Why a high minimum wage rate is racist:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMMN3UIQmEk
progressive policies and racism
I took a moment to watch this as I tend to trust that folks here pin up interesting stuff.
I can't say this is of any interest. This guy is simply making claims with neither empirical nor theoretical substantiation.
I don't see how you link this to racism.
The argument FOR a given salary rate is simple (and even starts with the same argument he ran with): Employers have a pile of costs. The owners and shareholders of that business seek to maximise their profits. If all other costs go up, the only cost that they can control directly is salary. As they CAN control salary, then they do so in the interests of their own profits. Call me an old lbertarian if you wish, but this seems unethical to me, that those owners would seek to cut an employees wages so as to maintain their profits, even if that is unsustainable and is thus a short term measure before closing the business down.
Reduction of salaries in real terms relative to other costs distorts the actual price that they should peg their own product/services to, because whilst all other costs are going up in the market place, they can artificially make their product/services look low by reducing, or allowing to degrade in real terms, the salaries of their employees. This leads, ultimately, to an unsustainable imbalance between the income of those employed and the base costs in the market place. This is just short-term-ism.
So this is the crux of the politics: If you could run a business for 6 months and make money, then close it down because it would be unsustainable after that, should you be encouraged to do so? The Government is [should be] interested in developing a market that is balanced, equitable and stable for generations to come. These are not the motivations of businesses and their owners. Hence, such a debate may always occur, but for long-term stability so a salary must be pegged to the minimum to sustain a basic standard of living. This is the motivation of the Government, not of businesses with 5-year [max] business plans. I think the minimum salaries could be higher: An expectation of a minimum standard of quality of life should be stated by a Government, and the minimum wage is decided on so as to sustain that minimum standard.
Maybe it is less, or more, than it is currently, I don't know as I have had no need to either state what I think is a minimum standard of life quality and nor would I fall short of it. But I feel quite strongly that we should understand what standard of living we expect for our fellow citizens, then co-ordinate a minimum wage to provide fulfilment of that minimum standard. Anything less is both unchristian (do we not have any compassion for the quality of life for others?) and outright exploitative.
I can't say this is of any interest. This guy is simply making claims with neither empirical nor theoretical substantiation.
I don't see how you link this to racism.
The argument FOR a given salary rate is simple (and even starts with the same argument he ran with): Employers have a pile of costs. The owners and shareholders of that business seek to maximise their profits. If all other costs go up, the only cost that they can control directly is salary. As they CAN control salary, then they do so in the interests of their own profits. Call me an old lbertarian if you wish, but this seems unethical to me, that those owners would seek to cut an employees wages so as to maintain their profits, even if that is unsustainable and is thus a short term measure before closing the business down.
Reduction of salaries in real terms relative to other costs distorts the actual price that they should peg their own product/services to, because whilst all other costs are going up in the market place, they can artificially make their product/services look low by reducing, or allowing to degrade in real terms, the salaries of their employees. This leads, ultimately, to an unsustainable imbalance between the income of those employed and the base costs in the market place. This is just short-term-ism.
So this is the crux of the politics: If you could run a business for 6 months and make money, then close it down because it would be unsustainable after that, should you be encouraged to do so? The Government is [should be] interested in developing a market that is balanced, equitable and stable for generations to come. These are not the motivations of businesses and their owners. Hence, such a debate may always occur, but for long-term stability so a salary must be pegged to the minimum to sustain a basic standard of living. This is the motivation of the Government, not of businesses with 5-year [max] business plans. I think the minimum salaries could be higher: An expectation of a minimum standard of quality of life should be stated by a Government, and the minimum wage is decided on so as to sustain that minimum standard.
Maybe it is less, or more, than it is currently, I don't know as I have had no need to either state what I think is a minimum standard of life quality and nor would I fall short of it. But I feel quite strongly that we should understand what standard of living we expect for our fellow citizens, then co-ordinate a minimum wage to provide fulfilment of that minimum standard. Anything less is both unchristian (do we not have any compassion for the quality of life for others?) and outright exploitative.
