Stop Raising The Minimum Wage & Stop Whining

reply to post by Maxmars


I'm just going by what you said. You said that you were not going to judge anyone, but that is what the minimum wage does by definition. It artificially sets the "worth" of someone at the minimum wage rate. Like it or not, in this society the worth of someone is determined by what they make. By advocating for the minimum wage you are telling people they are not worth anymore than X amount, and setting up a government manipulation of the market which represses them. It is the most judgmental thing you could possibly support. You can claim your not talking about monetary terms, but advocating for the minimum wage is still advocating for treating someone "less" than someone else. You are also judgmental in assuming that anyone with money is somehow bad. It is the epitome of judgment to dislike or like people based on the amount of money they have.

Also, as I said, the high moral ground here is to judge no one and let the market decide. As you said, the market is not a person, its a mix of factors that judge based on what you have to offer and does not discriminate by putting an artificial worth on your hourly work.

As you have agreed, you do not have the moral high ground to claim that you have an empathy for those in poverty. If you did, you would not support a minimum wage which oppresses them. Those who do not support a minimum wage have the moral high ground here, and they are being empathic for those in poverty.

We are saying to them: you are worth more. You deserve more. You can earn more. You should not have your value determined by big government.

Supporters of the minimum wage are saying to them: You are worth $X.XX per hour. Nothing more, nothing less. When you are worth more, we will let you know. You are not capable of earning more. You need us to help you.

Its clear who has the empathy here. You cannot support a policy that is repressive against the poor and then claim you have empathy for them. Well, you can, but its inconsistent.

How can a minimum wage be ANYTHING but a government hand out? It is not a "natural protective measure" - it is an albatross to what would happen naturally in the market. It sets artificial and meaningless wage barriers and compels employers to obey, stopping them from setting their own wages and paying people what they are worth (which would in the market be above minimum wage).

Finally, I find it odd that you do not believe that the founding fathers did not take a negative stance towards rights. I challenge you to find 1 scholar who thinks otherwise. This is sort of like arguing that the sun does not rise in the east, its just so well known and so grounded in fact. Leaving open future rights has nothing to do with making the nature of rights negative. The two things are not mutually exclusive in any way. The constitution is a document binding on government, its very purpose is to put chains on the powers of government to stop it from growing out of control. Nothing in the constitution has ever been positive in nature or construed as such - nothing has the government acting to proactively "give" you anything. It simply stops the government from doing anything to you.


[edit on 25-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


The research you selectivelly pull based on differing definitions of the variables and complete ignorance of history and how it has benifited the poor...we agree to disagree.

reply to post by skyshow


Actually, the research is what I'm basing this on. All the research. There is no selectivity of it. But yes we can agree to disagree, you can repress the poor and I'll keep trying to help them.

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


"All the research" that can not be true, first off there is the fact that in history before the minimum wage (by your argument, if it were not minimum wage what was it then? Union drives possibly? probably a bit of both I would argue) the working class was by far worse off, I beg you to find a historian who would suggest otherwise (other than the view point that it lead to squashing out a rebellion that might have overturned the capitalist system in favor of one more applicable to increased living standards by the poor). Second, I have seen research as well--quite a bit actually in a professor's office, handouts, in the library--that doesn't agree with your statement. Furthermore, we have evidence that is so obvious that prices go up all around us and then several years (often longer) after we see dramatic increases in prices, the politicians finally get around to passing a bill that raises the minimum wage. Moreover all of these increases fail to keep up with the real value of the dollar. Also in one of your other posts you argue that MW causes someone to be relegated to a set rate of pay...but then nobody is arguing for (or suggesting that this even exists) pay caps at MW...people don't have to stay at Wal Mart forever; I'll say it's difficult for upward mobility at the lower levels, but it's not impossible, especially for the young who are working for MW...

Hmmm? yes, we agree to disagree, but our conversations have been fun and stimulating. Best of luck in your studies.



