Minimum Wage - From another topic

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Minimum Wage - From another topic

Postby KitemanSA » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:05 am

MSimon wrote:
Me too. As an aside that I hope stops here, perhaps if we made the minimum wage law applicable to anything sold in the US rather than just what is made here, this problem would go away.


Absolutely. However, we need a decent minimum wage law not the stuff the crooks in Washington are trying to palm off as helping. What we need is a minimum wage of $100 an hour. And even that may be too low. It would be a start though. It would keep the riff raff from getting legal jobs. Plus it would definitely keep out products made by low cost labor. Take tungsten which we import. If the miners are not getting $100 an hour we can stop all imports. Or how about oil? If the janitors at the oil companies are not getting $100 an hour we can keep the oil out. Every where along the supply chain $100 an hour or the goods get excluded.

It is such a simple plan. I wonder why it is not more popular?

Yup, of course all you would be doing is devaluing the dollar. Yes I saw that too.
Then of course we could make the minimum wage the same everywhere a $0.01 and up-value the dollar too. Not too sure I care, but I don't like our workers to be at a legally mandated disadvantage. Perhaps people would eventually see that the best minimumwage is $0.00 and let market forces actually work.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:18 am

Minimum wage is one of the few places I depart from free market absolutism (the notable other being suppot for some sort of redistributive education funding).

It's true that, all else being equal, the economy would function better without a minimum wage. Unemployment would be lower, things would cost less, etc. However, I think the minimum wage serves a certain useful function in regards to creating new standard of living minimums.

For instance, most people don't realize that the poverty line in 2009 is about where average incomes were in the 1950s. How can this be, one might ask, given that the 1950s weren't some terrible era of misery and privation? Well, in fact, things in the 1950s were the best they'd ever been as of the 1950s, but things have gotten so much better since then that living a 1950s lifestyle (no air conditioning, cable, cell phone, microwave, computer, dvd player, or video games; smaller house; less food) today requires only subsistence-level funding. As it stands now, even a minimum-wage job will allow you to enjoy most basic modern conveniences -- which means there will be a huge market for such things.

There's another benefit too -- automation. Higher wages tend to drive capital innovation. When you can hire 100 immigrants used to sub-minimum-wage living for the price of renting one skid/steer loader, the market for machinery is going to be diminished.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:56 am

However, I think the minimum wage serves a certain useful function in regards to creating new standard of living minimums.


The difficulty is the excluded worker. You basically eliminate starter jobs. Well not really. They just become part of the black market. Which makes them less accessible.

There is no way to guarantee anything except to produce more than you consume (leave some surge capability).
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Re: Minimum Wage - From another topic

Postby Roger » Mon Mar 23, 2009 7:57 pm

Has any of that actually ever worked ?

KitemanSA wrote: and let market forces actually work.


All hail the Market. >wink<

I particularly like when old mature markets get a lot of momentum. They become nearly impossible to control. And they hit things, like walls.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:17 am

Simon,

Well, it depends. The U.S. has been slowly transitioning to a more and more skill-based economy. Most entry-level skilled labor positions pay considerably more than the current wage. What tends to be crowded out is no-skill labor.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:29 am

TallDave wrote:Simon,

Well, it depends. The U.S. has been slowly transitioning to a more and more skill-based economy. Most entry-level skilled labor positions pay considerably more than the current wage. What tends to be crowded out is no-skill labor.


Yes. The unskilled get crowded out. I'd rather the unskilled were working. It tends to keep them out of trouble.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:49 am

MSimon wrote:Yes. The unskilled get crowded out. I'd rather the unskilled were working. It tends to keep them out of trouble.
Which is why I made the suggestion in the first place. Don't put them at a disadvantage by MANDATING that they get overpaid while the folks overseas can undercut them. If it is "right" that folks get a minimum wage, it is "right" that EVERYONE gets said minimum wage. :wink: :wink: nudge nudge.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:00 am

KitemanSA wrote:
MSimon wrote:Yes. The unskilled get crowded out. I'd rather the unskilled were working. It tends to keep them out of trouble.
Which is why I made the suggestion in the first place. Don't put them at a disadvantage by MANDATING that they get overpaid while the folks overseas can undercut them. If it is "right" that folks get a minimum wage, it is "right" that EVERYONE gets said minimum wage. :wink: :wink: nudge nudge.


Why yes. It is imperative that we control India's wage structure. An IMPERIAL imperative. Not only can we keep their products out of our country but as a side benefit we can create either riots or starvation in India. An excellent plan. We can not only screw up our labor market but India's as well. All we got to do to make it work is pass some laws and every one will fall in line.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Postby ravingdave » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:36 pm

I know this is probably futile. The people who agree already know all this, and the people who disagree don't want to hear it, but in the off chance that some good may come of it I decided to post it for perusal by others.


