NATION

PASSWORD

Minimum wage (poll included).

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What type of minimum wage do you support?

Hourly, 0 to 5 US dollars minimum.
3
2%
Hourly, 5 to 10 US dollars minimum.
29
16%
Hourly, 10 to 15 US dollars minimum.
46
26%
Hourly, 15+ US dollars minimum.
40
22%
Weekly, 0 to 175 US dollars minimum.
0
No votes
Weekly, 175 to 350 US dollars minimum.
2
1%
Weekly, 350 to 575 US dollars minimum.
3
2%
Weekly, 575+ US dollars minimum.
4
2%
No minimum wage.
44
24%
Other (please state).
9
5%
 
Total votes : 180

User avatar
Secruss
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Secruss » Sun May 27, 2012 1:59 pm

Farnhamia wrote:
Tekania wrote:
You'd never get the executives running companies to agree to that.

Why not? A couple of bucks a memo, they'll be raking it in.

Seriously, though, I write computer code. What's the going rate? Per line? Per module? Different rates for different languages? Not that I get paid by the hour. I get treated as if I do, but I don't.

If you paid programmers per line of code, you'd get very inefficient programs.

I would argue that it should be up to the employer and the employee as to whether to be salaried, paid by the hour, or paid piece-wise. And between no one else.
"How now!" cried Jupiter "Are you not yet content? You have what you asked for and so you have only yourselves to blame for your misfortunes."

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 2:00 pm

Laissez-Faire wrote: Then why do you say if individuals are left alone to decide wages, that they automatically favor what the employer would want? Are the employees that incompetent?


People are desperate.

No. How would they get employees?


By people who would be willing to work for jack squat. If someone has to choose between starvation and bare subsistence most people will choose subsistence.

The last notable time was largely due to government ineffectiveness and stagnation of wealth. The Reign of Terror wasn't anarchy, and wasn't the result of anarchy.


Because wealth hasn't stagnated now or would fall straight to the bottom in your scenario? Unbridled capitalism concentrates wealth at the top. That is all but an established fact.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
The Reasonable
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1080
Founded: Apr 30, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Reasonable » Sun May 27, 2012 2:01 pm

It's a pretty bad deal for low level workers in developed countries either way. If there's no minimum wage, businesses will simply pay less in wages. However, if there is, businesses will outsource what they can to countries where people work for less. The service sector is not readily outsourced, and so can institute a minimum wage just enough to keep those workers living and healthy if they budget properly and have very little if any savings, but there's no real solution as to the manufacturing sector- those low-level workers will either have to accept lower wages or have their jobs taken by those who will in other countries. It's harsh, but it's life in the 21st century globalized economy- if you don't get a service job or at least a high-tech manufacturing job in a developed country, you're pretty much always at risk of losing your job to a sweatshop worker, and in a bad economy, even low-level service jobs are hard to find. I guess you've got a choice between a low standard of living for low-wage workers, but more jobs available for them, and higher standards of living but not as many jobs available. You can't be picky and expect high living conditions when other people around the world are willing to sacrifice those things for the chance to work.
Factbook
8values

Country mostly reflects RL political views. See factbook's legislation section for details on policy and factbook's politics section for system of government. NS stats used as guides rather than as-is; refer to factbook for actual stats.

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 2:02 pm

Laissez-Faire wrote:
Divair wrote:There is a job that two people want.

The company offers 10 currency units as wage.

Both people apply for the job, but one is willing to apply for 9 currency units.
The second person realizes this and drops his application to 8 currency units.

Repeat until one person gives up.

Corporation's thoughts on this?
"YAY, LESS PAYROLL!"

Then it's a contract, although I wouldn't exactly call those wages stagnant nor in the eventual interest of any of the persons there. There are also other companies in the same industry, and other demands on the same industry for wages in a labor market.


