Why can't Public Assistance increase?

[dblack]

The easy solution is if an employer offers low wages NOBODY applies. Leave the job unfilled. HOPEFULLY the business struggles. Let those jobs sit there unfilled. Some low life's would then say "hey there are jobs and nobody is applying and this is what's wrong with america.". Those folk should be shunned.

And you're getting to the heart of the 'union thug' mentality behind minimum wage laws. The reason your suggestion won't work (or won't work well enough to satisfy 'reformers') is because some people would be willing. Some people need it more, and have less to offer in skills and experience, so they'll take the jobs even if most people wouldn't. It's these 'scabs' that are the real problem and minimum wage laws are designed to thwart them.

 

[OnePercenter]

In 1932, when FDR introduced it, he said: "Any company that can't pay it's workers a decent living wage has no business in America!" Clearly, his plan didn't work because we still hear the same exact rant from the progressives. Raise the minimum wage and the corporations simply re-tool the formulas, lay people off, increase prices, downsize operations, increase productivity demands and life goes on. NEVER does the increase come out of the great big giant profit bucket.

The aspect that's ignored by this perspective is that all of society is to 'blame' for not valuing certain kinds of work very highly. The reason fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much to make fast food is that we, as consumers, don't value fast food very much. If it costs much more, we'll not bother with it. That's the case for a lot of services that are optional. We'll pay for them if they're cheap, but go without if they're expensive.

What I don't understand is why some people feel justified in making these kinds of decisions for others. If someone else wants to work for peanuts, why should that be illegal?

The aspect that's ignored by this perspective is that all of society is to 'blame' for not valuing certain kinds of work very highly. The reason fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much to make fast food is that we, as consumers, don't value fast food very much. If it costs much more, we'll not bother with it. That's the case for a lot of services that are optional. We'll pay for them if they're cheap, but go without if they're expensive.

What I don't understand is why some people feel justified in making these kinds of decisions for others. If someone else wants to work for peanuts, why should that be illegal?

'Fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much' is a lie. I've angel invested fast food stores, I know the numbers.

 

[initforme]

Leave the employers sit high and dry. If you pretend to pay me, I pretend to work. Words to live by.

 

[Anathema]

The Constitution does, indeed, make provision for the Federal government to "promote the general welfare"...

Although it is silent with respect to how that might be done...

It also talks in terms of "promoting" the general welfare, not becoming the wellspring... merely promoting...

You make two common mistakes....

1. General welfare and common defense refers to the welfare and defense of The NATION, not individual citizens.

2. Article I, Section 8 then goes on from that clause to definitively list the 18 items that compose "general welfare and common defense".

2a. The Tenth Amendment then goes on to specify that any power not specifically given TO the Federal Government or banned from the States, belongs to the States or the People, NOT the Feds.

 

[dblack]

In 1932, when FDR introduced it, he said: "Any company that can't pay it's workers a decent living wage has no business in America!" Clearly, his plan didn't work because we still hear the same exact rant from the progressives. Raise the minimum wage and the corporations simply re-tool the formulas, lay people off, increase prices, downsize operations, increase productivity demands and life goes on. NEVER does the increase come out of the great big giant profit bucket.

The aspect that's ignored by this perspective is that all of society is to 'blame' for not valuing certain kinds of work very highly. The reason fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much to make fast food is that we, as consumers, don't value fast food very much. If it costs much more, we'll not bother with it. That's the case for a lot of services that are optional. We'll pay for them if they're cheap, but go without if they're expensive.

What I don't understand is why some people feel justified in making these kinds of decisions for others. If someone else wants to work for peanuts, why should that be illegal?

The aspect that's ignored by this perspective is that all of society is to 'blame' for not valuing certain kinds of work very highly. The reason fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much to make fast food is that we, as consumers, don't value fast food very much. If it costs much more, we'll not bother with it. That's the case for a lot of services that are optional. We'll pay for them if they're cheap, but go without if they're expensive.

What I don't understand is why some people feel justified in making these kinds of decisions for others. If someone else wants to work for peanuts, why should that be illegal?

'Fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much' is a lie. I've angel invested fast food stores, I know the numbers.

