Why would I need to explain ? You mean you don't know about the most important aspect of a minimum wage raise (to a business owner). I find that hard to believe.
Nothing wrong with public school except with a few exceptions it does nothing to prepare students for the rigors ahead and sends them out the door steeped in ignorance. Oh, but the ysure feel good about themselves~! - - - Updated - - - Enough games. Get to the point already.
Well my public school education (as a student and teacher) at the City University of New York, sure didn't leave out the most important aspect (to a business owner) of a minimum wage raise. I really feel silly having to explain this, but OK. Try this >> You own a business (anything). The minimum wage goes up from the current $7.25/hour to $22/hour. Thousands of people in your city are now receiving almost $15/ hour more than before (3 times what they were) and about $600/week more. You don't think this is going to have a HUGE affect on your SALES$$$$ ?????????? If you don't, I wouldn't know why not.
Government will always intervene to protect and grow political power, it just so happens in our semi-capitalist system the politicians need the capitalists money to keep their jobs so they pander to them. Once the political class no longer needs their help... well history should tell you what happens. The only true course is to always actively strive to keep government, especially central governments role small as to not allow power to continually accrue in the hands of a few. It will never be perfect and it will always be a struggle, but its better than advocating for larger government and pushing the atrocities of large government onto others. At least I don't preach against it and then vote for Republicans and Democrats who do nothing but enrich the wealthy while giving the poor just enough scraps to keep them quiet.
Payment for services or goods produced based on perceived worth IS the essence of a "democratic republic" and every other form of economy/government except those based on slavery or piracy. You get paid what you're worth in a free-market economy -- how much more simply can it be expressed? The following paraphrased question was raised, "so why does the job you get paid $20/hour to do in the USA only get paid $5/hour in some other country?" The obvious answer is that the "job" (whatever it is) commands, say, $5/hour in a place a company chooses to do business-- so that is what people will be paid to do it! We're all becoming one big, happy socialist world-without-borders now -- right?! Well, the competitive nature of an international labor pool in an international economy is a big part of what you got as the individual identities, protections, and "norms" of individual countries were discarded. Why aren't liberal, internationalist socialists rejoicing about this? And as far as debt goes... the answer is equally forthright and simple: if you don't want to be a victim of debt-slavery then don't go into debt! Again, why is it that hyperlibs have so much trouble understanding this? Work at a job you choose, doing work that you choose to do, for compensation that you agree to accept, and then regulate your purchases in any way you choose! If you like your job, then keep on working at it. If you want a job that pays more, find one you can do in which you can make more money. Don't buy things you can't afford! But it's impossible to explain this to people who think Obama "walks on water" by continuing a ruinous policy that just drives the United States deeper and deeper into debt every stinking day! Liberals deeply resent being lectured to on things like this by Conservatives, as though they're idiots -- but can you see why? The simple laws of exchange and value in a marketplace are as old as mankind! They will continue to apply in mankind's future if we are to be productive and prosperous as a species. The only societies in which people are compensated disproportionately to their worth and value in the human marketplace are those that are Socialist or Communist -- and every one of those has failed or is in the process of failing (North Korea, Cuba, etc.)....
Entertaining thread for sure. Question. You often mention the additional money everyone will now have. Why do you never mention the additional cost associated with increased pay for workers? If I increase the cost for my business, I must increase revenue to maintain margin. You mention increased sales. You assume capacity can be increased. What if it cannot? What if you are already as efficient as possible?
You're unbelievable. You are so silly as to really believe that as you say "no business passes increased production costs to the consumer'. That my friend is ludicrous. So in your strange world thirty years ago McDonalds was selling a Big Mac for 25 cents and now the cost is a few bucks and the price increase has nothing to do with the cost of production? You need to give the 'Ripple' a rest. BTW the "market price" is determined 100% by the cost of production. Thank God none of my kids ever attended any of your 'microeconomics' Liberal Indoctrination classes. Take your strange silliness to the Harvard School of Business. You'd be laughed out of the place. " What do you think those people are ? Horses ? Tools ? Tractors ?" Now that there is funny. Just why do you think people use/d horses/tools and tractors? B/c these are things that increase productivity and reduce the cost of production. Can you say 'robotics'? You're obviously a socialist and that's your prerogative but you'll never convince any business owner that if he/she would only pay their employees $22 an hour the people in the neighborhood will have so much more money that they'll buy three times more burgers/or whatever so the business owner won't have to increase his prices to cover the cost of production. It's illogical. You completely leave out of your silly econ. 101 theory that there are other business's cranking out blue jeans etc in places like China/India already at a fraction of the price it costs to produce the same basic item in the US. Think economic Darwinism and you'll get your head right. Don't like it? Move to NK or Cuba or Russia. Your 'theories' will be welcomed with open arms and hungry stomachs.
I explained same thing to protectionist five times already to no avail... he's fixed on his nice, utopian idea. Don't think he can be helped
You really don't understand lost revenue? If I stick my (*)(*)(*)(*)ing hand in the till and stuff it in my pockets have I taken nothing from anything? I do not need to think hard for anything you have put forward. It is idiotic. Do not condescend to me... and it is spelled criteria... How about you answer the (*)(*)(*)(*)ing question instead of snidely dodging. If you mean to suggest that the volume of sales is going to compensate for the LOSS in revenue, you are ridiculous. People are not going to eat MORE cheap food...
