NationStates Jolt Archive

all left wing delegates should help in passing the "Minimum Wage" proposal, and any right wing one who has a bit of respect for the worker

all left wing delegates should help in passing the "Minimum Wage" proposal, and any right wing one who has a bit of respect for the worker

Increasing government regulation only hurts business. Increasing the minimum wage actually leads to employers firing some workers so they can afford to pay the higher wages for some. It hurts business, it hurts job growth, it hurts the economy.

No

So you find it ethical to drive down wages to the point that the proletariat cannot live on said wages and so that that will help the economy? See how it improves when your unemployment rate skyrockets.

Alight Karl Marx... first things first...

1. we don't have a "proletariat". We have citizens.
2. Minimum wage jobs are not careers.
3. the "Class Struggle" is an invention.

Alight Karl Marx... first things first...

1. we don't have a "proletariat". We have citizens.
2. Minimum wage jobs are not careers.
3. the "Class Struggle" is an invention.

An invention? How so? I can live a normal life and see the existance of such a struggle very often. If you're going to claim that a verifiable fact of human socio-organization is defunct, irrelevant or non-existant, at least give a couple of reasons why you would think so.

I would also say that your opinion of minimum wage jobs not existing as careers is incredibly wrong. Though I personally would not take such a career path, I would have to say that there are those who would start out at a low rung, say at McDonald's, and then slowly move up, perhaps one day even to manager. This may not seem like much to you, but for some this all they can get at the moment, or all they intend to do.

The prole is a creation, but it is an existing and accepted label of social groups in particular situations. When Lenin led a revolution, he did not lead a revolution of citizens. A citizen includes all people who fall under a single nation or flag. He led a revolution mainly made up of lower class farmers or what we would now refer to as blue collar workers.

I would suggest a simple fact check before making broad assumptions or lazy conclusions.

Another point to be made here is that minimum wage laws do not necessarily hurt job growth or the economy. That is an extremely limited perspective to take. The cost of living is ridiculous in some areas because of said unregulated business. The fact of the matter is that if a market exists and a company can make money in that market, they will enter it. It would be more logical to apply minimum wage laws that meet the cost of living requirements for each individual nation.

In reality, it is true that a business does tend to fire employees to make up for lost revenue. It doesn't matter what you do in any economy, business will always hire as many employees as they deem necessary unless the government requires them to employ so many people, which even I think would be a broad over-stepping of authority. You can look around the world at the other countries that do not have minimum wage laws and realize, perhaps for you with a sudden amount of shock, that they make far under what would be deemed acceptbale by many nations with such laws. It seems almost that you're failing to take into account the fact that an unregulated business will not regulate itself, but would rather seek out the cheapest employment it can locate in an effort to do what business does best: make more money, even at the expense of the human individual.

Alight Karl Marx... first things first...

1. we don't have a "proletariat". We have citizens.
2. Minimum wage jobs are not careers.
3. the "Class Struggle" is an invention.

An invention? How so? I can live a normal life and see the existance of such a struggle very often. If you're going to claim that a verifiable fact of human socio-organization is defunct, irrelevant or non-existant, at least give a couple of reasons why you would think so.

I would also say that your opinion of minimum wage jobs not existing as careers is incredibly wrong. Though I personally would not take such a career path, I would have to say that there are those who would start out at a low rung, say at McDonald's, and then slowly move up, perhaps one day even to manager. This may not seem like much to you, but for some this all they can get at the moment, or all they intend to do.

The prole is a creation, but it is an existing and accepted label of social groups in particular situations. When Lenin led a revolution, he did not lead a revolution of citizens. A citizen includes all people who fall under a single nation or flag. He led a revolution mainly made up of lower class farmers or what we would now refer to as blue collar workers.

I would suggest a simple fact check before making broad assumptions or lazy conclusions.

Another point to be made here is that minimum wage laws do not necessarily hurt job growth or the economy. That is an extremely limited perspective to take. The cost of living is ridiculous in some areas because of said unregulated business. The fact of the matter is that if a market exists and a company can make money in that market, they will enter it. It would be more logical to apply minimum wage laws that meet the cost of living requirements for each individual nation.

In reality, it is true that a business does tend to fire employees to make up for lost revenue. It doesn't matter what you do in any economy, business will always hire as many employees as they deem necessary unless the government requires them to employ so many people, which even I think would be a broad over-stepping of authority. You can look around the world at the other countries that do not have minimum wage laws and realize, perhaps for you with a sudden amount of shock, that they make far under what would be deemed acceptbale by many nations with such laws. It seems almost that you're failing to take into account the fact that an unregulated business will not regulate itself, but would rather seek out the cheapest employment it can locate in an effort to do what business does best: make more money, even at the expense of the human individual.

