NationStates Jolt Archive

That's precisely my point. It's not about being noble. You and I as individuals should be noble and moral. But if we're talking about public policy we're talking about law, which does not and should not require you to be noble. I still hold that I'd rather depend on companies' desire to survive (and hence, continuing provision of goods and jobs) than on government regulation on behalf of the little guy. Neither is perfect but you have to make a choice. The effectiveness of government regulation vs. free markets and consumers just a very basic flashpoint liberal and conservative economists will always disagree on.


Id say that only liberal economic theorists (as opposed realists) and economically doomed dictatorships on the left would want the market controlled solely by government regulation.

By the same token only hard line free market economic theorists who have not noted history or the likes of Bill Gates, Henry Ford, JP Morgan or JP Getty would advocate no government regukation of the economy.

The reasonable choice of government regulation is not a simple yes or no but the much more difficult decision of where to draw the line.

I think that raising the minimum wage a buck and a half does not go too far down the path of too much governmebt regulation. I think that any harm this might do the economy would be outweighed by the good it would do for the lowest economic echelon of society. I might be wrong. But I also think that it is a gamble worth taking. At any rate it would not do so much harm that it could not be remedied if it was a mistake.

In 2004 there were half a million people earning minimum wage and another million and a half earning less than that. Assuming all two million would start getting $1.50 an hour more and also assuming that they are all full time employees we would be risking about 6 billion dollars in employers capital on this social experiment. I think it's a good gamble.

In 2004 there were half a million people earning minimum wage and another million and a half earning less than that. Assuming all two million would start getting $1.50 an hour more and also assuming that they are all full time employees we would be risking about 6 billion dollars in employers capital on this social experiment. I think it's a good gamble.
How many of these wage-earners were heads of households? How many were restaurant employees? How many received EIC payments? There are offsetting conditions that you might not consider, at first.

A few points that I see need clarification:
The idea of a minimum wage increases being fixed to inflation IS THE WORST IDEA EVER.

assuming you have a minimum wage what should it be fixed to? or should it just move randomly according to political forces?

The idea for a minimum wage comes from the philosophical idea that all labor is equal

No that is what is behind having equal wages for everyone. That is rather different from having a minimum wage.

What the minimum wage could come from any of a number of assumptions for example
1) the idea that a person must have a minimum amount of income to be able to lift themselves up (pay for education and children's education etc)
2) that there may be a race to the bottom in certain sectors where incomes drop to levels where they cannot afford the things referred to in (1)
3) the idea that companies tend to have high profits and workers tend to capture a minimal amount of that - so an employer can often just absorb a price rise. By periodically pushing it up you can get more of a share for the workers and less for the ccapitalists - since hte capitalists dont do much anyway and would make marginal decisions on profit efficiently even if it was only a tiny percentage gain that might well be a more efficient market.
4) the idea that the rate of unemployment may be related more to unemployable people than the actual market efficiency etc. I.e. that there would be a equilibrium amount of unemployed at any reasonable unemployment rate so little danger in putting minimum wages up.

Have you ever lived in a poor neighborhood?

No, but I don't see how that's relevant.

I didn't claim that poor neighbourhoods don't get lousy policing. I claimed that poor neighbourhoods needn't get lousy policing.

Here's a good article on minimum wage from the Mises Institute:

http://www.mises.org/story/2229

Aren't some businesses leaving America for cheaper labor?

If that is the reason they're leaving, raising the minimum wage does not appear to be a good idea.

we thought that would happen in britain when we introduced the minimum wage, we didnt lose jobs!

Aren't some businesses leaving America for cheaper labor?

If that is the reason they're leaving, raising the minimum wage does not appear to be a good idea.
If a lower minimum wage isn't stopping it, raising the wages no doubt wouldn't increase it exponentially. The company execs who were hired for two months would fire a few thousand people and increase their yearly wages by 5 mil for doing it.

Aren't some businesses leaving America for cheaper labor?

If that is the reason they're leaving, raising the minimum wage does not appear to be a good idea.

Increasing minimum wage -> increase in income for many americans -> these americans buy more shit -> companies make more money -> companies can afford to obtain labor domestically.

But Cuba lacks advanced diagnostic tools, and doesn't do any medical research.

And many of those people without health insurance in the US had insurance 6 months ago, and will have insurance 6 months from now. They're voluntarily between jobs. And others are rich, and don't need health insurance. And some are young and stupid. The number of people who want health insurance and can't get it is a vastly smaller number.

And why would you believe that 100% number? Who measured it?

If you base all your arguments of american propaganda then you will always be wrong.

Cuba is responsible for laser eye surgery among other medical advances. Maybe you should get hold of some facts instead of making assumptions based on propaganda lies. Then you wouldn't look like such a dumbass when you're proved wrong.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3284995.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4486708.stm

Just because you are a product of capitalist education, don't try to pollute the rest of us with your lies.

Just because you are a product of capitalist education, don't try to pollute the rest of us with your lies.

Cuba's also home to incredible poverty, though I'd blame that mostly on US trade sanctions.