|
photomikey posted:That's not controversial in the least. What is controversial is a) what is "enough to survive", clearly they're all surviving now, and b) whether "should be" is a product of the free market or of government regulation. As for (a), that's not necessarily true; poor people often get into large amounts of debt in times of difficulty, and live in conditions which are detrimental to both physical and mental health (thus affecting their ability to get jobs or change their situation). By 'enough to survive' I simply mean enough to rent a small and adequate property, eat, pay basic bills, have healthcare provided, and not be in debt in order to do these things. (b) I would consider a problem with the entire ideological framing of the debate; the space of the market is defined by government regulation, and 'government vs the market' is in my view both an oversimplification and one which promotes neoliberal views on government intervention.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
photomikey posted:That's not controversial in the least. What is controversial is a) what is "enough to survive", clearly they're all surviving now, and b) whether "should be" is a product of the free market or of government regulation. b)Free market has it's limitations, and that's where government intervention comes in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:In a healthy economy, other businesses will move into the vacuum left by the businesses which couldn't afford or were unwilling to pay minimum wage. If "other businesses" are able, what stops the current ones from adapting to a higher minimum wage? And what stops other businesses from competing with them right now?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:If "other businesses" are able, what stops the current ones from adapting to a higher minimum wage? And what stops other businesses from competing with them right now? I dunno man, go do case studies? That question is so situationally dependent that it would require analysis of the local economy to give anything resembling a decent answer. Which is why I was arguing for locally determined minimum wages, not a single fixed rate. Anything like that needs to go hand in hand with development of disadvantaged regions. e: But this would require the US taking a decentralised social-democratic approach to economic policy, and let's face it, that's not going to happen any time soon. Purple Prince fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:If "other businesses" are able, what stops the current ones from adapting to a higher minimum wage? And what stops other businesses from competing with them right now? lovely business models
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Ausmund posted:a)People being able to pay bills without having to work 60-80 hour weeks. If you had no plan for your life and dropped out of high school and have no skills and make no ongoing effort to get any skills, and you have to work 60-80 hours a week to survive... that was bad planning, not the world stacked against you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
photomikey posted:If you had no plan for your life and dropped out of high school and have no skills and make no ongoing effort to get any skills, and you have to work 60-80 hours a week to survive... that was bad planning, not the world stacked against you. That is not, in fact, anywhere near what we see, and your "everyone can do well if they just try!" is, in fact, fantastically loving racist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Again, there are people that are born in lovely small towns to poor families with large debts and moving to the city or going to college is pretty loving expensive. They work what they can and make what is available with limited options. I'm not denying there are deadbeats that just play Call of Duty and smoke weed into their late 20s (not that there is anything inherently wrong with either but there is if those are your priorities) with no skills or educational ambitions but please never confuse those two with one another.Ausmund posted:a)People being able to pay bills without having to work 60-80 hour weeks. Ideally, people should be able to work the 40-hour work week and make enough to pay bills and live a decent life without having to troll the boss for OT or work multiple jobs. The free market, by nature, doesn't allow for businesses one way or the other to pay that living wage because the owners of those businesses are not in the market for welfare of the citizens. I agree that government intervention should come into play and compromise with the business world (I really hate the argument of "lol lets pay a million an hour then lol" because that's not what the Fight for 15 is about) by gradually raising minimum wage and see where it goes. I live in a province where our NDP government is working to raise minimum wage to $15/hr by the year 2018. Already it's going up to $11.20 in October, gradually, giving businesses time to adjust and ruin the argument of "well, just get a better job lol instead of ruining the economy lol". Justin Godscock fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