[edit on 25-7-2008 by skyshow]

reply to post by skyshow


Am I arguing with someone who just wants to get the last word so you can feel like you've won? If so, say so - you can have it if it makes you feel good. But you keep making closing statements and then responding again?

I should have said "nearly" all the research, greater than 99%. When there is that much consensus in academia that goes AGAINST the grain of what academics would prefer to push, there is something notable going on. Historians do not do economic analysis, so I could really care less what they think. I am interested in those who have looked at the minimum wage and done the quantitative analysis.

And your still confusing correlation with causation.

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


Are you projecting? I'll exit the floor and direct your attention to my last statement in my previous post above.

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


How about you try to help the poor while NOT reaching into everyone elses' wallet?

Want to be compassionate? Thats all fine and well, but keep your hands outta peoples pockets.

DO you own a business?

If so, I assume you hire only poor people and drop 6 figures on them annually right?

reply to post by slackerwire


What? Have you even read what I wrote? I'm arguing against the minimum wage. The poster I was engaging was using populist propaganda to make their points and I was circumventing it by demonstrating that NO minimum wage actually helps the poor.

Just as a point of contention here, I feel the need to ask a simple question:

How many of you who support raising the minimum wage also own and operate a profitable business?

So far, I haven't seen anyone mention it here.

If ya dont mind, one more question addressed to you same people:

Do you also tell surgeons how to perform surgery?

reply to post by slackerwire


ya gotta love ATS, everytime you present your argument complete with countering arguments, as I did based on documented history, and other facts, you get accused of using propaganda or being a paid operative. Try to stay on topic and back up your statements and rather than a decent rebutal always a default in the direction of a cop out. Unbelievable.

I said it before, and I will again, as a populist (I like the ring of that) Cheers! Here's to the American Working Class...and a once strong country we the working people helped to build...may we become strong again! MW is helping us get there, but once again a dollar short and a day late...give em' another raise this one falls short! Looked at your heating bill lately? How about that grocery bill? This pitifull MW raise doesn't even come close to plugging the hole!


[edit on 25-7-2008 by skyshow]

Lets just split the country already?

We can see who's economic theory works...

We would all be so much more happy ---

I think party hate is like the new racism... We will end up in civil war if the poor get inflated into starvation

On the other hand the sociopaths will always feel slighted and they are the typical legal gun owners...

Anyhow we can't keep on like this--- because if you sociopaths feel as angry at me as I feel towards you...
Endgame!

Originally posted by slackerwire
Just as a point of contention here, I feel the need to ask a simple question:

How many of you who support raising the minimum wage also own and operate a profitable business?

So far, I haven't seen anyone mention it here.

If ya dont mind, one more question addressed to you same people:

Do you also tell surgeons how to perform surgery?

Good point...

My point is,,, may not be now,,, but if the poor people ( who may or may not be lazy pieces of human waste as you may think it) get poor enough, feel hated enough...
Well, people can only take so much -
The French Revolution saw most business owners,,, chop , chop ,,,, the masses completely lost all prospective and reason.

Clearly this issue is very emotional -

As I told you,,, I am on edge --- I know its not your problem I know, shoot myself or shut up ---- however one day it may become your problem.

If some catalyzing event occurred tomorrow, I could not honestly say that I would not
"loss it"!

And in that situation maybe your "new" problem would not be my problem...

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
reply to post by Maxmars

 

I'm just going by what you said. You said that you were not going to judge anyone, but that is what the minimum wage does by definition.

The minimum wage definition is a monetary value, a standard metric to ensure that labor is compensated equitably. Whatever moral connection you draw is secondary to that fact.

It artificially sets the "worth" of someone at the minimum wage rate.

And its artificiality is the real issue isn't it? How do we 'judge' the worth of one job versus another, but by a value system that is a contrivance of our own making? It's not like we pay 'labor' positions as a function of the calories they burn, maybe we should. At least that would be objective, instead we rely on the judgment of those employers who stand most to gain from devaluing the cost for labor services. And when they, predictably, ran sweat shops and instituted abusive child labor practices, the entire working class cried out for help. It was business and the function of the market that drove that economic model.

