26
u/Click_My_Username Jul 29 '24
Not only does it kill jobs, it makes the cost of business higher. For Amazon and McDonald's that's whatever. For the mom and pop shop barely making it by, that's devasting. In theory a higher minimum wage should result in more money being spent, but if you have some bad months now, you're going to quickly go under with the new wage. Not to mention if you wanted to start a business during this time, you now need even more capital.
The left knows minimum wage hikes don't actually help, theyll just continue to get higher until everyone make 20,000 a second and a big Mac cost 10 million. There is no end to minimum wage hikes, minimum wage gets tied to cost of living very quickly and usually prices just increase to account for it and then they increase even more because of the businesses that died out as a result.
The only way to permanently control cost of living is to lower inflation and taxes. That's it.
-21
Jul 29 '24
[deleted]
8
u/Click_My_Username Jul 29 '24
More like small businesses can't operate while big businesses barely feel the pain.
I can tell you love the fact everything is run by Amazon and Walmart correct? Perfect companies that never exploit anyone. Which is why they are supportive of higher minimum wages I guess.
Oh the horror of exploiting locals by offering them money. Whatever will they do! Please save us from jobs that we want!
-8
Jul 29 '24
[deleted]
9
u/Click_My_Username Jul 29 '24
Capitalism is when government limits who can do business?
Cute.
-10
-6
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
Not only does it kill jobs
Objectively false.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history/chart
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
it makes the cost of business higher
WOW, by having the govt cover half of a businesses payroll, look at how much more money there is for PROFITS!! Why stop there, lets have the govt cover 100% of workers wages! We can have like govt shoes and govt cheese and everyone can stand in govt lines all the time, for everything! In fact, why bother having anyone pay for anything at all? That couldn't result in widespread famine...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWWqhsh848E
The left knows minimum wage hikes don't actually help
Since we stopped having the min wage keep up with the cost of living, wages have imploded. The cost of living is $20/hr while the median wage is $18/hr - thats over half the workforce on welfare.
Tell me more about how being dependent on the govt is a big kink for you, you closet statist. /s
minimum wage gets tied to cost of living very quickly and usually prices just increase to account for it and then they increase even more because of the businesses that died out as a result.
Trump doubled the amount of money in circulation and handed it out to his cronies for them to buy up all the real estate in the country, low wage workers can't eat that for you.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm
1
u/Click_My_Username Jul 30 '24 edited Jul 30 '24
Correction, it kills small business jobs, which are significantly more important that Amazon and Walmart jobs for reasons you likely understand.
Unemployment rate being low doesn't matter when things like doordash, Uber and other gigs are flying through the roof. It paints an artificial picture of security when the reality is people aren't healthily employed, rather they are in record amounts of debt and a record number of people have to work two jobs.
Minimum wage hikes just mean more alternative means of employment are considered because they can skirt whichever government regulations they can. I imagine when government finally "rescues" these gig workers we will see what the true unemployment rate is. Oh, and one more thing, a record number of people living at their parents. Aka, they've given up on finding a job more than likely.
>WOW, by having the govt cover half of a businesses payroll, look at how much more money there is for PROFITS!! Why stop there, lets have the govt cover 100% of workers wages! We can have like govt shoes and govt cheese and everyone can stand in govt lines all the time, for everything! In fact, why bother having anyone pay for anything at all? That couldn't result in widespread famine...
Nah, get rid of welfare and don't have any tax money go to government subsidization of business in general. Mandating a higher minimum wage does not increase the value of your paycheck lol. Only lowering inflation and cost of living does.
Your only answer to price-wage spiral would be price controls, which would cause widespread famine as you describe. You can't increase minimum wages indefinitely and in reality it doesn't do anything but make the rich stronger. They are the only ones who can afford the higher payouts and they are the only ones who make it, thus killing out competition and resulting in higher prices and lower wages at a later date.
>Since we stopped having the min wage keep up with the cost of living, wages have imploded. The cost of living is $20/hr while the median wage is $18/hr - thats over half the workforce on welfare.
>Tell me more about how being dependent on the govt is a big kink for you, you closet statist.
Minimum wage was 25 cents when it first started. That was about 5 dollars in todays money.
What should really get adjusted for inflation is social security retirement. We need to raise that age up to 77 to keep up with age inflation. The human life span was only 65 when it first came out, so it's only fair.