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... crats.html




David

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Tue Mar 24, 2009 4:09 pm

MSimon wrote: Why yes. It is imperative that we control India's wage structure. An IMPERIAL imperative.
We would not "control" India's wage structure. They are not REQUIRED to sell in the US. But they do a good job of making use of America's (admittedly stupid) laws against us. All I want is to level the playing field. If it is stupid to have minimum wage laws, at least require everyone to be burdened with said stupid laws if they wish to sell in the US.

I suppose that as an acceptable option, the "same minimum wage" could be set to $0.00. :wink:

clonan
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:16 pm

Postby clonan » Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:12 pm

ravingdave wrote:I know this is probably futile. The people who agree already know all this, and the people who disagree don't want to hear it, but in the off chance that some good may come of it I decided to post it for perusal by others.


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... crats.html




David


Nothing like writing a "questionnaire" that is SO skewed as to be amusing!

Lets fix your questions:

#1 A is OK, B should include the phrase "and go bankrupt." at the end of the last sentence.

#2 A is OK, B should begin with "Strongly enforce the currently existing policies of reducing/eliminating all responsibility to our workers by..."

#3 The Question needs to be amended "whose family income is above $250,000." Now becomes "whose family income is above $250,000, less than 1% of small business owners."

A) should now conclude with "continuing to pay tax on the reported funds and avoiding the tax ONLY on the PROFIT above $250K while risking extreme fines and potential jail time

#4 A) should conclude with "while forgoing with the fairly low risk profit afforded by the plan."

B) "hire a major law firm" should become "be prepared to hire a major law firm should it become necessary"

Add a C) Participate in the effort, acquire assets that appreciate strongly over the next few years (since they are backed by real property, supported by federal insurance and underpriced almost exclusively because of a flaw in the accounting laws) all while earning the respect and thanks of your regulators for risking your resources to support them.

#5 change "and other pending regulations." to "and other regulations which brings the US regulation in line with all other industrial nations."

B)replace the "begin" with "Continue."

#6 A) add "and trigger a massive drop in the dollar which will destroy the Chinese economy, which has a higher GDP percentage sunk in T-Bills than the % US GDP at risk. The drop in economy will destabilize the government leading to a massive revolt and civil war removing the communist party from power (and probably killing all the leaders). While at the same time the US now becomes a much more attractive place to manufacture destroying the value of the massive manufactuing infrastructure recently put in place financed through trade with the US."

#7) A)after "Washington" you replace the remainder with "have had no long term effect on the stock market since it's inception and will notice that the stock market has ALWAYS generated a profit over any 10 year period including the period with the Great Depression and New Deal. In addition you will notice that the Dow earns an average of 11% annually over almost any 10 year period.

And hopefully add C) "Pay off all outstanding debt, pay off the mortgage and save 6 months so you never need to worry about losing a job or the general economy again."

#8) A ends with "while not protecting yourself since temp workers, even heired through an agency, must be treated as full employees under current laws after only a few months of service. While at the same time you are restricting yourself from the best talent putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage INSTEAD of creating the systems necessary to spot and prevent the discrimination in question.

B ends with "since you acted fairly, kept proper records and realize that even under the new law it is very difficult for employees to win a suit due to the "reasonable business needs" clause.



Dave, I am an MBA. I have run several businesses. I freely admit that the laws coming out are a dramatic departure from the last 30 years. However a change does not mean death. Even under the new laws the deck is still stacked in favor of the employeer to a large degree. Thoes that treat thier people well and look beyond the next P&L statment will do just fine.

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Postby ravingdave » Tue Mar 24, 2009 6:23 pm

KitemanSA wrote:
MSimon wrote: Why yes. It is imperative that we control India's wage structure. An IMPERIAL imperative.
We would not "control" India's wage structure. They are not REQUIRED to sell in the US. But they do a good job of making use of America's (admittedly stupid) laws against us. All I want is to level the playing field. If it is stupid to have minimum wage laws, at least require everyone to be burdened with said stupid laws if they wish to sell in the US.

I suppose that as an acceptable option, the "same minimum wage" could be set to $0.00. :wink:



Shades of Pat Buchanan! This is one of his major points when he was running for President.

I actually can find no fault with his thinking on this. He contends that the USA requires all sorts of burdens on US companies operating in the US. Among them is minimum wage, health and safety regulations, Environmental/anti pollution regulations, a Hostile legal environment, and a host of other requirements.

His point was that it is unfair to American Workers and American Businesses for their foreign competition to be able to operate in the absence of all these governmental requirements, and therefore in order to make the playing field equal between foreign manufacturers and American based manufacturers, there should be an import tax commensurate with the cost to American businesses having to comply with all the governmental requirements.


He was castigated for being a "Protectionist" but if you look at it honestly, you gotta admit the idea is more "anti-unfair competitionist."

Why should American businesses have to comply with all this crap when the foreign competition doesn't ? Put this burden on them and then we'll SEE how competitive they are.



David

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Postby ravingdave » Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:05 pm

clonan wrote:
ravingdave wrote:I know this is probably futile. The people who agree already know all this, and the people who disagree don't want to hear it, but in the off chance that some good may come of it I decided to post it for perusal by others.