We shouldn't HAVE TO HAVE minimum wage laws. But unfortunately, without them the market becomes a race towards slavery.

Like it or not, in this society the worth of someone is determined by what they make.

Perhaps in your social circles. You will find very few short order cooks looking down their noses at custodial workers. Such determinations are presently part of your reality. Mine is considerable distinct from yours in many respects, I dare say. There is a meme at work here. I wonder if its cultural?

By advocating for the minimum wage you are telling people they are not worth anymore than X amount,...

No, the choice to rely on earning power as a measure of social worth is entirely a construct of your reality. I may be the one who is isolated in this regard. And this is not to imply that your reality is meant as anything other than where you live, who you live among and with, and your social environment. I contend that mine is not the same, thus my perspective differs accordingly.

... and setting up a government manipulation of the market which represses them.

A government, ANY government, cannot 'repress' its citizen's without the direct consent of those people, there has never been a repressive regime contested from within that has survived to remain repressive - barring outside influences. You should know that.

Stating the establishment of a limit to the stinginess of the business model in compensation for labor constitutes 'government manipulation' is illogical. The government is a representative body of the will of the people. The people ARE the "Free market". The minimum wage is now a factor in the equation of the 'free market' and its determinant is the will of the people as represented by the government. Therefore NOT having a minimum wage would constitute manipulation of the 'Free Market." (Like it or not)

It is the most judgmental thing you could possibly support. You can claim your not talking about monetary terms, but advocating for the minimum wage is still advocating for treating someone "less" than someone else.

A: It is NOT the most judgmental thing I could support.
B: I never "claim" I'm talking about anything, you may graciously excuse yourself of the misunderstanding or not, but your intransigence to cede on trivialities is a distraction I won't tolerate.
C: Incorrect, Advocating for a minimum wage is a tacit declaration the commercial interests should not be trusted to be the determinant of the value of labor at it's lower limit..., (you wanna really get riled up? Consider a 'maximum wage' law - sends shivers up the spine, no?)

You are also judgmental in assuming that anyone with money is somehow bad.

Yes, and for that I apologize, and only remind our gentle readers that as I believe I stated earlier in the thread these are generalizations. I am an adult and am able to accept that I have a bias to suspect the obscenely wealthy, if for no other reason that they are obscenely wealthy. It is what it is.

It is the epitome of judgment to dislike or like people based on the amount of money they have.

From my perspective the epitome of judgment is along the lines of "minimum wage" is government manipulation (at least in this governmental form).

Also, as I said, the high moral ground here is to judge no one and let the market decide.

Yes you did say something like that. However the market is a mechanism, not an intelligence. It does not 'decide' anything. It is controlled by fluctuating variables, compensation is part of the equation. Many of the variables are controlled, some by business, some by the people - who are the prime component of the "Free Market". Minimum wage is one the people control.

As you said, the market is not a person, its a mix of factors that judge based on what you have to offer and does not discriminate by putting an artificial worth on your hourly work.

Close, but not entirely accurate, the market cannot execute a decision based on reason, it is an artifact of our creation - top to bottom. I never would have stated that it judges anything. Similarly, it cannot discriminate, by virtue of the same reasoning.

As you have agreed, you do not have the moral high ground to claim that you have an empathy for those in poverty.

A presumptuous leap of logic will follow, I'm certain. My agreement was specifically:

I understand and agree with your sentiment that the moral high ground belongs to those opposing the minimum wage.

I agree because you believe what you are saying. Obviously you demand the moral high ground and I will not deny from the perspective of your somewhat ill-defined position, you are on it. And as I indicated we differ that I can't have the moral high ground as well.

If you did, you would not support a minimum wage which oppresses them.

We differ, evidently, in our willingness to embrace the function of minimum wage in this market.

Those who do not support a minimum wage have the moral high ground here, and they are being empathic for those in poverty.

How's the view? Mine's fine.

We are saying to them: you are worth more. You deserve more. You can earn more.