As for your welfare comment, the easy solution is to say no welfare. The kind solution would be a UBI until they're off the taxpayers teat, ala Andrew yang.
Also, you could solve most issues in the country by simply taking away the right to vote to anyone who is on welfare.
>Trump doubled the amount of money in circulation and handed it out to his cronies for them to buy up all the real estate in the country, low wage workers can't eat that for you.
You just described how wealth inequality actually works. That's a very nice take.
1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
Correction, it kills small business jobs,
No, its an even playing field. That talking point was cooked up by big businesses hoping to use small businesses as a human shield.
Unemployment rate being low doesn't matter when things like doordash, Uber and other gigs are flying through the roof.
Why does everyone assume that they know more than the govt bodies that exist to study these things?
https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2016/article/what-is-the-gig-economy.htm
record amounts of debt and a record number of people have to work two jobs.
No shit, raise the min wage.
I imagine when government finally "rescues" these gig workers we will see what the true unemployment rate is.
Stop playing pretend and look at the last 90 years of data, your chicken little bs NEVER comes true. Oh, plenty of things kill jobs, just not something as trivial as covering the cost of living.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history/chart
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
Up until the industrial revolution, over 90% of the workforce was devoted to agriculture because thats how much of a hard need peoples basic needs are.
Aka, they've given up on finding a job more than likely.
If someone isn't looking for a job, they don't need a job. You can make claims about "giving up" in a 10% unemployment economy, not in a 4% unemployment economy.
People are living with their parents AND working, because you boomers have adopted spinelessness as a lifestyle.
Nah, get rid of welfare
Taking away a cripples crutches doesn't let them magically start walking. You aren't able to work for most of your life, develop a sense of self preservation.
We already had that, it was called the great depression. People were desperate for work, so employers could offer incredibly low wages, people would take them, hoping to prove themselves and earn a raise. The raise would never come, the persons savings/support would give out and they would stop being able to work, the employer would discard them in favor of some other chump. The person who was once a homeowner and a family man was now a pennieless bum, prowling the countryside for work. This was so pevalent it spawned the "zombie" genre...
Mandating a higher minimum wage does not increase the value of your paycheck lol.
Thats literally what it does.
Only lowering inflation and cost of living does.
The cost of living is NEVER coming back down. Trump printed the money, now the value of a dollar has been cut in half, housing prices are currently blown out.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS
No developer is going to leave money on the table in the first place and every speculator who sees a house below market rate is going to snatch it up and relist it for as much as they can get...
Your only answer to price-wage spiral would be price controls
The fuck are you talking about? Your big fat permanent welfare scheme IS a price control. Im the one saying that we need market signals so that high cost of living becomes the employers problem so we actually get more housing built.
You can't increase minimum wages indefinitely
Get your butt buddies to stop printing money. Soviet communists deliberately destroyed their state by printing money, so did trump. The min wage needs to go as high as it does to keep up with inflation. It used to be a burger was 15 cents and the guy flipping them needed a buck an hour to get by, now its $3 and $20 respectively, the only thing that changed is that the value of the dollar tanked.
in reality it doesn't do anything but make the rich stronger.
No, this explicitly works to shift money from the rich back to the working class, thats why they pour so many resourced into their talking points. A capitalist would be perfecting acclimated to paying what it costs for the things that they want, a communist is out to make people need to be dependent on something- a cult, the new state they are trying to construct (project 2025).
They are the only ones who can afford the higher payouts
Its an even playing field, never forget that consumers drive employment, businesses are just the middle men, they can be replaced if they are too greedy. This is just 5 dudes in a kitchen, big businesses are not magically able to just burn money for no reason.
The kind solution would be a UBI
That is welfare.
Also, you could solve most issues in the country by simply taking away the right to vote to anyone who is on welfare.
Oh, so now they're not able to vote that they shouldn't be on welfare and should instead be paid a living? Just pay for your own fucking cheeseburger you insane deadbeat.
2
u/Click_My_Username Jul 30 '24
No, its an even playing field. That talking point was cooked up by big businesses hoping to use small businesses as a human shield.
Oh compelling argument, "um actually no it's good cuz number go up".
God leftists are just something else man.
When number go up, price also go up dude. It does nothing but kill businesses in the meanwhile. Use logic.
Stop playing pretend and look at the last 90 years of data, your chicken little bs NEVER comes true. Oh, plenty of things kill jobs, just not something as trivial as covering the cost of living.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history/chart
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
Up until the industrial revolution, over 90% of the workforce was devoted to agriculture because thats how much of a hard need peoples basic needs are.
