I think my Presidential aspirations would vaporize...

polaris_x

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

I don't see it that way. No minimum wage would yield higher employment. More employment also means more chance for advancement in employment, which would translate to higher wages for workers that do a good job. More employment also means less welfare and unemployment payments which do place a burden on people already in the workforce. People currently working at the mandated minimum become more prosperous if others are willing to work for less than them. If the problem is that society is not valuing labor, putting a mandatory low value on labor is NOT the solution.

Would raising the minimum wage $10 / hour solve anything? For a short time, workers currently making the minimum would be able to acquire more than previously, until their employers and the market decides to charge more for to cover the rising costs. At that point, 18.50 is no better than the current 8.50 (or whatever it is).

I just don't understand, for all that is permissible in America, such as free speech, why do we not allow people to determine for themselves what their labor is worth?

minimum wage allows for a quality of life ... no minimum wage would yield higher employment but ultimately lower earnings for workers ... who will then still not be able to afford anything to support the economy ...

directly correlating minimum wage as costs directly attributed to the consumer is not really fair ...

also the notion that america is some land of liberty is also a myth ... one example would be the raw milk farmers in california ... liberty is doled out by the same people who would benefit from the removal of a minimum wage ...

VINNY GOOMBA

polaris_x wrote:

also the notion that america is some land of liberty is also a myth ... one example would be the raw milk farmers in california ... liberty is doled out by the same people who would benefit from the removal of a minimum wage ...

No argument here. That's why every post I make on here is that liberty shouldn't be doled out. It should just exist for everyone, pure and simple.

In socialist utopia, doesn't everyone work for FREE anyway?

polaris_x

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

No argument here. That's why every post I make on here is that liberty shouldn't be doled out. It should just exist for everyone, pure and simple.

In socialist utopia, doesn't everyone work for FREE anyway?

haha ... no ... that's some form of communism or something which i don't believe in ...

society in general does not benefit from people living below the poverty line ... nor does it benefit when labour is exploited ...

VINNY GOOMBA

polaris_x wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

No argument here. That's why every post I make on here is that liberty shouldn't be doled out. It should just exist for everyone, pure and simple.

In socialist utopia, doesn't everyone work for FREE anyway?

haha ... no ... that's some form of communism or something which i don't believe in ...

society in general does not benefit from people living below the poverty line ... nor does it benefit when labour is exploited ...

A change in attitude about the value of labor as well as a steadfast effort on the part of laborers to maintain their own standards with regards to wages is far more warranted and useful for the cause than mandates that set the bar for labor low to begin with.

Again, agree to disagree with ya. Same end game, different implementations.

polaris_x

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

A change in attitude about the value of labor as well as a steadfast effort on the part of laborers to maintain their own standards with regards to wages is far more warranted and useful for the cause than mandates that set the bar for labor low to begin with.

Again, agree to disagree with ya. Same end game, different implementations.

we have that already ... it's called unions ...

VINNY GOOMBA

polaris_x wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

A change in attitude about the value of labor as well as a steadfast effort on the part of laborers to maintain their own standards with regards to wages is far more warranted and useful for the cause than mandates that set the bar for labor low to begin with.

Again, agree to disagree with ya. Same end game, different implementations.

we have that already ... it's called unions ...

Absolutely.

blueandwhite

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

I don't see it that way. No minimum wage would yield higher employment. More employment also means more chance for advancement in employment, which would translate to higher wages for workers that do a good job. More employment also means less welfare and unemployment payments which do place a burden on people already in the workforce. People currently working at the mandated minimum become more prosperous if others are willing to work for less than them. If the problem is that society is not valuing labor, putting a mandatory low value on labor is NOT the solution.

I've never understood this position. I think it's a bold assumption to assume that lower wages will automatically yield more jobs. Unless there is a greater demand for consumables or services, where is this demand for workers coming from? Moreover, with even lower wages becoming an acceptable practice, where do you suppose these workers will acquire the necessary capital to become contributing consumers in the first place?

When a person is forced against a wall, they will throw off their dignity and work for nothing. That doesn't mean that they will be successful finding work. There are millions of well-educated, hard-working individuals who are repeatedly labeled as being lazy leeches simply because their circumstances have not afforded them the chance to work. They willingly take jobs beneath their station for marginal wages. You may not be willing to work for less than minimum wage, but there are tons of people out there who already work below the poverty line because they have no options left. Do you really think that everybody who is poor is poor because they are lazy?

Also, if people desperate for income are willing to work for less than the minimum wage, wouldn't employers looking to get a leg up on their competition will inevitably terminate their current minimum wage flock for a cheaper alternative? The middle class is shrinking rapidly. How would eliminating the minimum wage do anything to remedy this?

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Would raising the minimum wage $10 / hour solve anything? For a short time, workers currently making the minimum would be able to acquire more than previously, until their employers and the market decides to charge more for to cover the rising costs. At that point, 18.50 is no better than the current 8.50 (or whatever it is).

I just don't understand, for all that is permissible in America, such as free speech, why do we not allow people to determine for themselves what their labor is worth?

Why do you suppose there has been an ever-widening gap between the wealthiest wage earners and the rest of society? Your free market system is far from free and it's far from perfect. Employers will continue to adjust their costs and streamline their businesses. Do you really think that this would change if there was no minimum wage? Costs will continue to rise irrespective of that fact. Everyone is looking for a bigger share of their respective market. If you want a society that has no real worker's rights, look over in China or India. It won't take that much to squeeze America's middle class out of existence.

catefrances

what is the minium wage in the US anyway?

VINNY GOOMBA

blueandwhite wrote:

Why do you suppose there has been an ever-widening gap between the wealthiest wage earners and the rest of society? Your free market system is far from free and it's far from perfect. Employers will continue to adjust their costs and streamline their businesses. Do you really think that this would change if there was no minimum wage? Costs will continue to rise irrespective of that fact. Everyone is looking for a bigger share of their respective market. If you want a society that has no real worker's rights, look over in China or India. It won't take that much to squeeze America's middle class out of existence.

You are absolutely correct in saying that "my" free market society is far from free and far from perfect if what you mean is that our current system is nowhere close to a free market system. Our current system is anything but free market, it is crony capitalism / corporatism / economic fascism. And I'm not saying a true free market system would be perfect either, but it would be a lot better than what is currently in place, and would empower the consumer as well as the laborer much more than the current system. The system itself is the biggest reason there is such a huge gap between the uber rich, the middle class, and ultimately the poor. You don't see small business owners receiving corporate welfare and bailouts, no-bid contracts, and subsidies to the tune of billions. On top of all of that, no one knows how much money the Fed doles out in secret to its shareholders, which are private mega banks and the world's biggest corporations, both foreign and domestic. Such things do not exist in a free market, and all businesses, no matter there size would be forced to compete on the quality of their products and services rather than competing for who can bring home the biggest payday courtesy of the American taxpayer. The reason there is such a huge gap between the super rich and the poor is that the richest of the rich are on the government gravy train, and no one is voting to stop that from happening. Monetary inflation, that is, the expansion of the money supply which inevitably results in price inflation gives money to the uber-rich first, and allows them to spend it into existence before that money loses value. By the time it reaches the middle class and the poor, all of the money in circulation and in savings loses value. Inflation is taxation through devaluation and is the most hidden and vicious form of taxation there is because it DOES hit the poor so hard. Until these ideas are really addressed, arguing about whether abolishing the minimum wage would be as fruitful as re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Although I do believe there should be no minimum wage requirements, it's probably a battle I would not choose to fight all that hard if I personally were running for office.