Wow... economics. Seriously, check it out. Most of us can 'afford' to take a pay cut. But most of us won't like it, and a lot of us will be looking for another job. For business owners, this translates to investing their money in something more profitable.

 

[OnePercenter]

That's what seems nuts to me. Minimum wages laws make these jobs illegal. If both employer and employee can agree on a wage why does it need to be illegal?

The minimum wage is one of the worst things to ever happen to wages in America. It removes the individual opportunity to negotiate. Even the non-minimum wage jobs are very often baselined on the minimum wage rate. Raises are very often conditional upon raising of the minimum wage instead of performance. The dirty little secret FDR didn't tell you is... the Corporatists LOVE the minimum wage! It allows them to baseline labor cost. Rather than having a bunch of varying wages based on the individuals negotiating on the basis of their skills and what they bring to the table, they have a standard rate of pay for all... baslined on the minimum wage.

In 1932, when FDR introduced it, he said: "Any company that can't pay it's workers a decent living wage has no business in America!" Clearly, his plan didn't work because we still hear the same exact rant from the progressives. Raise the minimum wage and the corporations simply re-tool the formulas, lay people off, increase prices, downsize operations, increase productivity demands and life goes on. NEVER does the increase come out of the great big giant profit bucket.

Are you saying that corporations aren't already running as 'lean' as they possibly can?

*Sigh* ...I don't know of ANY corporation that intentionally spends capital they don't need to. The goal and objective of all capitalists is profit. In their board meetings, no one is saying... hey, we're making too much profit here, let's find something wasteful to blow money on so our profits aren't so high next year!

So you are asking me a straw man question. It has nothing to do with the point I made.

*Sigh* ...I don't know of ANY corporation that intentionally spends capital they don't need to. The goal and objective of all capitalists is profit. In their board meetings, no one is saying... hey, we're making too much profit here, let's find something wasteful to blow money on so our profits aren't so high next year!

So you are asking me a straw man question. It has nothing to do with the point I made.

The goal and objective is record profit, usually more than the worth of the service and product.

 

[OnePercenter]

It's called "free market capitalism" and it works brilliantly whenever it is allowed to work.

Where is that? I'm guessing that if it exists, it's a shit hole.

It's right here in the USA. It is the very reason we rose from a fledgling upstart country 250 years ago to the world's leading superpower. It's the very reason you have virtually everything you have that makes us NOT a shithole.

Now.... we've never had PURE free market capitalism. Just as we've never had PURE freedom. But the idea is to come as close to that as we possibly can... not try to destroy it and condemn it as something evil and bad.

It's right here in the USA. It is the very reason we rose from a fledgling upstart country 250 years ago to the world's leading superpower. It's the very reason you have virtually everything you have that makes us NOT a shithole.

Now.... we've never had PURE free market capitalism. Just as we've never had PURE freedom. But the idea is to come as close to that as we possibly can... not try to destroy it and condemn it as something evil and bad.

Care to give us an example of an actual company?

 

[dblack]

The goal and objective is record profit, usually more than the worth of the service and product.

Here's another opportunity to learn some basic economics. It's impossible to sell anything for more (or less) than it's worth. In fact, every single voluntary transaction is an agreement between two parties on what something is worth.

 

[OnePercenter]

Here's a thought.. aspire to do something with your life/career that pays?

Why shouldn't every job 'pay?'

Because every job isn't worth 'paying' for.

Because every job isn't worth 'paying' for.

Name one.

 

[dblack]

By the way, 1%er, not sure if you saw my earlier question. In your view, should self-employed business owners be required to pay themselves a 'living wage'?

 

[dblack]

Here's a thought.. aspire to do something with your life/career that pays?

Why shouldn't every job 'pay?'

Because every job isn't worth 'paying' for.

Because every job isn't worth 'paying' for.

Name one.

All of them, if the prospective employee has no appreciable skills.

 

[OnePercenter]

Does a fire dispatcher require any more education than a McDonalds employee?

It makes no difference at all regarding what the job is worth. Even if working at McDonalds required a PhD in Chemistry, it wouldn't be worth much because most of us don't value burgers that much. You should really think about this, because I think it's key to your confusion on this issue.

It makes no difference at all regarding what the job is worth. Even if working at McDonalds required a PhD in Chemistry, it wouldn't be worth much because most of us don't value burgers that much. You should really think about this, because I think it's key to your confusion on this issue.