Do you see any value in human dignity or happiness? I'm not trolling. I'm seriously wondering if you're a sociopath.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
SquareDisc City
Senator
 
Posts: 3587
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby SquareDisc City » Sun May 27, 2012 2:21 pm

I believe there should be a minimum wage, and in Britain I think the right value is probably something like £7 an hour.

I am aware that a minimum wage acts to increase unemployment, however I do not subscribe to the view that reducing unemployment is more important than other considerations. A minimum wage ensures that for those who do obtain a job, that job is worth doing.

I am also aware of the possibility of government benefits being used to ensure everyone is capable of meeting their basic needs, and have come across an argument that a minimum wage is equivalent to taxing corporations and giving those tax receipts to low earners. The issue with benefits is that they're a ball of bureaucracy, and rely on the people eligible putting in the claim, risking people "slipping through". A minimum wage is very simple to administer, understand, and police.
FT: The Confederation of the United Pokemon Types, led by Regent Mew.
Nuclear pulse propulsion is best propulsion.

User avatar
Kazarogkai
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8073
Founded: Jan 27, 2012
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Kazarogkai » Sun May 27, 2012 2:22 pm

if we cut down on inflation by reducing the amount of money we print and maybe introducing a gold and/or silver standard we wouldn't need to raise the minimum wage, also reducing the costs for things would also help like reducing population growth and introducing consumption taxes and over all lowering taxes in general say 10% of peoples income, also we need to lower living costs exponentially this way people wouldn't be so affected by having low wages which would allow us to better compete on the world market, that added with higher tariffs on foreign goods will encourage local businesses in are borders and spur economic activity.
Centrist
Reactionary
Bigot
Conservationist
Communitarian
Georgist
Distributist
Corporatist
Nationalist
Teetotaler
Ancient weaponry
Politics
History in general
books
military
Fighting
Survivalism
Nature
Anthropology
hippys
drugs
criminals
liberals
philosophes(not counting Hobbes)
states rights
anarchist
people who annoy me
robots
1000 12 + 10
1100 18 + 15
1200 24 + 20
1300 24
1400 36 + 10
1500 54 + 20
1600 72 + 30
1700 108 + 40
1800 144 + 50
1900 288 + 60
2000 576 + 80

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10093
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Sun May 27, 2012 2:25 pm

Youth unemployment is high enough as it is, and more than half of you want to raise the minimum wage above $10/hour (27 percent want it at $15/hour or more). The current minimum wage of $7.25/hour is fine where it is. The highest raise that I might support would be a $0.25 increase to $7.50/hour.

1 person, poverty line = $11,170
2 people, poverty line = $15,130

$7.25 x 40 hours x 52 weeks = $15,080
$7.50 x 40 hours x 52 weeks = $15,600
$10.00 x 40 hours x 52 weeks = $20,800
$15.00 x 40 hours x 52 weeks = $31,200

6 people, poverty line = $30,970 . . . Why would the minimum wage need to be the amount of money necessary to support six people?

Do some of you just want to collapse the economy?

Average Annual Income in the United States:

Poorest 10% . . . $9,235
11% to 20% . . . $16,358
21% to 30% . . . $23,873
31% to 40% . . . $32,188
41% to 50% . . . $42,327
51% to 60% . . . $57,213
61% to 70% . . . $73,866
71% to 80% . . . $97,298
81% to 90% . . . $154,131
Richest 10% . . . $200,026

Raising the minimum wage too high (e.g., to $15.00/hour) would cause unemployment to increase significantly.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)^
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)
GA#468: Prohibit Private Prisons (57%)^

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
SquareDisc City
Senator
 
Posts: 3587
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby SquareDisc City » Sun May 27, 2012 2:28 pm

Import tariffs will not lower the cost of living, they will raise it.

Christian Democrats wrote:Youth unemployment is high enough as it is, and more than half of you want to raise the minimum wage above $10/hour (27 percent want it at $15/hour or more). The current minimum wage of $7.25/hour is fine where it is.
Bear in mind that not all the voters will live in the USA.
FT: The Confederation of the United Pokemon Types, led by Regent Mew.
Nuclear pulse propulsion is best propulsion.

