to rise because of demand. Pretty soon, businesses begin to collapse because they can't afford the workforce and infrastructure crumbles from the weight of all the incoming.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

 

[dblack]

Why would anyone talk about it any other way? Wages are money. Money's value is directly connected to its buying power.
There's no other sensible way to talk about it.

You don't know it but you're actually making the argument for why the MW is a BAD thing. If not for the federally-mandated minimum wage, the employer who wants to hire the cheapest possible labor would pay based on the cost of living. If it rose, they would naturally pay more. However, because they have the excuse of an arbitrary minimum, they don't have to.

Now, you may argue that we should set the MW up so that it fluctuates with the cost of living... problem is, cost of living varies in different places. There is a great deal of difference in the cost of living for Pearl, Mississippi and Los Angeles, California. Okay... so what to do there? Well, we can make the MW adjustable to the region... in other words, the MW in California would be markedly higher than the MW in Mississippi. Now... let us speculate what the results of that policy might be? People go where they can make the most money... so they leave Mississippi.. the tax base dries up and the remaining people suffer. Infrastructure crumbles, businesses move out because there are no more people. The cost of living continues to decline but it's because there are no people and nothing to buy. Meanwhile, California booms, more people move there, the cost of living continues to rise because of demand. Pretty soon, businesses begin to collapse because they can't afford the workforce and infrastructure crumbles from the weight of all the incoming.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

That's not freedom. That's power.

 

[Boss]

Why would anyone talk about it any other way? Wages are money. Money's value is directly connected to its buying power.
There's no other sensible way to talk about it.

You don't know it but you're actually making the argument for why the MW is a BAD thing. If not for the federally-mandated minimum wage, the employer who wants to hire the cheapest possible labor would pay based on the cost of living. If it rose, they would naturally pay more. However, because they have the excuse of an arbitrary minimum, they don't have to.

Now, you may argue that we should set the MW up so that it fluctuates with the cost of living... problem is, cost of living varies in different places. There is a great deal of difference in the cost of living for Pearl, Mississippi and Los Angeles, California. Okay... so what to do there? Well, we can make the MW adjustable to the region... in other words, the MW in California would be markedly higher than the MW in Mississippi. Now... let us speculate what the results of that policy might be? People go where they can make the most money... so they leave Mississippi.. the tax base dries up and the remaining people suffer. Infrastructure crumbles, businesses move out because there are no more people. The cost of living continues to decline but it's because there are no people and nothing to buy. Meanwhile, California booms, more people move there, the cost of living continues to rise because of demand. Pretty soon, businesses begin to collapse because they can't afford the workforce and infrastructure crumbles from the weight of all the incoming.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

Yes, your freedoms removed to negotiate for a higher wage based on increase in cost of living as opposed to a mandated minimum your employer will oblige instead.

Of course, you and your neighbors should be at liberty to cede your freedom to government to determine a suitable wage on your behalf if you so choose. That should be done at your statehouse.

 

[JoeB131]

Bear destroyed you......the min wage is a fucking joke.

Not really. He just repeated some kind of revisionist history. The reality is, living in the Jim Crow South was a miserable experience for blacks and they couldn't move to the North fast enough where the nice industrial jobs that paid minimum wage were.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

Shhhh.... when Boss says, "Freedom", he means the ability of the Rich to abuse the rest of us. That's what they always mean.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

See what I mean. He is just soooooo sad the rich can't exploit the working class.

 

[owebo]

Bear destroyed you......the min wage is a fucking joke.

Not really. He just repeated some kind of revisionist history. The reality is, living in the Jim Crow South was a miserable experience for blacks and they couldn't move to the North fast enough where the nice industrial jobs that paid minimum wage were.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

Shhhh.... when Boss says, "Freedom", he means the ability of the Rich to abuse the rest of us. That's what they always mean.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

See what I mean. He is just soooooo sad the rich can't exploit the working class.

Ummmm....you revised history....

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, your freedoms removed to negotiate for a higher wage based on increase in cost of living as opposed to a mandated minimum your employer will oblige instead.

Of course, you and your neighbors should be at liberty to cede your freedom to government to determine a suitable wage on your behalf if you so choose. That should be done at your statehouse.

Why, the Federal Government does these things better.

Hey, let's think about other "Freedoms" that mean old Federal Government deprives us (meaning the rich) of.

The right of the rich to make us work in unsafe work environments
The right of the rich to exploit child labor.
The right of the rich to sell unsafe products.

Clearly, we need "Free Market Fairies" to protect us from these things, not a mean old Federal Government that just wants to take away our "Freedoms".

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why would anyone talk about it any other way? Wages are money. Money's value is directly connected to its buying power.
There's no other sensible way to talk about it.

