Skip to main content

View Diary: Raising the minimum wage: The right thing to do, and a winning issue, too. (135 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Re (0+ / 0-)

    That issue is really a canard. Customers will be found. It's like asking how Apple expects to sell any products to minimum wage. It just doesn't.

    This isn't an argument against raising the minimum wage, I'm not sure I know enough about the economics involved. But customers will be found. The economy always adapts.

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 06:34:25 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  is it (0+ / 0-)

      Ask economists why we are in a demand crunch right now.

      •  What demand crunch (0+ / 0-)

        Corporate America is doing fine.

        Lots of people who are unemployed or at low wages aren't fine, but corporate America doesn't really care. It isn't malicious, there just isn't need to employ these people or to do so at high wages.

        We need to find productive ways to produce exportable private sector goods and services. That is the way you get economically ahead. If you do, wages will rise on their own.

        That being said, like I said, don't take this as an opinion on increasing the minimum wage. I don't have enough information to have an opinion.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:00:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  that's all well and nice, Spar, but once again (0+ / 0-)

          you miss the point.  If we move all the factories and workplaces to places where we pay people two cups of rice per day, then how in fucking hell do you stop wages HERE from also dropping to two cups of rice per day to stay competitive (and perhaps you are unaware that inflation-adjusted wages in the US have dropped every year since the 70's)------do you plan on asking the nice humanitarian corporations to please voluntarily keep our pay high here so we can afford to keep buying their stuff?

          And once EVERYONE's wages fall to two cups of rice per day (because libertarians kooks like you have NO way of preventing any job that pays higher from moving there where wages are lower--as I said, the wages always equalize, and they always equalize downwards), then we are right back to the question i asked originally--->who is gonna be able to BUY all this stuff that the two-cups-of-rice-per-day factory is turning out? The people HERE making two cups of rice a day?

    •  Spar, your argument only works IF the wages are (0+ / 0-)

      kept high in some parts of the economy and not in others.  Sort of like we tried to do in the 90's, when we tried to MAKE products in low-wage havens like China, and then SELL them in high-wage countries, like the US.

      As we can already see, it just doesn't work.  The wages will always equalize---and they always equalize downwards.

      •  If everyone has low wages... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hmi

        ...prices will simply fall to compensate.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:03:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  oh, yeah, just exactly like what's happening now! (0+ / 0-)

          There are moments when the body is as numinous as words, days that are the good flesh continuing. -- Robert Hass

          by srkp23 on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:09:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Riiiigggghhhhhhttttttttttttt. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ChadmanFL, sethtriggs

          Will profits also fall, to compensate?  

          And if they do, how do you plan on preventing wages from then being cut again to increase profits---thus starting the whole process all over? Again and again and again. Until wages reach zero and can't be cut any more.

          •  You can't cut wages to zero (0+ / 0-)

            Most people in the US make more than minimum wage, many a lot more.

            If it were possible to arbitrarily lower wages, companies would already have done it. Employees who make less than their market salary will simply leave and go to a company that appreciates them more.

            I get the impression that you think the government is the only force in the world that can keep wages up. Employees with skills (that is to say, most people since most make over minimum) just leave if they can get a better deal elsewhere.

            I certainly have done it and I have good friends who have drastically increased their salary by moving companies. In your world, this is apparently not possible.

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:37:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The hell you can't cut wages to zero (0+ / 0-)

              It's unConstitutional (Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments) , but when has that ever stopped greedy bastards from trying it?

              Your solution is ultra-short-term, and many people here are already reporting that those high-paying jobs are drying up and/or going away. People with skills. People with advanced degrees. Real people - who can't find jobs that pay what their skills "should" be worth.

              Must be really nice living in that air-conditioned plush-lined ivory tower, but you need to get out and see the real world.

              If it's
              Not your body,
              Then it's
              Not your choice
              And it's
              None of your damn business!

              by TheOtherMaven on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:59:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again (0+ / 0-)

                Tell me why most workers make more than minimum wage.

                If your theory was true nearly everyone would be at minimum.

                And market values of jobs change. Your market value is what someone is willing to offer you right now. Not your opinion of how much you are worth, or what you made the last job.

                (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                by Sparhawk on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 08:09:02 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Could be we're coasting on momentum (0+ / 0-)

                  I am not an economist and don't pretend to be. But the frequency of anecdotes here on DKos from people with skills/degrees and no job, or a low-paying McJob, strongly suggests that "market value" theory doesn't match reality.

                  If it's
                  Not your body,
                  Then it's
                  Not your choice
                  And it's
                  None of your damn business!

                  by TheOtherMaven on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 08:25:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  my dear Spar, you ALREADY know the answer to that (0+ / 0-)

                  The reason why most American workers make more than minimum wage is the very same as the reason why most workers in the US still have any job at all that pays more than two cups of rice per day----because their boss hasn't yet figured out how to either automate their job and eliminate it completely or to move it to China or Thailand for said two cups of rice a day.

                  If you disagree, then please by all means go ahead and explain to us why you think a business owner would voluntarily pay his workers more than he has to and voluntarily cut his own profits. You libertarians say you are economic experts on the free market---well then tell us what happens to a company that voluntarily raises his cost of production above that of his competitors.

