|
"If you don't let the handicapped be used as dirt-cheap labor, undeserving of regular wages because they are lesser people than regular workers, then who is the real villain here, "liberal"?" 
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:57 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I will try and provide a microfoundational example here. John has Down syndrome. John needs a $20/hr wage to support himself. John is capable of producing $10/hr in value for an employer. It would be better for society to allow John to work at $10/hr and subsidize the rest of his existence than to try and force an employer to lose at least $10/hr by employing him, because this would likely result in John being unemployed. The higher you raise the minimum wage, the more people will be in exactly the same situation as John. Not all people are capable of producing more than is required to sustain them and that's OK. Having the government pass a law will not magically make John capable of producing as much as he needs to live. This was how indentured servitude was justified 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Also hiring disabled people even though they are not tip loving top of productivity is a good end in itself as it promotes diversity and health communities and arrghh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:As I said, it would be data if we were collecting the opinions of people in this thread about their models about raising the minimum wage for another purpose. Does his graph do a good job of displaying that data point?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
i respect cripples enough to let them work for whatever wages they are willing to accept. why are you a bigot who wants to coddle them with a mandated wage floor? don't you think they're capable of making their own way in the world? this hospice mentality simply demonstrates that you are the clear ableist
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:46
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Graph chat led directly to you making this statement, which I have subsequently demolished. 
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Also hiring disabled people even though they are not tip loving top of productivity is a good end in itself as it promotes diversity and health communities and arrghh. And from a more practical point -- or cynical? -- means more of their incoming is coming from earned labor as opposed to government assistance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:i respect cripples enough to let them work for whatever wages they are willing to accept. why are you a bigot who wants to coddle them with a mandated wage floor? don't you think they're capable of making their own way in the world? this hospice mentality simply demonstrates that you are the clear ableist but sir, they would rather DIE than go to the cripples home!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:That's not a good reason to allow John to be employed at $10/hr, it's a good reason to not allow the disabled to continue to be exploited by allowing for minimum wage exemptions. If you want to incentivize the hiring of the disabled provide a government tax credit, don't just pay them less. There's no reason a disabled individual should make less than a living wage either. OK, so you think there's an important ethical difference between the government subsidizing john's existence and calling it welfare (bad) and the government subsidizing john's existence and calling it a wage subsidy (good). That's crazy. quote:The entire point of a living wage is to ensure the populace can survive comfortably while employed. Why shouldn't John be able to survive comfortably? Because he has Downs? Pretty disgusting imo. Which surprise, leads me back to where we started. It's simply unethical to allow someone to hire an individual for less than a living wage. It's effectively wage slavery. John should be able survive comfortably. Making it illegal for him to work at a wage that an employer might actually hire him at does not help him to survive comfortably. If the government is subsidizing John's wage, that, by definition, allows a company to hire an individual for less than a living wage. euphronius posted:It doesnt work like this in the real world. So in your world there must exist some perfect job where everyone, no matter what their level of skill or ability, will be able to have an hourly productivity that is equal to or above whatever you define as a living wage? Just world fallacy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:People keep saying that literally no one doubts that the minimum wage must have negative consequences at a sufficiently high level and you just keep proving them wrong. I don't think I ever said it was impossible for the minimum wage to cause unemployment, I'm just saying there are several other possibilities that are likely as well and to pretend like yours is the only rational or likely one is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:"If you don't let the handicapped be used as dirt-cheap labor, undeserving of regular wages because they are lesser people than regular workers, then who is the real villain here, "liberal"?" You can legislate a minimum wage. You can't legislate that companies hire employees at a loss. I'm sorry if reality gives you bad feelies but a minimum wage increase is likely to result in john's unemployment. Popular Thug Drink posted:i respect cripples enough to let them work for whatever wages they are willing to accept. why are you a bigot who wants to coddle them with a mandated wage floor? don't you think they're capable of making their own way in the world? this hospice mentality simply demonstrates that you are the clear ableist Remember all the times I told you to stop slurring oppressed people? Stop slurring oppressed people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:OK, so you think there's an important ethical difference between the government subsidizing john's existence and calling it welfare (bad) and the government subsidizing john's existence and calling it a wage subsidy (good). That's crazy. Who is to say that minimum wage isn't currently set too high then? Is everyone producing 8.25 or whatever in productivity? Are you arguing that there should be no minimum wage at all?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
JC why are you so quick to fire John? That's not how the world works. If he was doing a job, the need for that job still exists. I mean - as I said - unless in your conception you just had a pressing a button that created 10$ every hour or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Remember all the times I told you to stop slurring oppressed people? Stop slurring oppressed people. so you do self identify as mentally disabled hmm
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Who is to say that minimum wage isn't currently set too high then? Is everyone producing 8.25 or whatever in productivity? Are you arguing that there should be no minimum wage at all? Think of all the people that would be employed if they could be paid nothing! Us liberals are literally standing in the way of full employment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
euphronius posted:JC why are you so quick to fire John? That's not how the world works. If he was doing a job, the need for that job still exists. I mean - as I said - unless in your conception you just had a pressing a button that created 10$ every hour or whatever. there is a very smart man who determined john's labor is worth exactly $10/hr, no more no less, and one penny above or below this value means the only logical economic outcome is to toss him into the nearest convenient dyin' gutter
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Who is to say that minimum wage isn't currently set too high then? Is everyone producing 8.25 or whatever in productivity? Are you arguing that there should be no minimum wage at all? Currently disabled people can get exceptions to the minimum wage. euphronius posted:JC why are you so quick to fire John? That's not how the world works. If he was doing a job, the need for that job still exists. I mean - as I said - unless in your conception you just had a pressing a button that created 10$ every hour or whatever. Ok, so we're back to the just world fallacy where every person, regardless of skill or ability, can be as productive as we dream they can be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
OMG that toilet is clogged. It is only worth *checks chart* $14.99 cents per hour to pay someone to unlcog it. Thus, under LIBERAL TYRANNY all toilets will be clogged, FOREVER.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:there is a very smart man who determined john's labor is worth exactly $10/hr, no more no less, and one penny above or below this value means the only logical economic outcome is to toss him into the nearest convenient dyin' gutter Yes, I am making the bold, totally unsupportable assertion that for profit companies will not hire workers at a loss.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
hmm, strange... the table of labor values states that "creating tables of labor value" is worth $250/hr...