You don't know it but you're actually making the argument for why the MW is a BAD thing. If not for the federally-mandated minimum wage, the employer who wants to hire the cheapest possible labor would pay based on the cost of living. If it rose, they would naturally pay more. However, because they have the excuse of an arbitrary minimum, they don't have to.

Now, you may argue that we should set the MW up so that it fluctuates with the cost of living... problem is, cost of living varies in different places. There is a great deal of difference in the cost of living for Pearl, Mississippi and Los Angeles, California. Okay... so what to do there? Well, we can make the MW adjustable to the region... in other words, the MW in California would be markedly higher than the MW in Mississippi. Now... let us speculate what the results of that policy might be? People go where they can make the most money... so they leave Mississippi.. the tax base dries up and the remaining people suffer. Infrastructure crumbles, businesses move out because there are no more people. The cost of living continues to decline but it's because there are no people and nothing to buy. Meanwhile, California booms, more people move there, the cost of living continues to rise because of demand. Pretty soon, businesses begin to collapse because they can't afford the workforce and infrastructure crumbles from the weight of all the incoming.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

Yes, your freedoms removed to negotiate for a higher wage based on increase in cost of living as opposed to a mandated minimum your employer will oblige instead.

Of course, you and your neighbors should be at liberty to cede your freedom to government to determine a suitable wage on your behalf if you so choose. That should be done at your statehouse.

I support a minimum wage adjusted annually for inflation.

 

[owebo]

Yes, your freedoms removed to negotiate for a higher wage based on increase in cost of living as opposed to a mandated minimum your employer will oblige instead.

Of course, you and your neighbors should be at liberty to cede your freedom to government to determine a suitable wage on your behalf if you so choose. That should be done at your statehouse.

Why, the Federal Government does these things better.

Hey, let's think about other "Freedoms" that mean old Federal Government deprives us (meaning the rich) of.

The right of the rich to make us work in unsafe work environments
The right of the rich to exploit child labor.
The right of the rich to sell unsafe products.

Clearly, we need "Free Market Fairies" to protect us from these things, not a mean old Federal Government that just wants to take away our "Freedoms".

Your crony capitalism skirt is showing....

 

[owebo]

Why would anyone talk about it any other way? Wages are money. Money's value is directly connected to its buying power.
There's no other sensible way to talk about it.

You don't know it but you're actually making the argument for why the MW is a BAD thing. If not for the federally-mandated minimum wage, the employer who wants to hire the cheapest possible labor would pay based on the cost of living. If it rose, they would naturally pay more. However, because they have the excuse of an arbitrary minimum, they don't have to.

Now, you may argue that we should set the MW up so that it fluctuates with the cost of living... problem is, cost of living varies in different places. There is a great deal of difference in the cost of living for Pearl, Mississippi and Los Angeles, California. Okay... so what to do there? Well, we can make the MW adjustable to the region... in other words, the MW in California would be markedly higher than the MW in Mississippi. Now... let us speculate what the results of that policy might be? People go where they can make the most money... so they leave Mississippi.. the tax base dries up and the remaining people suffer. Infrastructure crumbles, businesses move out because there are no more people. The cost of living continues to decline but it's because there are no people and nothing to buy. Meanwhile, California booms, more people move there, the cost of living continues to rise because of demand. Pretty soon, businesses begin to collapse because they can't afford the workforce and infrastructure crumbles from the weight of all the incoming.

Whenever government meddles in the forces of free market capitalism the people suffer. Our freedoms are removed. Our lives are disrupted. Businesses can't function. This is why Communism and Socialism fail time and time again wherever they are tried.

Our freedoms are removed?

How about the freedom of the People to choose via their representatives to set a minimum wage?

Yes, your freedoms removed to negotiate for a higher wage based on increase in cost of living as opposed to a mandated minimum your employer will oblige instead.

Of course, you and your neighbors should be at liberty to cede your freedom to government to determine a suitable wage on your behalf if you so choose. That should be done at your statehouse.

I support a minimum wage adjusted annually for inflation.

Unlike you, I support the worker.....

 

[dblack]

See what I mean. He is just soooooo sad the rich can't exploit the working class.

What's sad, truly, is that gullible voters can't see the economic regulation ALWAYS favors the vested interests, ie the rich.

 

[JoeB131]

See what I mean. He is just soooooo sad the rich can't exploit the working class.

What's sad, truly, is that gullible voters can't see the economic regulation ALWAYS favors the vested interests, ie the rich.

If they did, the rich would call for MORE regulation, not less.

 

[dblack]

See what I mean. He is just soooooo sad the rich can't exploit the working class.

What's sad, truly, is that gullible voters can't see the economic regulation ALWAYS favors the vested interests, ie the rich.

If they did, the rich would call for MORE regulation, not less.