                  You're not REALLY this goddamn stupid, are you Spar?  You're just pretending to be this stupid so you can keep your ideological hymen intact by not letting anything in, right?

            •  well that goes back to what I asked our (0+ / 0-)

              libertarian friends earlier-----does "state's rights" mean that state governments have the constitutional right to reinstitute slavery within their territory if they want?

              The only possible (non-hypocritical) libertarian answer would, of course, have to be "yes".

              But none of them have the balls to say that out loud.

              Do you?

            •  but my dear Spar, you are utterly oblivious of the (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sethtriggs

              simple fact that the employer can pick up and leave too----and he can do it a lot easier than the employee can.  When the car companies all move their plants to China (and remember that any who don't have to compete with all those who do), where do you propose that highly-skilled worker of yours go to get a good-paying auto-worker job? Move to China to work for two cups of rice a day too?

              Indeed, the employers already ARE picking up and leaving, which is why all the good-paying jobs in the US have left for China and India and Cambodia and Thailand, where all those highly-skilled employees of yours get replaced by equally highly-skilled Chinese and Indians and Cambodians and Thais who work for two cups of rice a day. Perhaps you've not noticed.

              Indeed, the only reason YOU still have a good-paying job is because your employer hasn't figured out a way (yet) to move your job overseas where it can be done for two cups of rice a day. The instant he does, you will be in the unemployment line.

              The libertarian solution to that, of course, is to say "tough shit". To which I can only once again reply, "yes, it WILL be tough shit for the employer when nobody anywhere can afford to buy the car he's making because everyone is working for two cups of rice a day.

              Or did you plan on asking those good American companies to please keep the high-paying jobs here for god, mother, and country, out of the goodness of their benevolent patriotic hearts?

        •  do ANY of you libertarian fools actually (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ChadmanFL

          know how an economy works?

          This isn't the 1750's, my friend.  That Adam Smithian economy of little English shopkeepers that you worship, hasn't existed for over a century now.

          •  No Smithian economy (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sparhawk

            Surely not. There are too many semi-Marxian "economists" crying and wailing and intervening to ever let markets run their course.

            But then neither has your command-it-and-it-will-happen economy had much of a run, at least not since the last 5-year plan and the Great Leap Forward. It is an enduring mystery why, given the chronic failures of market controls in both open and totalitarian contexts, you hold on your naive faith that  governments will "get it right" this time, or maybe this time, or maybe this time ...

            •  ironic, isn't it, that it was the corporations (0+ / 0-)

              who introduced the Marxian economy.

              The Marxians wanted to eliminate private ownership of capital and replace it with collective ownership.  And indeed the corporations have done that--they are owned by no individual, but by a collective of stockholders.

              The Marxians wanted to separate ownership from management, and run the industries with elected representatives.  And in the corporation, the stockholder-owners elect a manager to run the company for them.

              The Marxians wanted to eliminate national borders establish an international economic structure.  And now the corporations have gone multi-national and global, and have made nation al governments and national borders irrelevant while governing themselves through their own international trade authorities who answer to no national government.

              Ironic, ain't it, that the very "free market" you worship has itself produced the economic structure that has done more to institute a socialist economy than the socialists themselves did.

              •  All you show (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sparhawk

                is that you are eternally unable to understand 1) the difference between a market and a government; 2) the contrast between collective action and collectivist orders.

                FWIW, I worship no economic doctrine. I look at what works well or poorly. Given the various available tradeoffs, the nature of men, the continuum between liberty and slavery, I lean toward freer markets with good regulation. That's not what's called crony capitalism.

                Will freer markets eventually crash? They will, because that is the nature of the business cycle and of economics. Is there some arrangement of governmental dispensations that can eliminate that through central planning, price and wage controls, collective ownership, etc.? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

                Last—it is absolutely the case that there have been a great number of command economies set up, virtually all of which have brought misery to the human species. Has there ever been a seriously attempt at a genuinely free market system? Not really—because people such as yourself just can't keep from sticking their oar in. Too bad.

            •  btw, that "command it and it will happen" (0+ / 0-)

              thingie that happens through long-range planning?  Yeah, the corporations are doing that, too.

      •  How are Chinese wages rising then? (0+ / 0-)

        It's easy to say 'wages always go down' when you live in the richest country in the world. The top 1% of earners globally make more than about $50k, which in the US is what, 35th percentile or something?

        The reality is that most of the rest of the world is increasing its living standard, even for massively poor people (or would if they cut their rate of population growth). So yeah, when you're on top, wages do equalize downwards. But it's an artifact of the fact that most Americans are abnormally rich compared to everyone else, and we have neither the moral nor actual power to keep it that way.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:47:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  unions (0+ / 0-)

          China has seen bitter strikes for the past several years.

          You, of course, should be over there waving your arms and telling them that they should just shut up and accept the free market and take their two cups of rice a day without complaining, because unions are communistic. I doubt they'll pay much attention to you, though.

          Meanwhile, the corporations are in response doing exactly what they did before----they are leaving China in droves and moving to the new low-wage havens in Thailand and Cambodia. As I said, the wages always equalize--and they always equalize down.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site