photomikey posted:If you had no plan for your life and dropped out of high school and have no skills and make no ongoing effort to get any skills, and you have to work 60-80 hours a week to survive... that was bad planning, not the world stacked against you. And how does severely punishing people for not having education and training allow them to acquire education and training? It's a stupid loving retarded system and there is no reason for it to be that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Ausmund posted:What if it was the other way around? Somebody is forced to drop out of highschool, and were unable to form any sort of life plan. But once they figure out what they want to do they can't do it because they work excessive hours, have no extra time, no money, and are constantly exhausted. This is not how living in a first world country works. Why would anyone expect someone to live long term like that and flourish with in it? They're in an un-winnable situation. Why do you give a poo poo? If you have time to post, you have time to study/work to make yourself better. If someone close to you is in this situation and you have time to post you have time to work more to help them. There's no reason for you to rob me to help people who would leave me starving if our situations were reversed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Why do you give a poo poo? If you have time to post, you have time to study/work to make yourself better. If someone close to you is in this situation and you have time to post you have time to work more to help them. Poster TwoQuestions: an optimistic, altruistic, and empathetic individual. e: Also, are you Ron Swanson? Purple Prince fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Aug 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:Poster TwoQuestions: an optimistic, altruistic, and empathetic individual. No, gently caress no, and aw hell no. Why should any of those things influence government policy? The rest of the world couldn't give a single poo poo if any one of us died horribly, why should we pretend to care about others? I mean if you're that much of a sucker that's you're perogative, you can do what you want. However, that doesn't entitle you or anyone else to the efforts of those who would as soon have everyone just... go away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Why do you give a poo poo? If you have time to post, you have time to study/work to make yourself better. If someone close to you is in this situation and you have time to post you have time to work more to help them. Because I have empathy for other people and wouldn't wish that kind of crap on my worst enemy? That I understand the world is not a perfect place and government should be there to at the very least make an effort to move it in a better direction? Also, what makes you think the people that work 80 hours a week are inherently bad people? To me, that reeks of hatred and elitism. You are not better than them by nature. Oh, and I have two university degrees and work a full-time job that pays extremely well (no need for OT or a second job either) and post here because it's my day off and I got all my poo poo done this morning. TwoQuestions posted:No, gently caress no, and aw hell no. Why should any of those things influence government policy? The rest of the world couldn't give a single poo poo if any one of us died horribly, why should we pretend to care about others? I mean if you're that much of a sucker that's you're perogative, you can do what you want. However, that doesn't entitle you or anyone else to the efforts of those who would as soon have everyone just... go away. You have a really bleak view of the world or just don't care about being a better person and I'm ready to call you self-centered and selfish as a result of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Why do you give a poo poo? If you have time to post, you have time to study/work to make yourself better. If someone close to you is in this situation and you have time to post you have time to work more to help them. Other than that you're getting "robbed" anyway because full time workers have to go on a variety of public assistance programs just to survive. But I suspect you oppose that too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Imaduck posted:Yes, if your worldview is "gently caress you, got mine," then there's no good reason to raise the minimum wage. Absolutely. What right do I have to force you to help me if something bad happens to me? If you see me bleeding out on the street, you have every right to laugh and keep driving away, and that's beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Absolutely. What right do I have to force you to help me if something bad happens to me? If you see me bleeding out on the street, you have every right to laugh and keep driving away, and that's beautiful. Tempted to revise my initial call of Ron Swanson to Patrick Bateman.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Who let Ayn Rand buy an account?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:
There is though. They'll kick your loving doors in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
Ausmund posted:What if it was the other way around? Somebody is forced to drop out of highschool, and were unable to form any sort of life plan. But once they figure out what they want to do they can't do it because they work excessive hours, have no extra time, no money, and are constantly exhausted. This is not how living in a first world country works. Why would anyone expect someone to live long term like that and flourish with in it? They're in an un-winnable situation. Sure there is. Calvinism, HO!
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
If people got too hungry, would you really be ok with them coming for what you have?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
The_Book_Of_Harry posted:There is though. Nah, man. History totally doesn't support the idea that the lower classes will rise up and murder the poo poo out of the rich and privileged if they are oppressed enough and have little enough left to lose. I mean, Louis the XVI clearly had everything turn out in his favor!