And will they earn more? If we remove the minimum, will they suddenly earn more? Weak.

You should not have your value determined by big government.

Now we're on the same page, who knew? You are absolutely correct! Minimum wage should be determined and enforced at the state-level, making it value more realistically in tune with the regional variances between States and the notional 'living wage'.

Supporters of the minimum wage are saying to them: You are worth $X.XX per hour. Nothing more, nothing less. When you are worth more, we will let you know. You are not capable of earning more.

Have you recently adopted a different definition of 'minimum'? The sky's the limit, there is no upper limit control, remember?

You need us to help you.

Considering the government is the executor of the will of the people, there is nothing wrong with this scenario, people helping people; sounds good to me.

Its clear who has the empathy here. You cannot support a policy that is repressive against the poor and then claim you have empathy for them. Well, you can, but its inconsistent.

I do not support a policy that is repressive against the poor. I support a policy that protects them from exploitation.

Sorry It's late and I really can't proceed at this time. Perhaps during a free moment tomorrow I might test your patience by answering to the remainder of your post, unless you object.

Thanks for reading!

[edit on 25-7-2008 by Maxmars]

Originally posted by russ1969

Originally posted by BennyHill
A lot of people do not understand the primary issue with raising the minumum wage, especially at a time like this. Raising the minimum wage now to make it easier on those earning it actually makes it more expensive for everyone (even the person whose minimum wage was upped), because it floods the market with more paper money, which drives down the miniscule value of that which already exists. In effect, the logic behind raising minimum wage is to combat inflation through more inflation. It has been trumpeted a lot on this board, but if we do not address the fundamental problem with money (which is that we have a fiat currency with no sustainable value), then we will just continue to perpetuate the problem.

[edit on 24-7-2008 by BennyHill]

So please explain why you think raising minimum wage will flood the market with more paper money?

The only way to strengthen the economy is to have people spend money. It is basic economics. When people dont have money to spend, Then the economy gets weakened and that is when the feds print more money.

But we need to focus on the main ones right now. Fuel prices are dropping, The dollar gained this week against the euro. We have a ways to go but there is hope.

As to the first quote, last I checked, no one is getting paid in meatballs.

To quote 2, you're half right. Spending money is an important part of economics, but when the money is less and less valuable, it does nothing but perpetuate the problem. Do some research on Zimbabwe; it is the best current example of inflation gone mad. As for the feds printing money, they do it regardless of if people spend money. People are spending less right now, yet they leave their artificially low interest rates low, which does nothing more than make money easier to access and exacerbates the problem of inflation...go to the grocery store or gas station and take a look for yourself.

On quote 3, there is always hope, but don't let one week of barely noticeable improvements get you too excited. The fact is that the price of gas has increased nearly in unison with the decline of the dollar (demand has also played a part, of course). As for the dollar vs. euro, it doesn't matter when you are comparing 2 currencies that are backed by nothing. When you have any currency backed by nothing, the bottom can fall out any time when the perceived value of the currency takes a hard enough hit. The only remedy to fluctuating currency values is a commodity-backed currency (whether it be gold or silver). A commodity-backed currency is able to maintain its value with some degree of consistency and without the severe fluctuations of a fiat currency. All you have to do to prove this is do some research on the US dollar under the gold standard, and since we began to move off of it in 1913.

The problem with economics (and most other issues of the day) is that the people in power are trumpeting how they are going to fix it, and only provide band-aids to the symptoms; they never treat the cause. The cause of our economic ups and downs is a monetary policy that is so severely flawed, and even worse, left in the hands of a private bank with virtually no oversight. If we want to fix the problem, it behooves us to recognize the root cause and start by fixing that, then all the symptoms will begin to fix themselves.







