Finally an article that puts numbers to the argument of Min Wage

[vulcancowboy]

I hope this thread doesn't get deleted as I enjoy listening to all opinions, no matter how wrong they may be! :laughing: :laughing: I think all of us are too often guilty of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. For instance I hear liberals pointing to the perceived outrageous salaries pulled down by CEOs of large companies to paint all business people as being uber-rich and only interested in making money at all costs. Conservatives are quick to point out government waste. For example, Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.

The fact is we need both private industry and government to survive as a nation.

Do I think a CEO is worth millions of dollars per year? No, but, unless I am a shareholder in the company, it is not my money. If I am a shareholder and it bugs me enough, I can sell my stock. If the company gets too fat and lazy, hopefully competition will either rein the "fat" company in, or it will cease to be profitable and go out of business.

Where I have a problem is with my tax dollars being wasted. That IS my money and it drives me nuts when government keeps asking for more and more and more. If a program fails to achieve the desired result, it isn't eliminated, the problem is usually "underfunding" and more tax dollars are needed.

<steps down from soap box>

 

[brain55]

Does anyone actually work for minimum wage? I mean, it must be a smallish number. Even the burger flippers get a raise almost immediately.

I've read that it's 3% of the workforce, but that as many as 30% would be affected by raising it to $10, meaning they would likely need to see an increase in their wages too.

Brian

 

[sd455dan]

The brand of capitalism that we practice, whatever name we apply, is not pure. We place limits and constraints on almost every aspect of what I bolded above. I believe we do that for the greater good. The extremes, in either direction, relate to the extent to which pure capitalism is constrained, or not, and by what methods.

If I, and I suspect most others, level a criticism against capitalism, I am referring to the current condition of the constraints and methods, not the basic premise of capitalism or free-market-ism as we practice it. It is a matter of degrees. In broad terms, we stir a little socialism into the purity of capitalism to make it mostly palatable.

I am always taken aback when expressing those opinions results in the leveling of charges that I am a socialist, communist or a whatever. I am saddened by the ignorance of those who think, in a largely capitalistic global economy that is currently practicing free-market-ism in overdrive IMO, that what happens in Denmark, Switzerland, or just about anywhere is not relevant. Those places and people are our competitors. Ignorance of your competition is a sure method of failure in capitalism.

Why anyone would think that aspiring to become the world's cheap labor pool by paying less than subsistence wages is a laudable goal, is another mystery.

If real life were "played" like Monopoly the losers--which would constitute most of the population--would be sleeping under decaying bridges hiding from debt collectors. That is not a result that serves the greater good and it is one that we should try to avoid. It is economic oppression. Oppressed societies are not stable. Bad things driven by desperation eventually happen.

Currently, income redistribution is what is keeping many people from sleeping under those bridges. Redistribution is not a one-way street. Many costs are socialized to a greater extent than the resulting benefits are shared. The rising tide is not lifting all the boats.

Within the span of one generation a significant portion of our population is finding economic success difficult to achieve. The causes of that are complex and numerous but one of them isn't that in the blink of a historical eye, they all became lazy no-goods, leeches and "takers."

That narrative, paid for and promoted by some extremely wealthy folks, exists only to make the wealthy more wealthy through cost avoidance measures. They are successfully playing the capitalism game to their utmost unconstrained advantage and the result is beginning to look more and more like the end of a Monopoly game.

Well said.

 

[tcartwri]

It's too early (for me) to take this on full frontal. So ..........

Redistribution is NOT the solution. Since invoking the great war on poverty - we have MORE people in need than ever before. They have been made wards of the state by engendering sloth and an attitude of victim-hood and entitlement. Their numbers are now so high they can control elections and that is why we wind up with the losers we see in the current administration. What these people can't seem to grasp is - THE LIFEBOAT CAN ONLY HOLD SO MANY BEFORE IT SINKS!

This scenario has very little to do with the decimation of the lower and middle classes. We have chosen to enter into the global economy and compete with nations where people are paid slave labor wages. Until our incomes come into equilibrium with 'those' nations, we will continue to slide. And that's all there is to it. I figure another two generations or so.... if there isn't a war over it.

 

[Jstpssng]

This scenario has very little to do with the decimation of the lower and middle classes. We have chosen to enter into the global economy and compete with nations where people are paid slave labor wages. Until our incomes come into equilibrium with 'those' nations, we will continue to slide. And that's all there is to it. I figure another two generations or so.... if there isn't a war over it.

We choose to contribute to the slide every time we go to Walmart et al and support sweat shops by purchasing their cheap goods.

 

[Pixguy]

I hope this thread doesn't get deleted as I enjoy listening to all opinions, no matter how wrong they may be! :laughing: :laughing: I think all of us are too often guilty of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. For instance I hear liberals pointing to the perceived outrageous salaries pulled down by CEOs of large companies to paint all business people as being uber-rich and only interested in making money at all costs. Conservatives are quick to point out government waste. For example, Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.

The fact is we need both private industry and government to survive as a nation.

Do I think a CEO is worth millions of dollars per year? No, but, unless I am a shareholder in the company, it is not my money. If I am a shareholder and it bugs me enough, I can sell my stock. If the company gets too fat and lazy, hopefully competition will either rein the "fat" company in, or it will cease to be profitable and go out of business.

Where I have a problem is with my tax dollars being wasted. That IS my money and it drives me nuts when government keeps asking for more and more and more. If a program fails to achieve the desired result, it isn't eliminated, the problem is usually "underfunding" and more tax dollars are needed.

<steps down from soap box>

:thumbsup:

 

[MossRoad]

I'm probably going to stick my foot in my mouth for saying this... but one of our biggest problems is the ability of the biggest players in our economy to place their earnings in other countries... BK's purchase of Tim Hortons being the laterst example. That, and this country's deficit are the biggest hurdles we need to overcome.

Overhaul the business tax code and businesses won't flee to other countries. Its just that simple.

 

[Jstpssng]

Overhaul the business tax code and businesses won't flee to other countries. Its just that simple.

How is it that something which is so plain to us peons can't be grasped by the powers that be?

 

[dave1949]

Overhaul the business tax code and businesses won't flee to other countries. Its just that simple.

It's simple until the next tax haven outbids us. Then what? It's an arbitrage game. Sort of like paying ransom for hostages creates more hostages and empowers the hostage takers; this will only further the undue influence of corporations. If you want more government by corporations, go for it.

No doubt our tax codes need simplification and sensibility across the board though.

 

[sseelhoff]

How is it that something which is so plain to us peons can't be grasped by the powers that be?

Because their (the powers that be) power is tied to code as is, or as they receive donations to make it become.