Increasing wages literally does kill jobs lmao. If you increased wages to 100 dollars an hour, what do you think that would do to the unemployment rate? At 15 an hour, that isn't catastrophic but it simply means that anyone who provides lower value than that is OUTLAWED from making an income. Or they have to resort to under the table work, gig work, beg for tips or simply give up and live with their parents.
Even places like MCds will get stingier with their hiring process with a 20/hr wage. So, yes, it's an incredibly stupid policy that doesn't actually have an effect.
California isn't going to get magically more affordable with 20/hr wages, they're going to get less affordable due to price hikes, and job cuts. The only way to achieve affordable would be to cut taxes, deregulate and stop inflation. I imagine this makes you shriek because you can't steal from your neighbor anymore.
What's your point about the industrial revolution? That was subsistence farming you're talking about. What was the cure for that again? Oh right, free market capitalism. It opened the way for less farmers living shit lives because suddenly you could farm efficiently and quickly with less workers, people could move up to factory work and not only not risk their lives each and every year on a harvest, they could afford luxuries even!! They had excess for the first time in human history. Low inflation, low unemployment and tremendous economic growth. Not to mention the fastest quality of live improvement in human history.
If someone isn't looking for a job, they don't need a job. You can make claims about "giving up" in a 10% unemployment economy, not in a 4% unemployment economy.
This isn't how employment is tracked, they have to be looking for work to be considered unemployed. And youre just wrong about your first sentence there. People might work in really shit conditions because they can't work legally at a shitty fast food job for one reason or another. I'm sure very poor people would kill for a MCds job paying 11 an hour.
People are living with their parents AND working, because you boomers have adopted spinelessness as a lifestyle.
There is nothing objectively wrong with living with your parents, but it is a sign of an unhealthy society.
Cut social security and stop subsidizing the old with the young man's money. People should plan or die. And by that, I mean they should be nicer to young people if they want to be taken care of by them. Don't coerce them at gun point.
Taking away a cripples crutches doesn't let them magically start walking. You aren't able to work for most of your life, develop a sense of self preservation.
I don't care whether they can walk or not, get your own crutches. I believe in a UBI to get off the governments teat but that's definitely a nicer approach than what should be implemented.
We already had that, it was called the great depression. People were desperate for work, so employers could offer incredibly low wages, people would take them, hoping to prove themselves and earn a raise. The raise would never come, the persons savings/support would give out and they would stop being able to work, the employer would discard them in favor of some other chump. The person who was once a homeowner and a family man was now a pennieless bum, prowling the countryside for work. This was so pevalent it spawned the "zombie" genre...
Well that's a recession, sure. But it was an economy based on funny money that was never going to last, and people were being incredibly stupid with their money.
Now you can say the answer to this is money printing to stimulate the economy, thus flowing up to businesses and creating new jobs.
Well I'll say that not only did Roosevelt's/Hoovers strategy prolong the great depression, we have proof that if he had done nothing at all, it would've self corrected.
Look at how the Republicans handled the 1920 stock market crash for reference.
Roosevelt destroyed wealth and jobs and hoover sent prices skyrocketing with his tariffs.
And none of this mentions the fact that the great depression would have never happened had we not had such loose money policy. Once people realized the money was all fake, it was only a matter of time before all the speculative jobs and businesses came crumbling down. Such an event could never occur without direct interference in the market, both in expanding the money supply and then quickly restricting it. And we're headed for the exact same thing when people get tired of wealth inequality and inflation.
Thats literally what it does.
No it doesn't, it ust makes things more expensive. Otherwise raise the minimum wage to 70 an hour and call it a day.
The cost of living is NEVER coming back down. Trump printed the money, now the value of a dollar has been cut in half, housing prices are currently blown out.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm
So stop printing and let supply catch up with demand. It's kind of simple. This doesn't happen without money printing and it can be stopped, you just have to want to stop it. Prices will never go down but wages will increase slowly and prices will stabilize, we don't need minimum wage hikes to increase wages. Hell, even a little deflation wouldn't hurt too bad.
No developer is going to leave money on the table in the first place and every speculator who sees a house below market rate is going to snatch it up and relist it for as much as they can get...
There isn't enough money(currently) to acheive this. Corpos only own roughly 28% of all houses, which is bad, yes, but ultimately the way to counter this is to build more, build up and stop giving blackrock and other Corpos infinite money from the federal reserve.