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10093
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Sun May 27, 2012 2:30 pm

SquareDisc City wrote:Import tariffs will not lower the cost of living, they will raise it.

Christian Democrats wrote:Youth unemployment is high enough as it is, and more than half of you want to raise the minimum wage above $10/hour (27 percent want it at $15/hour or more). The current minimum wage of $7.25/hour is fine where it is.
Bear in mind that not all the voters will live in the USA.

The poll, however, is in USD; therefore, I assume that the OP wants this topic to be mostly about the United States.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)^
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)
GA#468: Prohibit Private Prisons (57%)^

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
Laissez-Faire
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1837
Founded: Oct 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Laissez-Faire » Sun May 27, 2012 2:55 pm

Parpolitic Citizens wrote:
Do you see any value in human dignity or happiness? I'm not trolling. I'm seriously wondering if you're a sociopath.

No, psychologically I am sound. I just find the best way to help people is to leave them to their own devices.


Parpolitic Citizens wrote:
People are desperate.

Yet, even in desperation, it isn't a race to the bottom. Minimum wage isn't going to help desperate people, it's going to disadvantage them by the thousands and only make them more desperate.



By people who would be willing to work for jack squat. If someone has to choose between starvation and bare subsistence most people will choose subsistence.

Yes, but even then, what direction will wage demand go? Hint: It's not down.

Because wealth hasn't stagnated now or would fall straight to the bottom in your scenario? Unbridled capitalism concentrates wealth at the top. That is all but an established fact.

No. That is the established fact of corporatism.

If you feel that having any class of differing wealth, then anything but communism is unfair. But if you are talking about wealth stagnation and income disparity at gross levels, then this is no one's fault but the government's in it's faulty policy that only allows these conditions to exist.
Last edited by Laissez-Faire on Sun May 27, 2012 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sanguinthium wrote:and then the government abolishes itself after its purpose has been served
Vestr-Norig wrote:I'm sorry, I am not familiar with your highbrow words.
Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia wrote:Ah, how heavenly & masturbatable must unregulated capitalism be!
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:You're one of the most disingenuous people I've seen here.
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:Do you see any value in human dignity or happiness? I'm not trolling. I'm seriously wondering if you're a sociopath.

User avatar
Secruss
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Secruss » Sun May 27, 2012 3:03 pm

"But if you are talking about wealth stagnation and income disparity at gross levels, then this is no one's fault but the government's in it's faulty policy that only allows these conditions to exist."
I second this notion. Government policy favors large businesses with many regulations. From working conditions to latrine regulations, only large corporations have the resources and legal knowledge to make sure every desk has no sharp corners and every toilet is 20 inches off the ground. Small businesses that might compete for labor and prices are squeezed out by the law.

I point you towards the Taxi laws of Milwaukee or New York City that favor established Taxi services.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyuG86Sd44w&feature=plcp
321 cabs only.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_New_York_City
"As of 2011, the price of a New York City Taxi medallion had reached a million dollars."

Mobility hampered by the government.
"How now!" cried Jupiter "Are you not yet content? You have what you asked for and so you have only yourselves to blame for your misfortunes."

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 3:06 pm

Laissez-Faire wrote:No, psychologically I am sound.


:unsure:

Yet, even in desperation, it isn't a race to the bottom. Minimum wage isn't going to help desperate people, it's going to disadvantage them by the thousands and only make them more desperate.

Yes, but even then, what direction will wage demand go? Hint: It's not down.


DOWN. No one likes paying payroll. There are plenty of people who, given a world where your beliefs are enacted into law, would work just for food and a cardboard box.

No. That is the established fact of corporatism.