WTF? Because YOU don't value burgers, employees of burger joints shouldn't be paid a living wage?

 

[OnePercenter]

In 1932, when FDR introduced it, he said: "Any company that can't pay it's workers a decent living wage has no business in America!" Clearly, his plan didn't work because we still hear the same exact rant from the progressives. Raise the minimum wage and the corporations simply re-tool the formulas, lay people off, increase prices, downsize operations, increase productivity demands and life goes on. NEVER does the increase come out of the great big giant profit bucket.

The aspect that's ignored by this perspective is that all of society is to 'blame' for not valuing certain kinds of work very highly. The reason fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much to make fast food is that we, as consumers, don't value fast food very much. If it costs much more, we'll not bother with it. That's the case for a lot of services that are optional. We'll pay for them if they're cheap, but go without if they're expensive.

What I don't understand is why some people feel justified in making these kinds of decisions for others. If someone else wants to work for peanuts, why should that be illegal?

The aspect that's ignored by this perspective is that all of society is to 'blame' for not valuing certain kinds of work very highly. The reason fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much to make fast food is that we, as consumers, don't value fast food very much. If it costs much more, we'll not bother with it. That's the case for a lot of services that are optional. We'll pay for them if they're cheap, but go without if they're expensive.

What I don't understand is why some people feel justified in making these kinds of decisions for others. If someone else wants to work for peanuts, why should that be illegal?

'Fast-food joints can't afford to pay people very much' is a lie. I've angel invested fast food stores, I know the numbers.

Wow... economics. Seriously, check it out. Most of us can 'afford' to take a pay cut. But most of us won't like it, and a lot of us will be looking for another job. For business owners, this translates to investing their money in something more profitable.

Wow... economics. Seriously, check it out. Most of us can 'afford' to take a pay cut. But most of us won't like it, and a lot of us will be looking for another job. For business owners, this translates to investing their money in something more profitable.

Bloviating

 

[OnePercenter]

The goal and objective is record profit, usually more than the worth of the service and product.

Here's another opportunity to learn some basic economics. It's impossible to sell anything for more (or less) than it's worth. In fact, every single voluntary transaction is an agreement between two parties on what something is worth.

Here's another opportunity to learn some basic economics. It's impossible to sell anything for more (or less) than it's worth. In fact, every single voluntary transaction is an agreement between two parties on what something is worth

More bloviating

 

[OnePercenter]

By the way, 1%er, not sure if you saw my earlier question. In your view, should self-employed business owners be required to pay themselves a 'living wage'?

You should make a minimum of two to three times or more what you made as an employee.

 

[OnePercenter]

Here's a thought.. aspire to do something with your life/career that pays?

Why shouldn't every job 'pay?'

Because every job isn't worth 'paying' for.

Because every job isn't worth 'paying' for.

Name one.

All of them, if the prospective employee has no appreciable skills.

All of them, if the prospective employee has no appreciable skills.

So you hire a person with no skills and don't pay him for a job that doesn't exist?

 

[Slyhunter]

The easy solution is if an employer offers low wages NOBODY applies. Leave the job unfilled. HOPEFULLY the business struggles. Let those jobs sit there unfilled. Some low life's would then say "hey there are jobs and nobody is applying and this is what's wrong with america.". Those folk should be shunned.

Then they hire an immigrant.

 

[Londoner]

We assist the wealthy by giving them subsidies, bailouts and industrial infrastructure.

We assist the middle class by cutting their wages, eliminating their benefits and monopolizing their services ... so that they can go deeper into to debt.

We assist the lower class by feeding them revanchist culture war fantasies so that they unwittingly do the bidding of the wealthy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We assist the wealthy by giving them subsidies, bailouts and industrial infrastructure.

We assist the middle class by cutting their wages, eliminating their benefits and monopolizing their services ... so that they can go deeper into to debt.

We assist the lower class by feeding them revanchist culture war fantasies so that they unwittingly do the bidding of the wealthy.

And who exactly is WE?????

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

WTF? Because YOU don't value burgers, employees of burger joints shouldn't be paid a living wage?

No, they shouldn't be making a livable wage because their work is not worth a livable wage.