1. Your statement that people at McDonalds can make a career of it is entirely true. Their career is not pegged at minimum wage however. If it were, they would be the most brain dead humans to ever walk the planet..... and that's up against some stiff competition (people who actually think communism could work, etc). A minimum wage job is the "foot in" to a given company for unskilled workers. Jobs of that nature are not designed to be careers.

2. Class struggle is an invention to pit human against human to further leftie political goals. I see no class struggle.... I see individual competition. The most skilled shall rise.

3. Think of a business that has 100,000 currency per annum for salaries outside of management.. with that sum, you could hire 10 people at 10,000/annum wage, or 5 people at 20,000/annum wage. If the demand is to be pegged at 20,000 ... that company will have to fire 5 employees... or go bankrupt. So the choice is ... fire 5 people and increase unemployment, or go bankrupt and everyone loses a job.
It's a rediculous decision to make... especially if an employer has to make it because the UN told him to do so.

Ergo....

No.... we would never support this proposal.


As for the rest of the "Communist Manifesto" blather.... I spent too much time in university refuting that crap to redo it here in the UN. So my advise is to use critical thinking, apply the rules of logic, re-read it... and count the gigantic gaping holes it leaves in it's own shoddy argument.

If you really want to latch onto a political philosophy, read John Stuart Mill.... Mill's flawless

I personally am not in support of this particular issue, however I still find myself in genuine disagreement with you, Psychotropics. I do apologize for coming off as so strong willed, or even angry, but bad moods tend to lead to bad posts, and, frankly, I should not have allowed such emotions to carry over into this forum.

For the record, I have not only read John Stuart Mill, but disagree with both him and Thomas Hobbes, two people that many people tend to associate in philisophical similarities. I read the communist manifesto years ago, and will readily admit that most of it is shoddy, and best left to the pirahnas.

Your idea mentioned here as class struggle as individual competition I would agree with to a point. I would have to say that class struggle is a realistic fact of existence, not only put forth by Mr. Marx. but by several other people who have studied socio-organization in our society, nationally and abroad. Simply saying that class struggle is no more than individual competition is like saying the circle of life is individual struggle without realizing that there is more there than just that.

In any case, I can see your point in saying that debating these issues in the UN would be silly, I suppose. Though you may have debated them in your university days, I am just getting ready to end mine, and I'm not done yet. On these matters, I would have to use the generic agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As to Mr. Mill, I cannot say he was an idiot, I respect his ideals. I simply cannot agree that he was flawless, though he is not to be stuck away in some footnote in history.

I personally am not in support of this particular issue, however I still find myself in genuine disagreement with you, Psychotropics. I do apologize for coming off as so strong willed, or even angry, but bad moods tend to lead to bad posts, and, frankly, I should not have allowed such emotions to carry over into this forum.

For the record, I have not only read John Stuart Mill, but disagree with both him and Thomas Hobbes, two people that many people tend to associate in philisophical similarities. I read the communist manifesto years ago, and will readily admit that most of it is shoddy, and best left to the pirahnas.

Your idea mentioned here as class struggle as individual competition I would agree with to a point. I would have to say that class struggle is a realistic fact of existence, not only put forth by Mr. Marx. but by several other people who have studied socio-organization in our society, nationally and abroad. Simply saying that class struggle is no more than individual competition is like saying the circle of life is individual struggle without realizing that there is more there than just that.

In any case, I can see your point in saying that debating these issues in the UN would be silly, I suppose. Though you may have debated them in your university days, I am just getting ready to end mine, and I'm not done yet. On these matters, I would have to use the generic agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As to Mr. Mill, I cannot say he was an idiot, I respect his ideals. I simply cannot agree that he was flawless, though he is not to be stuck away in some footnote in history.

I personally am not in support of this particular issue, however I still find myself in genuine disagreement with you, Psychotropics. I do apologize for coming off as so strong willed, or even angry, but bad moods tend to lead to bad posts, and, frankly, I should not have allowed such emotions to carry over into this forum.

For the record, I have not only read John Stuart Mill, but disagree with both him and Thomas Hobbes, two people that many people tend to associate in philisophical similarities. I read the communist manifesto years ago, and will readily admit that most of it is shoddy, and best left to the pirahnas.

Your idea mentioned here as class struggle as individual competition I would agree with to a point. I would have to say that class struggle is a realistic fact of existence, not only put forth by Mr. Marx. but by several other people who have studied socio-organization in our society, nationally and abroad. Simply saying that class struggle is no more than individual competition is like saying the circle of life is individual struggle without realizing that there is more there than just that.

