It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OnceReturned
There are a handful of reasons that this is not a good idea. Here are 3 of them in order from the most economic to most ethical in nature:
1.) It's economically untenable to base someone compensation on someone else's compensation, instead of on the market value of that person's goods/services. If boss Bob could hire someone to empty the garbage at his company for $5/hr, but is legally mandated to hire the same person to perform the same service for $8/hr, Bob is incurring an economic loss. Now Bob has to pay more to get the same thing, and there is no reason for it other than the law. Do you think Bob will pass his expenses onto you in the form of higher prices? Of course he will. Now you will pay more to get the same product, and no one is any better off except the guy who is taking out Bob's trash, and that guy would have done it for $5/hr because he needed a job.
Do you think Bob is going to be motivated to hire a new employee at a wage that is legally(artificially) inflated? Or do you think Bob is more likely to demand more work out of his bottom guys, and if they won't put out then he will find someone who will?
Certainly, increasing minimum wages is bad for employement. Companies have limited resources are not going to buy as much of the things that cost more. If employees cost more, they will not hire as many of them.
2) We live in a global economy. When it comes to less skilled jobs, America does not have any advantages. The higher our minimum wage, the more likely Bob's company is to outsource. If he can get people to make widgets for 10 cents an hour in another country, he has no reason to play along with America minimum wage laws. If there is a job that a lot of people can do or can easily be trained to do, that job will go to the people who will do it for the least amount money. If the least amount of money in America is set by law, then any company that wants to make money will go someone that they can pay people less to do the same thing.
The higher our minimum wage, the less jobs will be in America.
3) Do you think that what Bill Gates has done is only woth 40 times more than what the janitor at Microsoft did in the same time period? Sometimes, people produce things which are worth a lot more than what other people produce. Isn't it right to compensate them accordingly? After all, they're the ones who did it, and people willingly paid for it. Who is anyone else to step in and say it was undeserved?
How do you come up with 40 as the number? I ask because arbitrary limits don't work very well economically. If there's no reason to set something at 40, then it probably shouldn't be set at 40. What's not arbitrary is market value. For example, Bill made his money from the value of Microsoft stock. That value is set by a free market. It's worth exactly as much as someone is willing to pay for it, of their own free will. Bill owns the stock, and the market(the people) are willing to pay billions for it. According to the OP, should we tell Bill and the market that his stock can't be worth that much because we say so? Or should we tell Bill that he has to give the janitor a billion, just to make it fair?
Ultimately, I do think that minimum wage in the US is a good thing. However, it is a matter of fact that it is bad for jobs here. We have to balance the benefits and the costs, and if we get carried away on a crusade to pay the lowest earners more money in order to do the exact same job, we're going to find ourselves in trouble.
Your logic, unfortunately is flawed.
1.) Bob could certainly hire some homeless bum to do the job. And tomorrow the homey will be gone. He will repost his ad to find another, cause that wage is not sustainable. In the long run, he faces a far more higher economical loss in tangible and intangible terms such as 'reputation' in the market place which is much more highly regarded than costs alone.
In the end, it will cost higher as Bob pays his employees better, and such costs as usual will be passed to consumers. But do not forget, such salary means more circulation of money in the economy and EVERYONE ultimately benefits.
Increasing min. wage will be a good thing for societies, so long as it is a standard across nations. If we can provide medicines to Africa to prolong the infant mortality rate, as well as curb nicotine addiction, I fail to see why we cannot maintain a standard wage mechanism equally across nations, unless it is nothing more than a lack of will or the will to continue subjugation of humanity by the super rich.
3. The reason why 40 times compensation for a biz owner is good enough is that he could not have done it without his WORKERS. Alone he is nothing, but with his workers who believed and helped him through the years, he succeeded, and it is his workers he should share his wealth with.
I know I cannot change your mind, and you are not my target. The readers are, and may they form a better informed opinion to push for better status for the honest working man. Otherwise, dishonesty and guile will be the continued way to sustain one and one's family, and society ultimately suffers. Please wake up.
Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Flatfish
NAFTA GATT. Hmmm, when did those get passed?
Let me think, who is pushing something called the Clinton Globalization Initiative. Hmmm, I think the name kinda throws it out there doesn't it?
Funny how the Dems are SUPPOSEDLY all about the workers, yet they have pretty much helped in the destruction of the US economy.
Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by OnceReturned
I'll just bet that those 3/4 of businesses in the U.S. that don't have employees are heavily invested in businesses that do. Also, I fail to see how the self employed would even be affected, unless of course there were other employees at their place of "self employment." More people work in this country than those that don't, and most of them are underpaid.
No one, other than yourself, is talking about destroying our economy. I believe that during the Eisenhower administration, the top tax rate was over 90% and that didn't destroy our economy, remember... we grew into the world's largest.
Eisenhower's fiscal conservatism carried a heavy price. There were three recessions during his administration--July 1953 through May 1954, August 1957 through April 1958, and April 1960 through February 1961--and real growth of the gross domestic product averaged just 2.5 percent over those eight years. In large part, that sluggish growth was due to high tax rates, not just on the wealthy but on the middle class as well.
Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance our budget, just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits. Surely the lesson of the last decade is that budget deficits are not caused by wild-eyed spenders, but by slow economic growth and periodic recessions, and any new recession would break all deficit records.
In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low, and the soundest way to raise the revenue in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a number of European countries and Japan has borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reduction in 1954 has borne this out. And the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring about budget surplus.
I repeat: our practical choice is not between a tax-cut deficit and budgetary surplus. It is between two kinds of deficits: a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted result of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy; or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, increase tax revenues, and achieve--and I believe this can be done--a budget surplus. The first type of deficit is a sign of waste and weakness; the second reflects an investment in the future.
Amazon Review :
Was IBM, "The Solutions Company," partly responsible for the Final Solution? That's the question raised by Edwin Black's IBM and the Holocaust, the most controversial book on the subject since Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing Executioners. Black, a son of Holocaust survivors, is less tendentiously simplistic than Goldhagen, but his thesis is no less provocative: he argues that IBM founder Thomas Watson deserved the Merit Cross (Germany's second-highest honor) awarded him by Hitler, his second-biggest customer on earth. "IBM, primarily through its German subsidiary, made Hitler's program of Jewish destruction a technologic mission the company pursued with chilling success," writes Black. "IBM had almost single-handedly brought modern warfare into the information age [and] virtually put the 'blitz' in the krieg."
The crucial technology was a precursor to the computer, the IBM Hollerith punch card machine, which Black glimpsed on exhibit at the U.S. Holocaust Museum, inspiring his five-year, top-secret book project. The Hollerith was used to tabulate and alphabetize census data. Black says the Hollerith and its punch card data ("hole 3 signified homosexual ... hole 8 designated a Jew") was indispensable in rounding up prisoners, keeping the trains fully packed and on time, tallying the deaths, and organizing the entire war effort. Hitler's regime was fantastically, suicidally chaotic; could IBM have been the cause of its sole competence: mass-murdering civilians? Better scholars than I must sift through and appraise Black's mountainous evidence, but clearly the assessment is overdue.
The moral argument turns on one question: How much did IBM New York know about IBM Germany's work, and when? Black documents a scary game of brinksmanship orchestrated by IBM chief Watson, who walked a fine line between enraging U.S. officials and infuriating Hitler. He shamefully delayed returning the Nazi medal until forced to--and when he did return it, the Nazis almost kicked IBM and its crucial machines out of Germany. (Hitler was prone to self-defeating decisions, as demonstrated in How Hitler Could Have Won World War II.)
Black has created a must-read work of history. But it's also a fascinating business book examining the colliding influences of personality, morality, and cold strategic calculation. --Tim Appelo
Quote from : Wikipedia : North American Freed Trade Agreement
The North American Free Trade Agreement or NAFTA is an agreement signed by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, creating a trilateral trade bloc in North America. The agreement came into force on January 1, 1994.
It superseded the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement between the U.S. and Canada.
In terms of combined purchasing power parity GDP of its members, as of 2007 the trade bloc is the largest in the world and second largest by nominal GDP comparison.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has two supplements, the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC).
Quote from : Wikipedia : Social Security Administration : History
The Social Security Act created a Social Security Board (SSB), to oversee the administration of the new program.
It was created as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal with the signing of Social Security Act of 1935, August 14, 1935.
The Board consisted of three presidentially appointed executives, and started with no budget, no staff, and no furniture.
It obtained a temporary budget from the Federal Emergency Relief Administration headed by Harry Hopkins.
The first Social Security office opened in Austin, Texas, on October 14, 1936.
Social Security taxes were collected first in January 1937, along with the first one-time, lump-sum payments.
The first person to receive a Social Security benefit was Ernest Ackerman, who was paid 17 cents in January 1937.