No true Scotsman.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 3:07 pm

Secruss wrote:"But if you are talking about wealth stagnation and income disparity at gross levels, then this is no one's fault but the government's in it's faulty policy that only allows these conditions to exist."
I second this notion. Government policy favors large businesses with many regulations. From working conditions to latrine regulations, only large corporations have the resources and legal knowledge to make sure every desk has no sharp corners and every toilet is 20 inches off the ground. Small businesses that might compete for labor and prices are squeezed out by the law.

I point you towards the Taxi laws of Milwaukee or New York City that favor established Taxi services.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyuG86Sd44w&feature=plcp
321 cabs only.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_New_York_City
"As of 2011, the price of a New York City Taxi medallion had reached a million dollars."

Mobility hampered by the government.


You mean mobility hampered by corporations extracting economic rent.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
Laissez-Faire
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1837
Founded: Oct 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Laissez-Faire » Sun May 27, 2012 3:10 pm

Parpolitic Citizens wrote:
Laissez-Faire wrote:No, psychologically I am sound.


:unsure:

Well, I'd say quite a few are more psychologically unbalanced than me. What does this have to do with anything?

Yet, even in desperation, it isn't a race to the bottom. Minimum wage isn't going to help desperate people, it's going to disadvantage them by the thousands and only make them more desperate.

Yes, but even then, what direction will wage demand go? Hint: It's not down.


DOWN. No one likes paying payroll. There are plenty of people who, given a world where your beliefs are enacted into law, would work just for food and a cardboard box.

Yes, labor is a major cost. But no, costs of work don't go down over the development of experience, and companies will always be willing to pick off increasing demand by modifying wages accordingly. This demand will go up as experienced is gained, not down. Companies don't hold all the power in a free market, contrary to popular belief.

Let me put this into an example. Why do companies lower the prices of their goods? It taxes their fiscal nature? The answer is due to demand, and that there are always at least two parties in a market, not one. It's government that is responsive only to the one.
No. That is the established fact of corporatism.


No true Scotsman.

Hardly. Wanting universal healthcare doesn't make one a full-fledged authoritarian communist. Corporatists may embrace capitalist ideals, but it doesn't make the system capitalism.
Last edited by Laissez-Faire on Sun May 27, 2012 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sanguinthium wrote:and then the government abolishes itself after its purpose has been served
Vestr-Norig wrote:I'm sorry, I am not familiar with your highbrow words.
Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia wrote:Ah, how heavenly & masturbatable must unregulated capitalism be!
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:You're one of the most disingenuous people I've seen here.
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:Do you see any value in human dignity or happiness? I'm not trolling. I'm seriously wondering if you're a sociopath.

User avatar
Laissez-Faire
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1837
Founded: Oct 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Laissez-Faire » Sun May 27, 2012 3:11 pm

Parpolitic Citizens wrote:
Secruss wrote:"But if you are talking about wealth stagnation and income disparity at gross levels, then this is no one's fault but the government's in it's faulty policy that only allows these conditions to exist."
I second this notion. Government policy favors large businesses with many regulations. From working conditions to latrine regulations, only large corporations have the resources and legal knowledge to make sure every desk has no sharp corners and every toilet is 20 inches off the ground. Small businesses that might compete for labor and prices are squeezed out by the law.

I point you towards the Taxi laws of Milwaukee or New York City that favor established Taxi services.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyuG86Sd44w&feature=plcp
321 cabs only.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_New_York_City
"As of 2011, the price of a New York City Taxi medallion had reached a million dollars."

Mobility hampered by the government.


You mean mobility hampered by corporations extracting economic rent.

No, by government providing the conditions for these to be set in motion. That is what hampers a company's and individual's decisions in the market. It assumes they are incompetent and that government, in whatever capacity, will do the job better and more efficient and be more responsive to the demands of the people.
Sanguinthium wrote:and then the government abolishes itself after its purpose has been served
Vestr-Norig wrote:I'm sorry, I am not familiar with your highbrow words.
Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia wrote:Ah, how heavenly & masturbatable must unregulated capitalism be!
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:You're one of the most disingenuous people I've seen here.
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:Do you see any value in human dignity or happiness? I'm not trolling. I'm seriously wondering if you're a sociopath.