The minimum wage hurts the least skilled by pricing them out of the labor market.
If your skills are worth $5 an hour and the government says pay them $7.50 then there is no work.
Further - if you can design a machine that will perform the work at $6 an hour then the job gets eliminated all together.
And racist? Well minorities in general are less skilled than whites.
If your skills are worth $5 an hour and the government says pay them $7.50 then there is no work.
Further - if you can design a machine that will perform the work at $6 an hour then the job gets eliminated all together.
And racist? Well minorities in general are less skilled than whites.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Better to have no job than be "exploited"?Anything less is both unchristian (do we not have any compassion for the quality of life for others?) and outright exploitative.
In addition it eliminates the chance of moving up because you can't get a start. So you then go on the dole - which makes the person a total loss to society - a total drain on the economy.
Which is to say the incentives are wrong.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
MSimon wrote:The minimum wage hurts the least skilled by pricing them out of the labor market.
If your skills are worth $5 an hour and the government says pay them $7.50 then there is no work.
Further - if you can design a machine that will perform the work at $6 an hour then the job gets eliminated all together.
And racist? Well minorities in general are less skilled than whites.
You touch upon something that I have been wondering\worried about for quite some time. Eventually we will have flexible adaptable robots that can do the jobs that are currently done by low wage people. At some point, any repetitive job can be replaced by one of these machines. At that point, what happens to the people who's work is no longer necessary?
Another point. Who's gonna control the machines?
Scary to think about.
This is on my point [a few layers down]; the predicate of your logic begins with the notion that the labour market is "right" and that it is the philosophy that should regulate society, viz. for the betterment of society that everyone needs to earn their keep and that everyone should work.MSimon wrote:The minimum wage hurts the least skilled by pricing them out of the labor market.
This is the way business would want it - to ensure a pool of workers are over-populated so as to keep wage costs low - but why does western society think like this? There's enough work to go around! Why do people work 60 hours at the top and earn $$$mega? Why not half, or quater, those jobs, bring up the next layer of people, until such time as everyone shuffles up and there are enough vacancies at the bottom?
I'm not saying *this* is the solution, what I am trying to say is that there are alternative ways to structure a society so that it doesn't demand 12 hours, 7 days a week from everyone.
I think people are too busy these days, in our society, and that busy people never get anything done!
I'm no bleeding-heart liberal, I just don't think we need to maintain this flog-your-guts-out-for-cash mentality when we are such a clever species with machines that can do most of our work for us.
Chris,
To make your scheme work all you have to do is get your Parliament to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. I'm surprised you are not petitioning your government for just such a move. You could do it under the rubric of government simplification. Fewer laws.
I think your country would be an excellent place to try it. After all the USSR is no longer with us. If if works there I promise to push for it over here.
You will have to do something about imports in order to keep prices high enough to support the higher wage. Of course since imports often form the basis of exports then you will be uncompetitive in the markets you do have. But you have to consider that wrecking an economy is a small price to pay to keep wages high.
Perhaps government subsidy is a better way. They can tax you in order to pay some one else more than he is worth. Jolly good all around. You get the opportunity to pay more for goods plus higher taxes. What is not to like? Plus the government agents will need their cut. To keep it all "honest".
BTW in America many union wages are tied to the minimum wage.
Anyway. Get a system that works and we will adopt it here.
To make your scheme work all you have to do is get your Parliament to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. I'm surprised you are not petitioning your government for just such a move. You could do it under the rubric of government simplification. Fewer laws.
I think your country would be an excellent place to try it. After all the USSR is no longer with us. If if works there I promise to push for it over here.
You will have to do something about imports in order to keep prices high enough to support the higher wage. Of course since imports often form the basis of exports then you will be uncompetitive in the markets you do have. But you have to consider that wrecking an economy is a small price to pay to keep wages high.
Perhaps government subsidy is a better way. They can tax you in order to pay some one else more than he is worth. Jolly good all around. You get the opportunity to pay more for goods plus higher taxes. What is not to like? Plus the government agents will need their cut. To keep it all "honest".
BTW in America many union wages are tied to the minimum wage.