In any case, I can see your point in saying that debating these issues in the UN would be silly, I suppose. Though you may have debated them in your university days, I am just getting ready to end mine, and I'm not done yet. On these matters, I would have to use the generic agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As to Mr. Mill, I cannot say he was an idiot, I respect his ideals. I simply cannot agree that he was flawless, though he is not to be stuck away in some footnote in history.

I personally am not in support of this particular issue, however I still find myself in genuine disagreement with you, Psychotropics. I do apologize for coming off as so strong willed, or even angry, but bad moods tend to lead to bad posts, and, frankly, I should not have allowed such emotions to carry over into this forum.

For the record, I have not only read John Stuart Mill, but disagree with both him and Thomas Hobbes, two people that many people tend to associate in philisophical similarities. I read the communist manifesto years ago, and will readily admit that most of it is shoddy, and best left to the pirahnas.

Your idea mentioned here as class struggle as individual competition I would agree with to a point. I would have to say that class struggle is a realistic fact of existence, not only put forth by Mr. Marx. but by several other people who have studied socio-organization in our society, nationally and abroad. Simply saying that class struggle is no more than individual competition is like saying the circle of life is individual struggle without realizing that there is more there than just that.

In any case, I can see your point in saying that debating these issues in the UN would be silly, I suppose. Though you may have debated them in your university days, I am just getting ready to end mine, and I'm not done yet. On these matters, I would have to use the generic agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As to Mr. Mill, I cannot say he was an idiot, I respect his ideals. I simply cannot agree that he was flawless, though he is not to be stuck away in some footnote in history.

I personally am not in support of this particular issue, however I still find myself in genuine disagreement with you, Psychotropics. I do apologize for coming off as so strong willed, or even angry, but bad moods tend to lead to bad posts, and, frankly, I should not have allowed such emotions to carry over into this forum.

For the record, I have not only read John Stuart Mill, but disagree with both him and Thomas Hobbes, two people that many people tend to associate in philisophical similarities. I read the communist manifesto years ago, and will readily admit that most of it is shoddy, and best left to the pirahnas.

Your idea mentioned here as class struggle as individual competition I would agree with to a point. I would have to say that class struggle is a realistic fact of existence, not only put forth by Mr. Marx. but by several other people who have studied socio-organization in our society, nationally and abroad. Simply saying that class struggle is no more than individual competition is like saying the circle of life is individual struggle without realizing that there is more there than just that.

In any case, I can see your point in saying that debating these issues in the UN would be silly, I suppose. Though you may have debated them in your university days, I am just getting ready to end mine, and I'm not done yet. On these matters, I would have to use the generic agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As to Mr. Mill, I cannot say he was an idiot, I respect his ideals. I simply cannot agree that he was flawless, though he is not to be stuck away in some footnote in history.

I personally am not in support of this particular issue, however I still find myself in genuine disagreement with you, Psychotropics. I do apologize for coming off as so strong willed, or even angry, but bad moods tend to lead to bad posts, and, frankly, I should not have allowed such emotions to carry over into this forum.

For the record, I have not only read John Stuart Mill, but disagree with both him and Thomas Hobbes, two people that many people tend to associate in philisophical similarities. I read the communist manifesto years ago, and will readily admit that most of it is shoddy, and best left to the pirahnas.

Your idea mentioned here as class struggle as individual competition I would agree with to a point. I would have to say that class struggle is a realistic fact of existence, not only put forth by Mr. Marx. but by several other people who have studied socio-organization in our society, nationally and abroad. Simply saying that class struggle is no more than individual competition is like saying the circle of life is individual struggle without realizing that there is more there than just that.

In any case, I can see your point in saying that debating these issues in the UN would be silly, I suppose. Though you may have debated them in your university days, I am just getting ready to end mine, and I'm not done yet. On these matters, I would have to use the generic agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As to Mr. Mill, I cannot say he was an idiot, I respect his ideals. I simply cannot agree that he was flawless, though he is not to be stuck away in some footnote in history.

On Liberty .... by John Stuart Mill, is the most flawless argument ever written in all of the great conversation of philosophy. You can try and find where the logic is unsound, or the reasoning is invalid.... but you will fail :) In fact... I challenge you to find fault in it.

http://www.bartleby.com/130/

Ah, John Stuart Mill, that self-described socialist. Sounds good to us...

Ah, John Stuart Mill, that self-described socialist. Sounds good to us...

Founder of modern Libertarian thought :)