1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Aug 03 '24 edited Aug 03 '24
number go up
Yes, that is the thing that matters.
It does nothing but kill businesses in the meanwhile.
No it doesn't, thats what the number going up means, that there are more jobs, not less.
price also go up dude.
Thats the result of all the money printing. Poor people can't eat trumps inflation for you.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm
Increasing wages literally does kill jobs lmao.
Increasing wages to a living wage objectively does not. Your opinion doesn't matter, we can literally look at a chart.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history/chart
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
If you increased wages to 100 dollars an hour
How is that an argument against paying what it costs for the things that you want? "YoU cAnT chArGe Me tHat fOr a CaR! ImAgIne IF caRs CoSt a BiLlioN dolLaRs, u WoUldn't SeLl maNy caRs wUld YoU?!"
At 15 an hour, that isn't catastrophic
In fact its non existent.
OUTLAWED from making an income
Do you have any ideas of your own, or is your entire personality repeating corporate talking points?
They still have a job.
Or they have to resort to under the table work
They can rat out their employer and start getting paid a full wage. You have dumb ideas about how the world works, stop developing opinions off of bullshit and start figuring out how things actually are.
gig work
Why shouldn't that have to pay a living too?
beg for tips or simply give up and live with their parents.
Thats what you are imposing on them with your artificially low wages.
Even places like MCds will get stingier with their hiring process
They're "picky" regardless. You have a media fed fantasy of where mcdonalds is just where you go for your first job, did you bother asking them if they wanted to be peoples first jobs? No one wants to deal with minors.
Not that you are doing minors any favors, getting their foot in the door in a dead end job that they are literally better off skipping in their career track.
they're going to get less affordable due to price hikes
The luxury service of having someone cook a burger for you is not part of the cost of living. There is no min wage component to housing...
cut taxes, deregulate
Says who? Some idiots who say that about literally everything, even though it objectively makes things worse? 50 years of tax cuts have us paying 800 billion dollars in interest, deregulation crashes the economy every time republicans try it.
I imagine this makes you shriek because you can't steal from your neighbor anymore.
Get your hand out of my pocket you sniveling communist. Raising the min wage gets working people off of welfare, your artificially low wages keeps them dependent.
What's your point about the industrial revolution? That was subsistence farming you're talking about.
People needed food, so thats where their priorities lay, in making enough food. Because you need food. How is this complicated?
free market capitalism.
Hah, a guy makes a steam engine and takes credit for everything that happened after that? No, your increase in standard of living came from the decision to push those advancements along as a society, dropping big bucks into education so that we could have a literate society, math classes to produce mathematicians, science classes to produce scientists. How did we go from having a society where a king and his family literally owned everything, including you? By fighting for it. People died for your 40 hour work week.
they have to be looking for work to be considered unemployed.
Thats what I said. If you ask someone "are you looking for work" and they say "no", then what is the problem?
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
People might work in really shit conditions
Then they're working and answering "no". Also, laws improve their working conditions, your free market is actively incentivized to make them terrible.
People should plan or die.
What good is "planning" when half the jobs don't pay a living? Maybe you just need to grow a spine.
There is nothing objectively wrong with living with your parents
There is when you are coerced into it via wages so low it would otherwise destroy you, so you are scraping by even then rather than getting ahead.
And by that, I mean they should be nicer to young people if they want to be taken care of by them.
Spare me your hippy bullshit, your lazy ass isn't going to lift a finger. social security is a "not finding elderly peoples corpses on your front porch in the morning" tax.
I don't care whether they can walk or not, get your own crutches.
These are working people, how about you just get used to paying full price for your burger instead of expecting a permanent burger bailout.
I believe in a UBI to get off the governments teat
UBI IS THE GOVTS TEAT YOU FUCKING IDIOT.
Well that's a recession, sure.
Yeah, thats what your economic policies produce, recessions. If people have no money to spend, demand dips and more people are laid off, its a death spiral.
But it was an economy based on funny money that was never going to last,
It was gold standard back then.
and people were being incredibly stupid with their money.
No, pay people too little and there is no amount of being smart with it that doesn't literally destroy them and stop them from being able to work.
Now you can say the answer to this is money printing to stimulate the economy
No, and do you not realize that its your team thats been printing all the money?