This was a one-time, lump-sum pay-out, which was the only form of benefits paid during the start-up period January 1937 through December 1939.
The first person to receive monthly retirement benefits was Ida May Fuller of Brattleboro, Vermont. Her first check, dated January 31, 1940 was in the amount of US$22.54.
In 1939, the Social Security Board merged into a cabinet-level Federal Security Agency, which included the SSB, the U.S. Public Health Service, the Civilian Conservation Corps, and other agencies.
In January 1940, the first regular ongoing monthly benefits were begun.
In 1946, the SSB was renamed the Social Security Administration under President Harry S. Truman's Reorganization Plan.
In 1972, Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) were introduced into SSA programs to deal with the effects of inflation on fixed incomes.
In 1953, the Federal Security Agency was abolished and the SSA was placed under the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
HEW became the Department of Health and Human Services in 1980.
In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed into law 42 U.S.C. § 901 returning the SSA to the status of an independent agency in the executive branch of government.
Quote from : Wikipedia : Thomas J. Watson : Head of I.B.M.
In 1924, he renamed the company International Business Machines.
Watson built IBM into such a dominant company that the federal government filed a civil antitrust suit against them in 1952.
IBM owned and leased to its customers more than 90 percent of all tabulating machines in the United States at the time.
When Watson died in 1956, IBM's revenues were $897 million, and the company had 72,500 employees.
Throughout his life, Watson maintained a deep interest in international relations, both from a diplomatic and a business perspective.
He was known as President Roosevelt's un-official Ambassador in NY and often entertained foreign statesmen.
In 1937, he was elected president of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and at that year's biennial congress in Berlin stated the conference keynote to be World Peace Through World Trade.
That phrase became the slogan of both the ICC and IBM.
Watson's merger of diplomacy and business was not always lauded.
During the 1930s, IBM's German subsidiary was IBM's most profitable foreign operation, and a recent book argues that Watson's pursuit of profit led him to personally approve and spearhead IBM's strategic technological relationship with the Third Reich.
In particular, critics point to the coveted Eagle with Star medal that Watson received at the Berlin ICCC meeting in 1937, as evidence that he was being honored for the help that IBM's German subsidiary Dehomag (Deutsche Hollerith-Maschinen Gesellschaft mbH) and its punch card machines provided the Nazi regime, particularly in the tabulation of census data.
Quote from : Wikipedia : United States Census : Historical F.B.I. Use of Data
Under the Roosevelt administration the FBI, using primarily census records, compiled (1939–1941) the Custodial Detention Index ("CDI") on citizens, enemy aliens, and foreign nationals, who might be dangerous.
The Second War Powers Act of 1941 repealed the legal protection of confidential census data, which was not restored until 1947.
This information facilitated the internment of Japanese-Americans, following the Japanese attack on the U.S. at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 and the internment of Italian- and German-Americans following the United States's entry into World War II.
In 1980, 4 FBI agents went to the Census Bureau's Colorado Springs office with warrants to seize Census documents, but were forced to leave with nothing.
Courts upheld that no agency, including the FBI, has access to Census data.
Quote from : Destron Fearing Website
Destron Fearing is a global leader in innovative animal identification.
With presence in over 40 countries worldwide we seek to provide real world ID solutions to match the ever increasing complexity and opportunities related to animal identification.
Since 1945 we have provided innovative products addressing the needs of livestock producers, companion animal owners, horse owners, wildlife managers and government agencies.
Destron Fearing provides a full complement of radio frequency identification products and software solutions to automate the collection of critical livestock production and carcass information.
Individual and herd information can then be easily transferred between all parties involved in the production and retail of meat products.
Information sharing allows the food industry to meet the discriminating demands of the market place.
Quote from : Wikipedia : North American Union
The North American Union (NAU) is a theoretical economic union, in some instances also a political union, of Canada, Mexico, and the United States.
The concept is loosely based on the European Union, occasionally including a common currency called the Amero or the North American Dollar.
While the idea for some form of union has been discussed or proposed in academic, business and political circles for many decades, government officials from all three nations say there are no plans to create such a union and no agreement to do so has been signed.
The formation of a North American Union has been the subject of various conspiracy theories.
Quote from : Wikipedia : Trans-Texas Corridor
The Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) is a transportation network in the planning and early construction stages in the U.S. State of Texas. The network, as originally envisioned, would be composed of a 4,000-mile (6,400 km) network of supercorridors up to 1,200 feet (370 m) wide to carry parallel links of tollways, rails, and utility lines.