[edit on 25-7-2008 by BennyHill]

I'v learned a tremendous amount in this thread...so thanks to everyone for sticking to your guns on both sides of the argument....I'm financially poor at the moment, disabled and older, have never been unemployed until the last two years - the temp jobs dried up - had to sell my car to keep a roof over my head and then applied to the state for assistance.....And I used to be much more in the populist camp most of my life....but despite my current situation I would have to say that Light's Libertarian position makes more sense to me these days....
Plus I have seen the Dems and Reps trade policies toward the working class like cards in a poker game for 50 years....and though I understand that folk are truly well meaning in their concern for those less fortunate and I fully appreciate that concern - that same concern(when legislated) sets limits on human potential and I have watched those limits become narrower and narrower as the years roll by ....I hope that makes sense...I won't pretend that I understand completely the underlying economics discussed here - but I do understand the qualitative value of Light's argument because it to my mind it represents freedom, and makes more sense to me spiritually.....thats how I see it anyway....

reply to post by realshanti


I respect your opinion and the graceful way you put it. We may disagree, but I feel we understand each other. Thank you kindly.

sorry to say this but i've posted many topics better than this but..in this day and age how can you not justify Not raising the minimim wage? Another thing with minimum wage being disclosed as an absolute fraugulent expedition which is unfair and absolue against the common man raises a bunch of moral isssues and indusscussions on your part..how do you explain?

reply to post by Maxmars


By supporting the minimum wage, you are supporting putting an arbitrary value on people. You can argue all day long about it, but that is what you are doing because that is the purpose of the law. To assign some arbitrary value in the name of "protecting" people from slave wages (even though the research shows this actually is not true and the law does no such thing). If you care about their actual worth, you could not support such a policy.

We shouldn't HAVE TO HAVE minimum wage laws. But unfortunately, without them the market becomes a race towards slavery.

Woah. Full stop. This is completely wrong. There is absolutely no basis for this in the actual research, which says without minimum wages in developed economies the net income for low skill workers increases. The minimum wage creates a slave labor class. You can bemoan and ignore the obvious, but your desire to arbitrarily place a value on the work of millions of people makes you the one doing the judging.

You can ignore that people are judged by how much they make, but its funny that you try to do so. Your the one doing the judging, then ignoring that you just did the judgment. I guess it helps you justify your belief system. I prefer being a bit more consistent.

This attempt to use the relativist fallacy on your part ("this is not part of my reality") does not distract from the fact that placing a minimum wage hurts the poor, sends the message that people are worth an arbitrary sum of money for their work, and that they should rely on big government to get raises. You can attempt to peddle around it, use relativism and deflect from it, but this is simply the message it sends. Whether you wish to acknowledge it as "part of your reality" is an acceptance problem on your part.

I note again that most people in the United States have no education on public policy, so you will undoubtedly find some minimum wage workers who would support a minimum wage increase. But that is not because it is best for them, it is because they have been programmed with populist propaganda and for so long those who support the minimum wage have told them they can do no better than suck on the government teat.

A government, ANY government, cannot 'repress' its citizen's without the direct consent of those people, there has never been a repressive regime contested from within that has survived to remain repressive - barring outside influences. You should know that.

Right. Except you are the outside influence, and you are whispering sweet nothings into the poor telling them that big government's going to make everything OK. People are repressed without even knowing it. They work the minimum wage, they are programmed to believe that this is all their worth. They do not know to do their research. They do not know that they are supporting something designed by people to repress them.

Stating the establishment of a limit to the stinginess of the business model in compensation for labor constitutes 'government manipulation' is illogical.

Seriously, what do you think GOVERNMENT SETTING ARBITRARY WAGES IS if not MANIPULATION? This is, again, akin to you denying something that is so obvious I do not know what to do but simply be in awe of the logic here. Minimum wage is not setting a "limit to the stinginess" - it is encouraging it and giving businesses the tools to be stingy. With minimum wage, we never have to worry about pesky things like competition for workers driving up wages.

C: Incorrect, Advocating for a minimum wage is a tacit declaration the commercial interests should not be trusted to be the determinant of the value of labor at it's lower limit...

Sometimes I am in amazement of what I am reading. Advocating for minimum wage is you embracing big business tactics to hurt the poor. You are declaring that only the government can set the floor values of workers, and you create an entire sub-class because there are no incentives to pay anything but that minimum wage because of the government's manipulation of the market.