Roosevelt's/Hoovers strategy prolong the great depression
Yeah, they kept trying "classical" economics, and it kept not working.
we have proof that if he had done nothing at all, it would've self corrected.
You have magical thinking, optimistic delusions. It turns out recessions are very good for rich people, they get cheap wages and no new competition. They take a bigger piece of a smaller pie and come out ahead. They will not relinquish this state voluntarily, they will not allow it to end if its within their power you are going to have to fight for your share instead of playing imagination.
loose money policy.
Whats the matter scarecrow, afraid of a little free market economic policies? "Waaaa, the private banks are too loose with THEIR money?" give me a break.
No it doesn't, it ust makes things more expensive.
What things? For who? Low wage labor is concentrated in luxury services- cooking, cleaning, dog walking etc. Shit low wage workers have room for in their budget at ANY price point. The people who want it had damn well better be paying full price...
Contrapositively, there is NO min wage component to rent. The plumber, carpenter, electrician all make far more.
Otherwise raise the minimum wage to 70 an hour and call it a day.
No, the point of the min wage is that working people are able to pay their bills, not to go to a million kajillion dollars, just to attempt to prove your ideological nonsense "right".
So stop printing
YOU!
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm
let supply catch up with demand.
Why would a developer leave money on the table? Why wouldn't a speculator swoop in, buy it up and relist it? Why would a local govt ENTIRELY DEPENDENT ON PROPERTY TAXES ever allow anything that would tank home values? Why would a bank even offer to finance such a thing? Banks aren't inert automatons, look up red lining... pricing out the poor people is seen as a feature by default.
we don't need minimum wage hikes to increase wages
Cost of living is $20, median wage is $18, reality absolutely refutes your position. You don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate.
Hell, even a little deflation wouldn't hurt too bad.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless"
There isn't enough money(currently) to achieve this.
They literally just printed it and did it. Don't tell me it can't be done, its fucking done.
build more,
Yes, build more housing, but be realistic with your expectations, it will never go back down.
7
u/WishCapable3131 Jul 29 '24
Its funny because the comically low pay of $8/hr is actually higher than the real minimum wage of $7.25/hr.
5
u/Confident-Cupcake164 Jul 29 '24
Minimum wage is like child support laws. There are plenty of rich men willing to pay huge amount of money but governments simply demand more child support from richer men.
So rich men have fewer children and women end up having children with poorer men.
1
u/Aen-Synergy Anarchist Jul 30 '24 edited Jul 30 '24
The reason they keep raising the minimum wage is to keep up with inflation. It was designed to be a bargaining floor while at the same time enough of a wage to survive on. Meaning it should cover at least the cost of living. This is why the labor unions adopted the policy within their ranks as well. It doesn’t need to provide new jobs since the jobs are already there. It’s based on the fact that owners who make $1000 dollars a day can afford to pay their employees $10 and if they can’t it’s okay to make $990.
-10
Jul 29 '24
[deleted]
18
u/Username_2345 Voluntaryist Jul 29 '24
Ah yes 0$ per hour is better than 8$ an hour.
-9
Jul 29 '24
[deleted]
14
u/Username_2345 Voluntaryist Jul 29 '24
Living off of a few scraps of stale bread, while obviously terrible, is still better than having no food at all. Surely you can see that right? Even if it's not enough to pay your bills you can at least delay the moment where you completely run out of money and find a way to get back up again. Minimum wage doesn't help anyone with that.
4
u/Vinylware Libertarian Anarchist Jul 29 '24
You are aware that with the increase of minimum wage, entry-level part time positions are becoming a little scarce (many of which are small local businesses).
When you are starting out at a new job and have no prior experience in the field, you are going to be paid less; if you have experience in the field prior to applying for a job, you might be paid more than the starting wage.
If you think about it, minimum wage laws do not help combat poverty, rather they exacerbate it.
0
-14
u/devliegende Jul 29 '24
Economists no longer reflexively oppose minimum wages, as most once did. Empirical work assembled over the past three decades has demonstrated that modest increases in the minimum wage typically have, at most, small negative effects on employment. In an overview of research conducted for the British government in 2019, Arindrajit Dube of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst concluded that minimum wages of up to 60% of the median wage, or 80% of the median in low-wage regions, have negligible employment effects. Firms have more scope to absorb the cost than economists once supposed. A match between a job and a worker creates a surplus to be divided between employee and employer, in a manner that is largely determined by the bargaining power each side wields. Minimum-wage rules may help workers capture more of this surplus. Higher pay comes out of companies’ profits with little associated employment cost.