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Yes, I am making the bold, totally unsupportable assertion that for profit companies will not hire workers at a loss. this is someone who has never met a CEO
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Ok so it's a graph which is representing a model... Excellent! Progress has been made! Now apologize to the rest of the thread for wasting their time insisting on this point. quote:You didn't answer the question. What word would you use to describe the information which informs a model? Why is data an inappropriate word to describe that information? It's background knowledge which informs the model, and is separate from data. Data is what you gather in the field, and then you see if the relations between the data fit with your model (to some level of uncertainty). If you're doing Bayesian analysis, then when you're looking at Bayes` Theorem: P(M|D, I) = P(M|I) x P(D|M, I) / P(D|I) D is the data you are collecting, M is the model, and I is the background information that feeds into the model and to your data collection methodology. Another way to put this is that there are at two levels to arguing about statistics: about the data collected, and about what that data means. You keep conflating the two. At least on a disciplinary level, you should be able to agree with people about the data collection procedures to a level where you at least don't disagree about whether unemployment is at 10%, median wage is at $40,000/yr, interest rate is at 2%, etc. Then you can argue about which model best describes a series of data with respect to time. If you disagree there, then you push error models in collection back and forth, or arguing about relevant variables, or whatnot. You seem to be using language that would suggest that you are arguing at that level. But really, what you are saying is that "this is what I think the relation between raising the minimum wage to total benefits accrued to people of a certain social class", and then putting it again in graph form, and thinking that that helps. I doesn't. We can read that paragraph, and we can read that graph, to say that you think that there is benefit to raising the minimum wage until some point, then it will become a hinderance, until it leads to zero benefits for the lower social classes. The issue is that people disagree with your model. And you claiming that that model is actually data is simply obfuscating that point. Objections to that model that have been raised is that it doesn't take into account the rate of increase of minimum wage, it doesn't take into account the relation between that rate and inflation, all things that are vital since pretty much everyone here who is arguing for a raise in the minimum wage, is arguing for doing it gradually and adaptively. The data that will be needed is not another graph visualizing your model, it's data from people actually raising the minimum wage at a certain rate (as they are in LA and in Seattle) and seeing what happens. The model we need is one that will actually take into account rates and times.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Yes, I am making the bold, totally unsupportable assertion that for profit companies will not hire workers at a loss. Ok I am glad we all agree.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so you do self identify as mentally disabled Just stop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Excellent! Progress has been made! Now apologize to the rest of the thread for wasting their time insisting on this point. I want to drop this into my syllabus for "how do you use and work with statistics" AA.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Currently disabled people can get exceptions to the minimum wage. This doesn't answer the question of who is deciding the value of productivity and if the current minimum wage is above or below that value for many employers. What all of those non-disabled workers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Just stop. i'd imagine your lack of real world experience comes from the fact that you are insufferably hairy, and smell really bad, and therefore in the few meaningless jobs you've had all the attractive women who work there constantly laugh at you behind your back. isn't this not true?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
FYI the "just world fallacy" has to do with the justness of outcomes, not prerequisites
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I want to drop this into my syllabus for "how do you use and work with statistics" AA. Sure. Just don't forget to use the APA standard for citing Something Awful Forums posts. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:OK, so you think there's an important ethical difference between the government subsidizing john's existence and calling it welfare (bad) and the government subsidizing john's existence and calling it a wage subsidy (good). That's crazy. Can you explain how minimum wage is a subsidy/welfare from the government? I'm confused. JeffersonClay posted:If the government is subsidizing John's wage, that, by definition, allows a company to hire an individual for less than a living wage. Again, where is this subsidy you're talking about? JeffersonClay posted:So in your world there must exist some perfect job where everyone, no matter what their level of skill or ability, will be able to have an hourly productivity that is equal to or above whatever you define as a living wage? Just world fallacy. One possible explanation is that wage is not a primary factor for job growth. For instance, increasing costs (wage increases) to all businesses could trigger a rate increase that does not hurt or benefit any one company (much like gas prices). The effect, that even you have described, is that all ships rise with the tide. The playing field isn't any more or less difficult between businesses and therefore they could raise their prices by the same rate and see no change in their profits or number of employees. We also know that companies are seeing record profits yet we don't see a linear effect on job growth, so why should we assume a reduction in profits would be a linear decrease? I'm overly simplifying this, but it's perfectly reasonable to believe that increasing minimum wage might affect the economy in ways that have nothing to do with employment or ability for companies to hire employees.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:
disabled people produce inferior labor which clearly should not be priced at the same standard intended for a normal, non-disabled person mandating a minimum wage floor is just a handout to people who provide a substandard labor-product
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Yes, I am making the bold, totally unsupportable assertion that for profit companies will not hire workers at a loss. how much money does a company make from its janitorial staff?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
I am sorry senior VP of HR, I cannot fathom how much money you actually bring in so you are sacked. Legal department?? who needs this poo poo. you are out. We are running a profit focused business here. What the hell, IT? When have we ever made a dime making sure I can email invitations to my friends. Gone. euphronius fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jun 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Yes, Ortiz is it? Im sorry, you may have cleaned my poop off the toilet for years but it has come to our attention that this does not generate profits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:how much money does a company make from its janitorial staff? You could argue that they make money from a janitorial staff by increasing the time that the rest of their employees spend on task instead of cleaning up after themselves. Though, that's likely too far abstract a notion for him. m
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Yes, I am making the bold, totally unsupportable assertion that for profit companies will not hire workers at a loss. Do you know anything about operational costs? I have a whole department that's just bleeding money, yet they keep us around for some stupid reason. Maybe it's because the work we do is necessary for the company to function, the value we add is negative, we cost money. Other employees make up the difference in production to keep us working though, it's so confusing, this business thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:this is someone who has never met a CEO Hi I'm Carly Fiornia, nice to meet you!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You could argue that they make money from a janitorial staff by increasing the time that the rest of their employees spend on task instead of cleaning up after themselves. Though, that's likely too far abstract a notion for him. m that doesen't generate profits though, that reduces losses, optmially, though it ends up being a net loss as everyone could just take out their garbage at the end of the work day on their way out the door. Which also makes this: JeffersonClay posted:Yes, I am making the bold, totally unsupportable assertion that for profit companies will not hire workers at a loss. a swing and a miss
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:It's background knowledge which informs the model, and is separate from data. Data is what you gather in the field, and then you see if the relations between the data fit with your model (to some level of uncertainty). I'm not attempting to do a bayesian analysis nor did I ever claim to be. quote:The issue is that people disagree with your model. And you claiming that that model is actually data is simply obfuscating that point. I never claimed the model was actually data, i claimed the model was informed by data, that it represented data. You seem to think that there's a really important distinction between data and information which informs a model. Fine. I'm happy to concede that the graph contains no data about what the effects of any specific minimum wage level would be. I never claimed it did. That's why the axes are unlabeled. quote:Objections to that model that have been raised is that it doesn't take into account the rate of increase of minimum wage, it doesn't take into account the relation between that rate and inflation, all things that are vital since pretty much everyone here who is arguing for a raise in the minimum wage, is arguing for doing it gradually and adaptively. The data that will be needed is not another graph visualizing your model, it's data from people actually raising the minimum wage at a certain rate (as they are in LA and in Seattle) and seeing what happens. The model we need is one that will actually take into account rates and times. No, because that graph was never intended to actually calculate any actual effects of minimum wage changes, only to describe visually a relationship between overall welfare and the minimum wage that literally everyone except Elcondemn agrees must be true. euphronius posted:Ok I am glad we all agree. And now we're back to arguing with people who think the economy runs on unicorn farts. ToastyPotato posted:This doesn't answer the question of who is deciding the value of productivity and if the current minimum wage is above or below that value for many employers. What all of those non-disabled workers? Employers are deciding the value of productivity because they're the ones making hiring decisions. I agree that attempts by the government to appropriately subsidize the wages of low-productivity workers is and would be fraught with difficulty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:57 |
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:that doesen't generate profits though, that reduces losses, optmially, though it ends up being a net loss as everyone could just take out their garbage at the end of the work day on their way out the door.  The university I work for is doing this and I hate it. And I hate whoever came up with it. I don't want to take my trash out. But okay, I misread what you were after. JeffersonClay posted:. You seem to think that there's a really important distinction between data and information which informs a model. There really is. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jun 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 20:20
|
|