User avatar
Secruss
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Secruss » Sun May 27, 2012 3:14 pm

Parpolitic Citizens wrote:You mean mobility hampered by corporations extracting economic rent.

Indeed, they do extract the literal term of economic rent. In conditions permitted by the government. It is much like how the Statute of Monopolies of 1624 gave exclusive rights over an industry to the highest bidder.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies

The market did not implement the monopoly. The government did. These sold monopolies allow artificially high prices, just as artificial as the minimum wage.
"How now!" cried Jupiter "Are you not yet content? You have what you asked for and so you have only yourselves to blame for your misfortunes."

User avatar
Zijeme
Diplomat
 
Posts: 763
Founded: Nov 14, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zijeme » Sun May 27, 2012 3:22 pm

Laissez-Faire wrote:Corporatists may embrace capitalist ideals, but it doesn't make the system capitalism.

Still, the function of capitalism is to accumulate capital in the hands of those lucky enough to already have control of capital, and that is primarily achieved by having a large, depressed army of labour to extract product from.
The vandal shot his paint straight at the cow in the form of words like "twat", and later "fucknut" and "arsecandle".

User avatar
Laissez-Faire
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1837
Founded: Oct 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Laissez-Faire » Sun May 27, 2012 3:23 pm

Zijeme wrote:
Laissez-Faire wrote:Corporatists may embrace capitalist ideals, but it doesn't make the system capitalism.

Still, the function of capitalism is to accumulate capital in the hands of those lucky enough to already have control of capital, and that is primarily achieved by having a large, depressed army of labour to extract product from.

And the more abusive processes of which are only made structurally possible by government intervention and the shift in the balance of power to the central few to dictate the economic conditions of less fortunate individuals.
Sanguinthium wrote:and then the government abolishes itself after its purpose has been served
Vestr-Norig wrote:I'm sorry, I am not familiar with your highbrow words.
Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia wrote:Ah, how heavenly & masturbatable must unregulated capitalism be!
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:You're one of the most disingenuous people I've seen here.
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:Do you see any value in human dignity or happiness? I'm not trolling. I'm seriously wondering if you're a sociopath.

User avatar
Chrisoepia
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 142
Founded: Oct 09, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Chrisoepia » Sun May 27, 2012 3:23 pm

minimum wage should be at 50 cents per trillion of the countries income

EX: USA=16.4trillion in income so MW would be $8.2 :)

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 3:24 pm

Laissez-Faire wrote:
Zijeme wrote:Still, the function of capitalism is to accumulate capital in the hands of those lucky enough to already have control of capital, and that is primarily achieved by having a large, depressed army of labour to extract product from.

And the more abusive processes of which are only made structurally possible by government intervention and the shift in the balance of power to the central few to dictate the economic conditions of less fortunate individuals.


You've just described how a corporation acts towards it's employees.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
Milks Empire
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21069
Founded: Aug 02, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Milks Empire » Sun May 27, 2012 3:25 pm

Parpolitic Citizens wrote:
Laissez-Faire wrote:And the more abusive processes of which are only made structurally possible by government intervention and the shift in the balance of power to the central few to dictate the economic conditions of less fortunate individuals.

You've just described how a corporation acts towards it's employees.

Not that you'll ever get the members of the Fundamentalist Church of the Free Market Fairy to see that.

User avatar
Aeronos
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1948
Founded: Jun 03, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Aeronos » Sun May 27, 2012 3:26 pm

Without a minimum wage, income parity in the US was generally a better sight than it was after the introduction of a national one, so the "Race to the Bottom" argument doesn't really work.