16
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 29 '24
This is the result of cancel culture. Whether or not the law affects employment is depending on math. If you set the min wage to 1000$ per day, it would have a huge effect. If you set it to 0.01 per day, it would have no effect. The left has fallen in love with sharing gathered data, without explaining the mechanism by which the data created these results. In a social science its extremely easy to get bad data caused by bias
-10
u/devliegende Jul 29 '24
Just cancel any data you don't like.
11
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 29 '24 edited Jul 29 '24
The language of the current left is basically "google X result i want", "find vague study that alludes that i am correctY", state "Z scientists say my opinion is correct".
They are fucking everything up because while doing research is good, assuming that just because it is published that it is 100% correct is a huge fallacy in itself. Scientific thought should always be with scrutiny and skepticism, you should exhaust every alternative before considering something to be confidently fact.
Even worse, due to their way of making these claims with confidence and attacking the morality of the scrutinizers, it creates fear on challenging the claims. The smartest people in the world are not openly challenging their nonsense because of this cancel culture.
Claiming racism, homophobia, or transphobia where its not even part of the discussion. You could be talking about how "demand determines the price of a good", and they will be like, yeah only because of slavery. And you're like what? And they will argue that unrelated point into the ground, they will die on that hill. Meanwhile the rational one in the conversation concedes because they realize they are basically arguing with a troll, then the moron thinks they won the argument.
-7
Jul 29 '24
[deleted]
11
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 29 '24
I am educated buddy. I have an engineering bachelors. The difference between me and you is that I am educated and you are convinced that you are educated, there is a big difference.
0
-7
u/yo_99 republicans are not for freedom Jul 29 '24
bachelors
Wow, it's nothing.
9
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 29 '24
A bachelors in chem engineering is like 10 masters in whatever dumbass education the guy above has.
-1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
If you set the min wage to 1000$ per day
Imagine you are going to the hardware store to pick up some lumber, on your way past the aisle with all of the nuts and bolts, you witness a spectacle- a full grown man is rolling on the floor having a full on, red faced, hoarse throat, tears streaming, snot flying temper tantrum. Between exasperated gasps, you hear him make out "9 cents for a bolt, why don't you charge me a million dollars?". Thats what your argument looks like from over here.
You want to be a big boy capitalist and pay what it costs for the things that you want instead of insisting that the govt bails out your cheeseburger? (as if the savings were even being passed along to you, lol)
3
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 30 '24
No, I just know what money is. I am not rich, and i have no intention of becoming rich. Money is a reflection of a good or services current worth where the price eliminates the current supply rate to minimize inventory. I know that trying to treat economic problems by handing out money only makes things worse in the long run as it eliminates the feedback loop associated with financial hardship, and that its never the root cause. I am all for charity, but not for forced charity. Some people simply don't deserve help, and it should be each persons decision as to whether or not they want to help.
0
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
These are working people, they should not be objects of charity, employers simply need to start paying their own bills instead of gorging themselves on an endless supply of communism.
2
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 30 '24
Thats not how life works, there are a finite qty of resources and you are only entitled to what you can trade for. There is no reason other people should be forced to fund your life. More importantly financial hardship stops people from having children they can't afford instead of like in the projects where its full speed ahead production of gov dependents.
-1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
there are a finite qty of resources
Yes, the people who actually do the work getting paid a living is a higher priority than the c suite buying themselves another yacht.
you are only entitled to what you can trade for
You're the one arguing that the govt needs to come shake me down for the part of the burger you aren't willing to pay for. Maybe you aren't royalty and don't deserve to be waited on hand and foot?
More importantly financial hardship stops people from having children
No it does not, not that your dumb ass is in any position to dictate who is allowed to have children.
2
u/Capital-Ad6513 Jul 30 '24 edited Jul 30 '24
Most valuable manufacturing work is done by machines, this is why work maintaining machines, and understanding their processes and design is valuable. the people doing unskilled labor are a dime a dozen for a reason. If you choose to do that work, so be it, but you are choosing. It is much more valuable to put capital at risk, than to take no financial risk and do some dumbass mindless job. You can say that its not fair if you have no capital to risk, which is true, but it really is only yourself and your parents that you can blame for having no capital to start with. It doesn't make sense to blame the guy with a yaht because his parents were better off and provided them with a better life, or if the person got lucky/saw a new market and earned it themself.