From my perspective the epitome of judgment is along the lines of "minimum wage" is government manipulation (at least in this governmental form).

Then your perspective is enough to boggle the rational mind. You have made yourself judge and jury of the value of labor. You have stated that the government shall come down from the clouds and with its knowledge and its known ability to do things correctly (uh-huh) deem to us the common peoples what we should get paid.

I have said the government needs to get out and let businesses pay people what they are worth. Whose judging? Again, you. Which I really wouldn't care about if you didn't make such a big deal of trying to claim you weren't judging when you were doing the exact opposite.

Yes you did say something like that. However the market is a mechanism, not an intelligence. It does not 'decide' anything. It is controlled by fluctuating variables, compensation is part of the equation. Many of the variables are controlled, some by business, some by the people - who are the prime component of the "Free Market". Minimum wage is one the people control.

I cannot believe I am having to say this, but that is the point of using the market. It does not make decisions under duress of agendas or propaganda, it represents the point where a multitude of forces align to determine your pay. If you think minimum wage is a market force I am again amazed. I urge you to do your research. The minimum wage has never been a market force, its government manipulation, and no economist has ever claimed that such a thing is a market force.

And will they earn more? If we remove the minimum, will they suddenly earn more? Weak.

Again evidence that you have done no research on this. I'm quite astounded, actually. Yes, if you remove the minimum the average worker will indeed earn more. Weak.

Now we're on the same page, who knew? You are absolutely correct! Minimum wage should be determined and enforced at the state-level, making it value more realistically in tune with the regional variances between States and the notional 'living wage'.

Again you show an astounding lack of research. States have the option to set their own minimum wage, as long as its above the federal mandate. This is again adding more layers of big government, and allowing you to repress the poor.

Considering the government is the executor of the will of the people, there is nothing wrong with this scenario, people helping people; sounds good to me.

Wrong. People helping people would mean there would be no minimum wage - and your right, that sounds good to me.

I do not support a policy that is repressive against the poor. I support a policy that protects them from exploitation.

Wrong. By supporting the minimum wage, you support a policy that the research shows harms the poor the most - it also harms everyone else by the way. You want a repressive policy that socks it to the poor and benefits the rich.

This is the beauty of populist propaganda. Its simple in its eloquence. Populists like yourself are forced to support policies that in reality repress the poor because you have to keep them angry and vindictive. Supporting the minimum wage assuages the dumb masses because they don't do their research, but in reality it represses them. The populists end up looking good, and it keeps their targets angry at someone because its never going to improve their status. This is because the populist movement requires anger and constant revolution to operate. The moment the masses get an education and realize what the populists are up to, the populist propagandists lose.

Star and flagged.

Anyone complaining about minimum wage has no idea how it impacts unemployment rates. High minimum wage means kids and laborers with no skills do not have a job. That's why unemployment spiked last month - because the minimum wage went up and all the high school kids entering the marketplace for summer couldn't get a job because companies couldn't afford the large pay increase.

Any ADULT who makes minimum wage is making it because they WANT to make it. There is no excuse why any adult is making minimum wage.

Minimum wage is TOO HIGH. Drop it to $5/hr. ANY paying job is better than no job.

reply to post by slackerwire


I did, I did not have a full time employee, I did however have a part time secretary that was paid $11/hr .. you get what you pay for.. I could easily have found someone to work for $6, but the skill of someone who expects to pay more is worth the investment and alleviates the headache.

It should also be known that most minimum wage earners are in the service industry dominated by multi billion dollar enterprises like McDonalds or Taco Bell .. also small businesses in the cleaning and disposal services. The other big employer of minimum wage earners is agriculture who employ Mexicans. (not all illegals make minimum wage)

And as Light says, raising the Minimum wage does in fact excel inflation, however, cause and effect often takes several years to "catch up" in a normal economy.

[edit on 7/26/2008 by Rockpuck]