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Why do you give a poo poo? If you have time to post, you have time to study/work to make yourself better. If someone close to you is in this situation and you have time to post you have time to work more to help them. Hey did you write this article?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
Personally, I think it's nice that the government makes it so I don't have to step over people starving to death in my doorway, or on the sidewalk on my way to work. I consider that a quality of life improvement well worth my tax dollars. I swear to god, "just do better in school" is the "let them eat cake" of the 21st century.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Absolutely. What right do I have to force you to help me if something bad happens to me? If you see me bleeding out on the street, you have every right to laugh and keep driving away, and that's beautiful. Jesus loving Christ what the hell is wrong with you? Do you have any concept of basic human decency?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 06:46
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Why do you give a poo poo? If you have time to post, you have time to study/work to make yourself better. If someone close to you is in this situation and you have time to post you have time to work more to help them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
A lover of fine wines, videogames, and crushing the skulls of the poor beneath his heels. Hit me up on LibertarianDates.org
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 10:10
|
|
|
Kanine posted:Jesus loving Christ what the hell is wrong with you? Do you have any concept of basic human decency? He's trolling by exaggerating the positions of wunderkinds like goodness and photomikey to their naked extreme.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 12:13
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I swear to god, "just do better in school" is the "let them eat cake" of the 21st century. That, and "learn a trade". Almost always HVAC, plumbing, or electrician. If you counter with either, "yes, but you have to have money to attend schools to learn that" or "not all people have the mechanical aptitude", you get, "see, you're just too lazy". Same with "there's plenty of jobs out there, go get one" conveniently forgetting that one has to be the right person for the job. You can't just go to an employer and say, "You have an opening, I need a job. Give me the job." Binary thinking. Gotta love it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 12:30
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:
Beep boop just get a tech degree.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
MettleRamiel posted:Even the dumbest and laziest people I know managed to show up to work enough to get promoted or the gain the experience to get a better job. This may be just in my field, but my general experience with "Pay increases" is that 95% of the time you'll never see a major pay increase in your current company with the major exception of nepotism trumps all. All of my major increases have come from job hopping. There are entire swaths of America where even job hopping will only net you minor increases over years of work. It's easy to get trapped in a low paying job without enough money to move to a place where higher paying jobs are available.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I swear to god, "just do better in school" is the "let them eat cake" of the 21st century. Nope. This is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
I guess what I would like to know is how much of the disconnect is willful and deliberate, and how much is just ignorance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Absolutely. What right do I have to force you to help me if something bad happens to me? If you see me bleeding out on the street, you have every right to laugh and keep driving away, and that's beautiful. You see, this is what I hate about libertarians. You all make sense at first and I agree with some of your finer points. It's good to work hard, individual liberty is a valuable thing, questioning government is fine and proper examination of welfare is a responsible thing to do. But then you all go loving nuts for no damned reason and say some really sociopathic poo poo like "I'm an individual so I have the right to not do anything if someone is being murdered in front of me and that's good". That's loving insane thinking that ruins discourse which is the loving reason why you guys will never get any power in government because you just cannot compromise or understand and spin off in your own wild and hosed-up direction. Necc0 posted:Nope. This is. What's really funny is Apple is notoriously "gently caress the market" when it comes to pricing and has some of the most rigid pricing rules you'll see (I worked retail, there is no loving leeway on what they cost the consumer). Comparing it to commodity prices as a result of market movements is not only "let them eat cake" it's wildly apples-to-oranges. Justin Godscock fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Imaduck posted:Yes, if your worldview is "gently caress you, got mine," then there's no good reason to raise the minimum wage. There is a good reason not to raise the minimum wage to $15 though, doing so would create higher unemployment. If