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... crats.html




David


Nothing like writing a "questionnaire" that is SO skewed as to be amusing!

Lets fix your questions:

#1 A is OK, B should include the phrase "and go bankrupt." at the end of the last sentence.



Okay, let's try that out and see how it fits.

a) Lend out money to almost all applicants with reasonable but less than good credit on order to, per government orders, stimulate the economy. Agree to caps on salaries and bonuses and have Congress look over your shoulder questioning every decision.

b) Lend money only to excellent credit risk applicants, retain as much cash as possible in high yield instruments and do everything to repay the TARP money as quickly as you can and go bankrupt.



It doesn't seem to make any sense when you put that in there. Lending money to ONLY good credit risks seems like the opposite of a bad business plan. How does this make you go bankrupt ?


Apart from that it overlooks the elephant in the room, and that being the likelihood that CEO would care more about their own money than that of others. I firmly believe that General Motors executives knew full well that the deals they made with the Unions (to get them to behave in the short term) were completely untenable, but the CEO's and other executives figured they would have gotten their payolla and retired before the shit hit the fan, and it would be their successors problem. It's the old "I got mine!" thing.


clonan wrote:Dave, I am an MBA. I have run several businesses. I freely admit that the laws coming out are a dramatic departure from the last 30 years. However a change does not mean death. Even under the new laws the deck is still stacked in favor of the employeer to a large degree. Thoes that treat thier people well and look beyond the next P&L statment will do just fine.



Not to be disrespectful or anything, but it is my observation that the people who created the financial mess that the whole country is dealing with are the brilliant genius graduates of places like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell, etc. I'm thinking these guys were too clever by half, and i'm reminded of the old joke.

A guy attending his 10 year high school reunion watched the arrival of the dumbest guy in the class. The man drove up in a chauffeured limousine with two cuties on his arms bedecked in jewelry and luxury.
The guy walked up to him and asked him his secret to success. The dumb guy replied "If I buy something for a dollar, I sell it for two! It's amazing how fast that two percent adds up ! "

I think the laws which are coming out are in fundamental conflict with human nature, and they are being proposed by the same type of people who created this ponzi scheme mess in the first place.


David

clonan
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:16 pm

Postby clonan » Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:58 pm

It doesn't seem to make any sense when you put that in there. Lending money to ONLY good credit risks seems like the opposite of a bad business plan. How does this make you go bankrupt ?


Because many, probably even most, people who did take TARP money took it because they had to or go under. Therefore if you had to have the TARP money you get to select option A and smile. If you tried to take option B you would fold since repaying the TARP money quickly would kill your liquidity. Thoes that took TARP money when they didn't need it absolutly SHOULD pay it back ASAP and continue with the policies that kept them productive until now.

I firmly believe that General Motors executives knew full well that the deals they made with the Unions (to get them to behave in the short term) were completely untenable


Possible.... however they were faced with the prospect of bankruptcy now or bankruptcy later. By refusing to deal with the unions GM would have died immediatly. Now while the Union contracts were a little extreme in a few areas (retention payments after dissmisal etc.) generally they aren't THAT crazy. If the union contracts were the only thing wrong than GM would still be stumbling along. What killed GM was the inability to look beyond the next quarter and to migrate a majority of the profit from making cars to making loans. GM has massive managment issues as well as union issues.

It's the old "I got mine!" thing.


Absolutly there is a lot of this on all sides. I beleive this attitude is a direct result of the policies since Reagan. These policies are the one that are in fundamental conflict with human nature. The elevation of the individual to the level of personal god while all obligations to society are destroyed is what has primarily lead to this crisis.

brilliant genius graduates of places like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell,


ohh please thoes schools are pathetic. I went to a state school. Actual learned the material and applied it. You buy low - sell high is Always a part of it but it isn't the whole picture. Your high school grad learned that the hard way...besides in America he was probably Morgaged up to his eye balls and heading to bankruptcy court the next week.

Read the book "Millionaires Next Door" It is an enlightening analysis of wealth in America.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:05 pm

KitemanSA wrote:
MSimon wrote: Why yes. It is imperative that we control India's wage structure. An IMPERIAL imperative.
We would not "control" India's wage structure. They are not REQUIRED to sell in the US. But they do a good job of making use of America's (admittedly stupid) laws against us. All I want is to level the playing field. If it is stupid to have minimum wage laws, at least require everyone to be burdened with said stupid laws if they wish to sell in the US.

I suppose that as an acceptable option, the "same minimum wage" could be set to $0.00. :wink:


There are a lot of things we need that we have to import. Suppose the oil producers decide fu we ain't paying no gd American minimum wage. Of course we can make an oil exemption.

Suppose the tungsten producers decide fu we ain't paying no gd American minimum wage. Of course we can make an tungsten exemption.

Suppose the industrial diamond producers decide fu we ain't paying no gd American minimum wage. Of course we can make an industrial diamond exemption.

etc.

etc.

etc.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 8 guests