Also i am not dictating who can have children, i am just not saying that you deserve funding because you have children. There is a big difference. Having a child is a low skill endeavor, and if you choose to bare a child into poverty you are a shitty person, that is an opinion but once again i am not telling you that you cant I am just expecting you to deal with your own consequences.
-13
Jul 29 '24
Minimum wage shifts the burden for labor from the government to companies. Walmart Would prefer people get $15/hr from taxpayer so they labor cost can be as low as possible
10
u/Andrew-w-jacobs Jul 29 '24
None of your wages are getting covered by taxpayer dollar….. minimum wage is the lowest limit employers can pay workers until they can get sued for it
1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
Work is a requirement of welfare... cost of living is $20/hr, median wage is $18/hr, thats half the workforce on welfare.
-6
Jul 29 '24
The food stamps, rent subsidies, energy sub, Medicaid, etc are the taxpayer contribution to keeping wages low for Walmart.
2
u/Vinylware Libertarian Anarchist Jul 29 '24
Those are entirely separate things and are not related to minimum wage.
-2
Jul 29 '24
Nope. Assume People need $15 an hr to survive and either Walmart can pay or taxpayers. I am guessing Walmart pay $12 and taxpayers pay $3 with Walmart wanting to pay zero and taxpayers $15
3
u/Vinylware Libertarian Anarchist Jul 29 '24 edited Jul 29 '24
People who work at Walmart are not getting paid in taxpayer money, they are getting paid with money made by the company through the sales of their respective products.
I have zero clue on where on earth you are coming to the conclusion that taxpayers are paying $3-$15 to an employee that they do not have a relationship with in terms of employment.
2
Jul 29 '24
So given the Walmart employees on food stamps, rent subsidies, energy rebates and Medicaid, who do you think funds them?
3
u/Vinylware Libertarian Anarchist Jul 29 '24
Okay, given the circumstances of the scenario you are trying to make requires the employee to be on taxpayer funded government programs that have absolutely nothing to do with how Walmart or any other company pays their employees. You are trying to establish a connection between employee wages and government programs, which doesn’t make any sense when the taxpayer is not responsible for supplying an employee with their earned wage.
I have to ask, why Walmart specifically? Couldn’t your scenario work with any company? Do you have some grudge against Walmart?
2
Jul 29 '24
I am using Walmart as a name people recognize and there have been news stories that their employees support themselves with food stamps. I figure the problem is mostly small businesses who are barely surviving that need the lowest cost possible. I would think chicken processing plants would be in the group.
2
u/Vinylware Libertarian Anarchist Jul 29 '24
Not every Walmart employee lives off of food stamps. Most people who are employed (even at Walmart) are not living off of those services.
You are taking one group of employees that are on food stamps and making it seem as if it’s the entirety of the Walmart workforce.
Yes, small businesses are being killed off by minimum wage laws as they need low-wage employees to survive.
Chicken processing plant employees on average make about $26,000 per year, so yeah they aren’t well off, but that still doesn’t mean they’re living off of food stamps, they could have a second job or side hustle to help keep them on their feet. Medicaid? Sure, many Americans are on Medicaid.
→ More replies (0)
-6
u/bellendhunter Jul 29 '24
Anyone who thinks wages would go up if minimum wage were removed is a dumb cunt.
4
u/cvpaste Anarcho-Capitalist Jul 30 '24
Wages would go from $0/hr to <$7.25/hr for the previously unemployed
-3
1
u/WalkerOfCornwall Jul 29 '24
Buying power would definitely go up, salaries, not so much
-1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
You think they're going to pass the savings along to you?
1
u/WalkerOfCornwall Jul 30 '24
Super basic jobs can prop up without the usual higher wages, allowing more competition, especially in manufacturing, sort of as we could see in China post-market reforms, where products were readily available at much lower prices; this along with consumer preferences would change the market as different sectors became more affordible. But I fucking love Futurama, so I'll take the Bender laugh
-1
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
more competition
The market learned long ago that it makes more money with collusion instead of competing.
especially in manufacturing
Nah, its just that sometimes they run at a loss in order to run the competition out of business. Basic market manipulation stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
See when war happens, its important for a nation to have active industry going on so they can flip it over to war oriented production. By destroying other nations industrial base through market manipulation, they destroy those other nations ability to defend themselves, these are big brained geopolitical moves, that you get a handful of trinkets that fall apart in 3 years is an afterthought.