It is intended to route long-distance traffic around population centers, and to provide stable corridors for future infrastructure improvements–such as new power lines from wind farms in West Texas to the cities in the east–without the otherwise often lengthy administrative and legal procedures required to build on privately owned land.
The tollway portion would be divided into two separate elements: truck lanes and lanes for passenger vehicles. Similarly, the rail lines in the corridor would be divided among freight, commuter, and high-speed rail.
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) intends to "charge public and private concerns for utility, commodity or data transmission" within the corridor, in essence making a toll road for services such as water, electricity, natural gas, petroleum, fiber optic lines, and other telecommunications services.
The network would have been funded by private investors and built and expanded as demand warrants.
In 2009, TxDOT decided to phase out the all-in-one corridor concept in favor of developing separate rights-of-way for road, rail, and other infrastructure using more traditional corridor widths for those modes.
In 2010, official decision of "no action" was issued by the Federal Highway Administration, formally ending the project.
The action eliminated the study area and canceled the agreement between TxDOT and Cintra Zachry.
Originally posted by ripcontrol
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
So to cut through it quickly ( local time constraint not for any other reason)
You are stating that each of these incidents are related?
I can see it, but I have a quite different understanding. Each is a group or individuals attempting to seize control through various means. Me personally I see no connection other then possibility of similar tactics.
Originally posted by ripcontrol
I want to thank them for the ideas..
It ties in the discussion due to the nature of the base idea of restructuring our base wage.
My view is twisted between a dream and the reality.
Originally posted by ripcontrol
A) Forget all the laws (finance) and remove every single one. allow free market rules to rein completely with no government over sight... This also means no copyright protect protection or non-compete enforcements. Ad nausea... no taxes...
B) the real world solution
The cost to produce each item forced to be listed...
Originally posted by ripcontrol
The tariff on the shipment is then taxed to match the items cost in american terms... American labor, shipping ect... It would then cost the same as it would to make in america but you have to make sure they cant deduct the shipping through ports from the cost...
Youll have a lot of whiners but it would protect the american worker and bolster the tax base...
Nike would be crying as well as dell, ect.... (walmart too)
Originally posted by ripcontrol
That is about the best answer I can think of... Raising the minimum wage will not improve the lot of the worker nor will giving power to the unions do a single thing at all.
All it does is raise cost to the consumer, you.
Amazon Review :
This important book goes into the role of Morgan banking executives in funneling illegal Bolshevik gold into the U.S. and how the American Red Cross was co-opted by powerful forces on Wall Street.
It also tells of Wall Streeters who intervened to free Leon Trotsky, even though Trotsky's stated aim was to engineer 'the real revolution'?
The Soviet coup which toppled Kerensky, and much more.
SKL's Amazon Review :
This book is quite literally a tell all of all the names of who financed Adolph Hitler's rise to power by financial means. The man didn't get into power just by his lies, but by lies of other men too, the men with power, with money, and influence, and the access to Wall Street. You would be surprised to see the names within this book that financed "the funny little man, with the funny little mustache" that almost took over the entire world.
I will not ruin the book for you by telling all the names in it, but I will tell you two men's name I know you will instantly recognize.
Henry Ford & Edsel Ford. Yes, those "Ford's", from Ford Motor Company. Henry Ford even got the highest award the Nazi's could give to a foreigner, in recognition of his assistance to Adolph Hitler, and his picture hung in Hitler's office.
Just so you know, I am not a fan of the Nazi's, nor am I a racist of any kind, nor a fan of Adolph Hitler. I'm following a papertrail to find out all the names of who helped the man get into power to begin with, because I am someone who knows there's more to history than what they teach you in school. It doesn't just come down to the lies a politician tells the people who put them in office, but to the power-brokers who finance the man. Adolph Hitler was a politician, plain and simple. He knew how to lie to the people and give them comfort through manipulative persuasion and then when the people willingly gave him the power he went for the throat of the world.
Another good book that tells the details of who assisted Hitler that you may be able to find here on Amazon is, "IBM and the Holocaust."
Yes, I am talking about that "IBM" here too. They helped Hitler track down the Jews and other "undesirables" (Hitler's words, not Mine) through the use of the census and the Hollerith Card Sorting Machine.
Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
It is DEFINATELY time to do so. TIme the super rich start sharing their wealth or there's gonna be trouble ahead, ...
The clock..... is ticking........