The United States is a constitution republic. You know, that individual life liberty and property thing. A example of a democratic republic would be Soviet East Germany. In a constitutional republic the sovereignty lies with the individual. In a democratic republic sovereignty lies with the state. I doubt that you have taught anything but I have no doubt that you preach socialism every chance you get. Although many countries with governments you desire have collapsed, there are still some around, Venezuela, Cuba just not here, so why dont you go ahead and get out. Oh, and Bon voyage to you..
I've waisted enough time here. Trying to carry on an intelligent debate with someone who is clearly missing a few bricks is like trying to debate the long-term economic benefits of having a SS Tubi package compared with a steel one with a three year old. Thank you God for never allowing any of my children to be exposed to such a 'pant-load' of Socialist/Marxist/Communist economic nonsense when they were 'earning' their degrees.
Exactly, than no one would be able to afford Mcdonalds, the company goes under, and everyone loses their jobs, all while people won't be able to buy burgers anymore.
This is literally one of the dumbest most uneducated posts i have ever seen. You have obviously not run a business, your idea of economics is that of a fairy tale. We are all dumber for having read what you posted. I award you zero points. May God have mercy on your soul.
I think my biggest fear in this thread is that these kinds of ideas are being taught in our university system.
Ya, that is is wrong. Actually history shows that in the modern period, government and capital are inexorably linked. Government grows it's power in order to protect and promote capital accumulation. Obamacare may be an increase in government, but more importantly it mandates millions of new customers for giant insurance companies. It guarantees new customers for the entire health care industry actually. That is what government does. Similarly, government regulates, not for the sake of its power, and not to regulate the actions of capital, but to undermine the ability of competitors to challenge capitalist profit. A good example is the energy industry, where the regulations put in place by the EPA are easily met by big corporations or sometimes they even get exemptions from those regulations. On the other hand, any smaller competitor or individual considering entering that market, would find doing so to be extraordinarily difficult, because of all the bureaucratic red tape involved in the process. It is not a power grab for the sake of a power grab. It is a power grab manufactured by the lobbyists who work for those companies. When government actually does do something they don't like, they send out more lobbyists and make some more "campaign contributions" and give the people speaking engagements at some energy conference, and then those laws are changed. Capital and government go hand in hand because they are mutually useful to each other. They both wield enormous power and influence. To say one side is just using the other is kind of inaccurate, but if it actually does work that way, then it is probably capital using government!! Which is why they are able to do this sort of thing in most countries across the world, no matter who the government is. Which I commend you for. I similarly vote for neither Democrats nor Republicans, and that IS exactly what they do. Enrich the wealthy, and use "redistribution" to give the poor(who they helped make and keep poor) just enough scraps to keep them quiet.
Well... this is exactly what protectionist is saying he was taught in his New York University. Apparently, if these greedy employers will just pay everyone $20/hour or more, our fiscal problems will be solved.
That moron is unbelievable..... If we had it her way, we'd have unemployment at 25%, or higher.... Productivity increases when you fire people.
We need more leaders with real world experience not some college graduate with a law degree. We need less complicated law and less elected officials that are lawyers to really return this country back to the people.
Again, NO!!!!!!! Australia has a minimum wage around $16, yet their unemployment rate has hung around 5% recently. People WILL fire workers up until a point, and WILL ask workers to increase their productivity to make up for that. However, what drives hiring is the amount of employees required to service the customers they have. If a store needs 4 employees and has 4 employees, and minimum wage is raised, they cannot simply fire an employee to make up for that. They would then be understaffed and would lose money in that way. The only way they can fire, is if they were carrying too many employees before. PS. An overnight switch to a $22 an hour minimum wage WOULD cause firings, but NO one would advocate for that. It is something that would happen slowly over time. Done in that way, there would be few firings in conjunction, because as I said, businesses need to meet their demands, and need employees to do so.
THEY ARE GREEDY EMPLOYERS!! Corporate profits are at record levels, while ages are down. http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/03/news/economy/record-corporate-profits/index.html So it would seem a raise in the minimum wage would be a good idea. It is actually a sensible way to "redistribute." In this way, you don't take from one group and give to another, after a bureaucratic web reorders the money. You simply get straight to the obscene corporate profits, and money goes back down to the lower end of the spectrum. Which is absolutely necessary for a functional society. PS. Few people have even brought up the most reasonable argument against this, and it is that, while $22 an hour may be reasonable in the large cities of the US, it IS NOT reasonable at a drug store in a small town in Wyoming. All the minimum wage would do in such a place, is incentivize hiring people under the table and paying them in cash. However, a national minimum wage hike above it's current level, and state governments adding their own minimum wage levels in congruence with the realities of their own states, actually makes sense.
Ayuh,... Yer describing Government induced Inflation.... The $22. an hour will still equal the $1.25 an hour of 1975.... Bottom line, the worker gettin' a fatter check is Still in the same economic position, just usin' More Zer0s in his checkbook.... 'n yer McDee burgers will be $100.00 a piece....
a bankrupt business hires no one. People will not pay for a happy meal if it costs $23.50. They just wont. Productivity has increased because of the removal of people, not by the addition of people. The auto companies make 10x the cars with 1/5th of the people, than they did in 1962. Productivity increased when people were replaced with robots. McDonalds prepackages all the ingredients for every store in the country, with robots at a single central location. Productivity increased when people were replaced by robots. Tying minimum wage to productivity is idiotic and it has almost no baring on the value of an individuals abilities. Increasing the minimum wage would force all manufacturing out of the USA. All of it. China uses slaves, and we cant compete now at $7.50 an hour. .
So, if raising the minimum wage is not a valid option, then what are we to do. The fact is, we CANNOT and WILL NOT compete with the wages they pay in 3rd world countries. So what else can we do, realisticly?