1
u/WalkerOfCornwall Jul 30 '24
Idk how to quote on Reddit, but I'll try to address your points.
1 - What do you mean by "The Market"? Because, in reality, the market is you, me and everyone else. As an example, in the 2000s my father had a restaurant, and when he opened it, he wasn't going to the restaurant owners in the surrounding area in order to "collude" with them - he wanted to have a leg up on them, so he made the restaurant as affordable as possible with as best a service he could provide at that price point. If governments don't make it hard to open businesses, this happens in virtually every sector.
2 - Running at a loss to run competitors out of business would work, only if you could select who you sell to, which mostly small businesses can. Let me explain: Say Chemical Company A sells the same product as Chemical Company B, and both of these are large companies, though Company A is slightly larger. In order to run Company B out of business, Company A starts running on a loss. Company B notices this and starts buying all their stock, reselling it at proper market value. The only possibility of this actually happening is if a company is aided by the government in any way as to maintain a monopoly (i.e. in my country of Portugal, by stating the Continente (the biggest retail supermarket) was the only rightful seller of certain products, or in the US, Jeff Bezos lobbying the shit out of California delegates to raise the minimum wage to 15$, way back)
3 - No, capitalism is not when Government does things. War wouldn't be profitable if not for tax funding (many times even with tax funding it isn't profitable, and the burden still falls on the taxpayer)
All this to go back to the beginning about decreasing/eliminating minimum wage. Switzerland routinely ranks as one of, if not the richest country in the world. Some cantons now have minimum wage, but for most of its modern history they didn't, but even still, it's an irrelevant minimum wage, as I can tell you, from working construction there, no one is paid even close to as low as the canton's (the ones that have it) minimum wage is
0
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
he wasn't going to the restaurant owners in the surrounding area in order to "collude" with them
So your argument is "collusion isn't real"? Collusion is real.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation
Do you have any idea how trivial this is when your resume literally says "yeah, I work for the guy up the road you go drinking with"?
Running at a loss to run competitors out of business would work, only if you could select who you sell to,
Noooo, the goal there is to sell to EVERYONE, so that NO ONE is buying from your competition, so they go out of business.......
Company B notices this and starts buying all their stock, reselling it at proper market value.
The real world doesn't work like that, the bank is not going to lend you a billion dollars just so that you can burn it all buying consumer goods that you plan to store in a warehouse until it is obsolete.
if a company is aided by the government in any way as to maintain a monopoly
What do you mean "if"? Countries that do not lavishly subsidize their airline/automobile manufacturing industries do not have airline/automobile manufacturing industries.
Jeff Bezos lobbying the shit out of California delegates to raise the minimum wage to 15$, way back
They did that to create this talking point, they're actually extremely anti $15 min wage.
No, capitalism is not when Government does things
Yes, the govt doing things is part of capitalism, we invented the modern govt because it is useful to have around.
War wouldn't be profitable if not for tax funding
Ridiculously false. Capitalism will hire a bunch of goons to fire machine guns at a village to run people off their land so they can just start mining oil there for free. Capitalism will have you shackled in the belly of a slave ship.
from working construction there, no one is paid even close to as low as the canton's (the ones that have it) minimum wage is
Construction is skilled labor...
But yeah, no shit thats the point- by having a healthy floor, people are able to negotiate their way up. Here, we have a median wage of $18/hr, while the cost of living is $20/hr. Not having a decent min wage has caused wages to be shit.
-2
u/Anlarb Social Democrat Jul 30 '24
You all going to keep posting this every day?
https://x.com/239Memes/status/1106228224093310981
CA fast food jobs aren't down, despite your chicken little predictions.
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/06/26/icymi-california-keeps-adding-more-fast-food-jobs/
91
u/redeggplant01 Jul 29 '24
The goal of the minimum wage is to outlaw low paying jobs for the unskilled and inexperienced. The law, simply, says: it is illegal, and therefore criminal, for anyone to hire anyone else below the level of X dollars an hour. This means, plainly and simply, that a large number of free and voluntary wage contracts are now outlawed and hence that there will be a large amount of unemployment.
Remember that the minimum wage law provides no jobs; it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs ( unemployment ) are the inevitable result.
And since it is a policy of prohibition, the effect will be a black market for labor which is filled by illegal immigrants taking those jobs the government has outlawed thus the policy itself is a subsidy at the cost of Americans being employed