Supply and demand proves how wages are determined in the market place. If you're hiring, you want the lowest costs for the best labour. If you're jobseeking, you want the best jobs for the highest wages. This is the exact same setup that we use in supply and demand graphs: if employers are finding it difficult to get employees, then supply is too low, so the equilibrium rests at higher wages. This creates an upward pressure on wages. If employees are finding it too difficult to get a job, then either supply is too high or demand is too low; the equilibrium rests at a lower price, and so there'll be a downward pressure on wages.

With a minimum wage in place, there's a price floor in effect. This means, if equilibrium rests below the set wage, the person is doomed to unemployment; it is illegal for them to reduce the price of their labour in order to get employed. Hence, the people who do get employed with a higher wage tend to be more skilled than the folk below them who cannot compete. This tends to be composed of people predominantly from the middle class. The result of this is a literally direct transfer of wealth from the lower class to the middle class, and with it, a deadweight loss caused by the breaking of pareto optimum (wealth literally being evaporated by inefficiency).

So yes, you might get a sudden reduction in wages if you have a huge amount of unemployed people. But a huge amount of unemployed people generally implies a recession anyway. As employment returns to a much higher level, the economy grows, and the workers have higher expectations; they want a bigger share of the cut. Upward wage pressures return, and companies offering higher wages begin to siphon workers from those who wish to be more prudent.

I love this topic, because it's basically the most explicit exercise in fundamental economics and game theory. Most macroeconomic topics tend to be hard to understand to the average person who only understands domestic finances, but this one can be understood by anyone who understands even that :3
My Political Compass
Economic: Left/Right (2.18)
Social: Libertarian/Authoritarian (-9.71)

Note: I am female, so please get the pronoun right!

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 3:28 pm

Milks Empire wrote:
Parpolitic Citizens wrote:You've just described how a corporation acts towards it's employees.

Not that you'll ever get the members of the Fundamentalist Church of the Free Market Fairy to see that.


This is why I am a left libertarian. Abuse can come from both ways.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
Parpolitic Citizens
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: May 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 3:38 pm

With a minimum wage in place, there's a price floor in effect. This means, if equilibrium rests below the set wage, the person is doomed to unemployment; it is illegal for them to reduce the price of their labour in order to get employed. Hence, the people who do get employed with a higher wage tend to be more skilled than the folk below them who cannot compete. This tends to be composed of people predominantly from the middle class. The result of this is a literally direct transfer of wealth from the lower class to the middle class, and with it, a deadweight loss caused by the breaking of pareto optimum (wealth literally being evaporated by inefficiency).


Could you guarantee that the wealth evaporated is enough to live a functional life? Economic policy is not entirely about efficiency and net numbers. If we eliminated the minimum wage yes, employment would go up and some amount of wealth increase. But at what expense? We'd have people living in slave like conditions if we simply went by the whims of the freemarket. Most people don't find that acceptable.
Damned commie
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

User avatar
Zijeme
Diplomat
 
Posts: 763
Founded: Nov 14, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zijeme » Sun May 27, 2012 3:41 pm

Laissez-Faire wrote:
Zijeme wrote:Still, the function of capitalism is to accumulate capital in the hands of those lucky enough to already have control of capital, and that is primarily achieved by having a large, depressed army of labour to extract product from.

And the more abusive processes of which are only made structurally possible by government intervention and the shift in the balance of power to the central few to dictate the economic conditions of less fortunate individuals.

How does that conjecture explain such abusive processes as this? And how did those workers get stuck in such a desperate situation, doing such dangerous and completely unrewarding work if there 'isn't really a race to the bottom'?

It looks like the lack of intervention, the lack of enforcement of regulation (or any law, actually) in that region, allowed the situation to occur.
The vandal shot his paint straight at the cow in the form of words like "twat", and later "fucknut" and "arsecandle".

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arvenia, Cerespasia, Cheblonsk, Europa Undivided, Infected Mushroom, Israel and Moshiach, Post War America, THE BROSVILL, Turenia

Advertisement

Remove ads