you compare restaurants like McDonalds that pay the minimum wage to ones that pay higher wages such as In-N-Out, you can see that the latter has less employees. In-N-Out is able to pay their employees more because they only hire the best and most productive workers, unlike McDonalds who takes pretty much anyone. An increase of the minimum wage to $15 pretty much prices poor workers out of the labor market. I'd rather the government supplement the incomes of the poorest segment of the population instead. Raise the minimum wage to $9, then give the working poor a cash subsidy equal to say 25% of their income using a diminishing sliding scale. The EITC is an extremely successful program that promotes work and reduces poverty, we should be expanding it instead of condemning more people to unemployment. Gamesguy fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
Prove it. We've had this discussion to death across several threads. The only way an increase in minimum wage will cause any major amount of unemployment is if employers are already employing more people than absolutely necessary at that wage, which means that they are willingly forgoing profit and increasing their costs now. Minimum wage labor is in no way a major portion of the cost of anything, and given the choice of paying slightly more for the necessary labor or going out of business, the vast majority of businesses are going to find somewhere else to make up the couple percentage points of profitability that slightly increased labor costs will consume. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 10:53
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Minimum wage labor is in no way a major portion of the cost of anything Where you getting that from? Cause thats really loving wrong. Take yourself a trip over to http://www.census.gov/econ/bes/ and take a look at 'detailed operating expenses' for retail (most minimum wage jobs) spreadsheet and see. They even made it easy for you and put payroll/payroll % right behind total operating expenses. Anywhere from 32.5 to 50.2 percent of businesses costs come from labor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 12:27
|
|
|
Blackchamber posted:Where you getting that from? Cause thats really loving wrong. Take yourself a trip over to http://www.census.gov/econ/bes/ and take a look at 'detailed operating expenses' for retail (most minimum wage jobs) spreadsheet and see. They even made it easy for you and put payroll/payroll % right behind total operating expenses. Anywhere from 32.5 to 50.2 percent of businesses costs come from labor. Costs from labor/payroll and costs going to minimum-wage employees are two different things. Most studies have come back looking like this, and you have to keep in mind that someplace like McDonald's is almost certainly going to have a lot more sales (so a lot more revenue) once the minimum wage gets bumped, and people working for minimum wage have a lot more income.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Blackchamber posted:Where you getting that from? Cause thats really loving wrong. Take yourself a trip over to http://www.census.gov/econ/bes/ and take a look at 'detailed operating expenses' for retail (most minimum wage jobs) spreadsheet and see. They even made it easy for you and put payroll/payroll % right behind total operating expenses. Anywhere from 32.5 to 50.2 percent of businesses costs come from labor. Notice what's not on that spreadsheet? That's right, goods purchased for resale! You know, the single biggest expense, and biggest determinant of shelf prices, in almost any retail enterprise. That's not dishonest in and of itself. If you're trying to drill down into the economy, it's very helpful to be able to look at just what it costs to keep a store running, with the figurative or literal price of tea in China abstracted away. But, if you're trying to use those numbers to paint a full and accurate picture of what it costs to run a retail business, you're either woefully misinformed or just reaching for the first google result that supports your ideology.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Notice what's not on that spreadsheet? OK buddy you post your link with that info then. Cause I actually searched a while to find a somewhat reputable source (.org gov vs. Yahoo answers etc.). Go ahead and actually show me the numbers that support your statements. Liquid Communism posted:Minimum wage labor is in no way a major portion of the cost of anything, and qouting you again because you said ANYTHING, so tell me how 30 to 50 percent of your total operations costs is nothing while your at it. Blackchamber fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
Blackchamber posted:OK buddy you post your link with that info then. Cause I actually searched a while to find a somewhat reputable source (.org gov vs. Yahoo answers etc.). Go ahead and actually show me the numbers that support your statements. *cough cough* Thanatosian posted:Costs from labor/payroll and costs going to minimum-wage employees are two different things. Most studies have come back looking like this, and you have to keep in mind that someplace like McDonald's is almost certainly going to have a lot more sales (so a lot more revenue) once the minimum wage gets bumped, and people working for minimum wage have a lot more income.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:44
|
|