Anyway. Get a system that works and we will adopt it here.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
MSimon wrote:Chris,
To make your scheme work all you have to do is get your Parliament to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. I'm surprised you are not petitioning your government for just such a move. You could do it under the rubric of government simplification. Fewer laws.
I think your country would be an excellent place to try it. After all the USSR is no longer with us. If if works there I promise to push for it over here.
You will have to do something about imports in order to keep prices high enough to support the higher wage. Of course since imports often form the basis of exports then you will be uncompetitive in the markets you do have. But you have to consider that wrecking an economy is a small price to pay to keep wages high.
Perhaps government subsidy is a better way. They can tax you in order to pay some one else more than he is worth. Jolly good all around. You get the opportunity to pay more for goods plus higher taxes. What is not to like? Plus the government agents will need their cut. To keep it all "honest".
BTW in America many union wages are tied to the minimum wage.
Anyway. Get a system that works and we will adopt it here.
I'm not sure most people either understand or appreciate the significance of this. To spell it out, the Unions are constantly pushing the Democrats to raise minimum wage to help the "poor" workers. The Fact that EVERY time minimum wage is increased, the unions get AUTOMATIC pay increases (based on the minimum wage and a percentage of their current salary) is what is driving this false concern for the poor.
The Media (which is nothing but a Democrat Party mouthpiece) will heap praise on Congress (The Media is all union too.) for their wonderful concern for the poor, and the rubes (ignorant voters) once again buy the bright shining lie.
Minimum wage increase = Union wage increase. Figure it out people.
You are being excessive in your response. Maybe just sticking in a minimum wage will do the job? I petition Government on lots of things, but getting rid of minimum wage isn't one of them. It is a biasing mechanism against Supply and Demand - any gazetted rate it - but it is one of the means by which a Government can modulate society.MSimon wrote:Chris,
To make your scheme work all you have to do is get your Parliament to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. I'm surprised you are not petitioning your government for just such a move.
My central tenet is that if society was simply down to how businesses work, then we have lost our humanity. That's the problem with that video - it begins with the presumption that businesses exist, and should for their own purposes. As the Chinese authorities will tell you (!), businesses exist freely [in the West] because it serves the purposes of those Governments.
(I did petition the Government to repeal Ohm's Law once. There was a lot of resistance!)
Ah, well, I wasn't aware of that, and it changes the dynamics considerably, of course!Diogenes wrote: Minimum wage increase = Union wage increase. Figure it out people.
If business doesn't work you will lose a LOT of humanity.
See the SSR, U of.
My point, and I think you have tumbled to it is that the Law of Supply and Demand can't be repealed. It makes no difference how much you care. If the Soviets couldn't do it what makes you think your country can?
The effort to repeal it will have unintended consequences - i.e. low skill labor will be driven out of the market.
The way to counteract that is to subsidize low skill labor. Or increase the numbers on the dole. Is your government (already broke) going to do that?
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Can you force business to operate at a loss? Not for long. Can you force them to operate at below market rates of return? The business will be liquidated and the capital redeployed.
You assume a static situation - the situation is never static.
See the SSR, U of.
My point, and I think you have tumbled to it is that the Law of Supply and Demand can't be repealed. It makes no difference how much you care. If the Soviets couldn't do it what makes you think your country can?
The effort to repeal it will have unintended consequences - i.e. low skill labor will be driven out of the market.
The way to counteract that is to subsidize low skill labor. Or increase the numbers on the dole. Is your government (already broke) going to do that?
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Can you force business to operate at a loss? Not for long. Can you force them to operate at below market rates of return? The business will be liquidated and the capital redeployed.
You assume a static situation - the situation is never static.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Links at the above site .There’s a story like that by Mark Lee on Bloomberg today. “As Chinese Wages Rise, Machines Replace Migrant Workers,” read the headline. “New minimum wage laws, a looser yuan and worker strikes like those affecting Honda Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Corp. are raising costs at plants in China’s Pearl River Delta, leading to increased automation of assembly lines.”
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... ina-rises/
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.