Income Inequality.

[Audie]

If your aim is on the best, and you are prepared for the worst. You are ready for anything.
...I didn't say ignore the good that may be yet possible. However, consider these two scenarios:

¹If you've anticipated a sad disaster to follow, how disappointing would it be to be wrong?​

²If you've expected to have taper tape parades down streets of alabaster, the disappointment might hit differently.​

The glass is half empty, it's not a debate to me. The Weak Nuclear Force, 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, and simple evaporation determine that before the glass was sat down, the material in it began to dissipate.

Opportunities are fickle and few, and limited to your geographical location and economic situation. Rightfully so, they tend to be offered to the up-and-coming youngsters with possibility in their eyes, and they deserve it more.

I'm not young anymore, if I missed my chances, that's on me. It could be worse, I'm not concerned. I'd just like to have a relatively comfortable life. At least I have electricity, unlike 940 million people. I have clean water I can collect from a natural spring, unlike 2 billion people around the world. Could most definitely, be worse.

Sounds OK.

How do you manage to go hungry tho?
Aren't there like animals you can catch?

If you are talking like survivalist, collapse of
civilization, I've no plans.

150 cm 48 kilo female I have zero chance
of surviving

 

[Kfox]

That's an easy one: Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia.

The federal minimum wage in the United States has been $7.25 per hour since July 2009, the last time Congress raised it.[44] Some types of labor are exempt: Employers may pay tipped labor a minimum of $2.13 per hour, as long as the hour wage plus tip income equals at least the minimum wage. Persons under the age of 20 may be paid $4.25 an hour for the first 90 calendar days of employment (sometimes known as a youth, teen, or training wage) unless a higher state minimum exists.[45] The 2009 increase was the last of three steps of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, which increased the wage from $5.15 per hour in 2007 to $7.25 per hour in 2009.

I wasn't looking for an answer, I asked the question to dispel his claim of why the Feds increased minimum wage.

 

[Kfox]

You have made a single factor explanation. Have you checked if there are several factors for which BLM is one factor, but not the only one?

What other factors do you have in mind?

 

[Kfox]

Firstly, the reason I don't agree with legislation that increases minimum wage, is because some businesses don't have enough profit after overhead to pay more to employees, and will have no other choice but to charge more to their consumers. It gets us right back to where we started.

On the other hand, there are businesses that make exponential growth and put large portions of the company's income into stock buybacks or share repurchases. Then when the market crashes, they need bailed out because their stock holdings are plummeting.

Anyway, Fed minimum wage increase... This bill lays out the current 5-year increase that is in progress:

H.R.603 2021 Raise the Wage Act

SEC. 2. MINIMUM WAGE INCREASES.


(a) In General.—Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
“(1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not less than—
“(A) $9.50 an hour, beginning on the effective date under section 7 of the Raise the Wage Act of 2021;
“(B) $11.00 an hour, beginning 1 year after such effective date;
“(C) $12.50 an hour, beginning 2 years after such effective date;
“(D) $14.00 an hour, beginning 3 years after such effective date;
“(E) $15.00 an hour, beginning 4 years after such effective date; and
“(F) beginning on the date that is 5 years after such effective date, and annually thereafter, the amount determined by the Secretary under subsection (h);”.

I wasn't looking for an actual answer, I asked the question to dispel his claim of the Feds having to raise Minimum wage. The fact that it hasn't been raised in 15 years made my point.

 

[Nakosis]

Any proof for that claim?

Yes, well it depends on the company but the companies did the research on other companies for competing wages. They'd have to offer with in the same range of other local companies in order to attract employees else they'd go someplace else.

One thing I have seen them do though is research labor costs in a particular area. If an area had a lower average wage, they'd move the company to that area.

Moving from California to Florida there was quite a wage difference. Enough that my wife continues to work in California for the higher pay even though she also has to pay the additional rent.

(Oh geeze, I'm way behind on this thread. )

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

How do you manage to go hungry tho?

I'm in between jobs, trying to be picky and get one I can tolerate, I'll break down and get another menial job soon. I got laid off for demanding they provide my pay stubs according to MI Statute, apparently, I was in the wrong.

Aren't there like animals you can catch?

Yes, and no. Legally, I need to have a license and it's supposed to be a season that doesn't disturb their ability to rear offspring. I don't have licenses, and rather not attract any trouble.

150 cm 48 kilo female I have zero chance
of surviving

Probably wisest to build strong bonds now, when trust is safer to give and receive. But, as long as there are people, there should be at least some who have compassion and humility towards their fellow kind. I can't think of a situation where there's no good-natured people left. As long as there are people left, of course.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

"The glass is half empty"

That's nothing but a negative view.

Its also half full.

Perhaps, if one could cause time to stop. If you could prevent the natural processes described by material, chemical, and quantum physics from progressing. As soon as one singular fundamental interaction occurs, energy (or mass) has been lost. Reducing the atomic weight to less than half.

I don't see it as negativity, but the reality constructed by the four forces of nature.

Murphy was an optimist. "If it can happen, it will happen!"

 

[Nakosis]

Firstly, the reason I don't agree with legislation that increases minimum wage, is because some businesses don't have enough profit after overhead to pay more to employees, and will have no other choice but to charge more to their consumers. It gets us right back to where we started.

On the other hand, there are businesses that make exponential growth and put large portions of the company's income into stock buybacks or share repurchases. Then when the market crashes, they need bailed out because their stock holdings are plummeting.

Anyway, Fed minimum wage increase... This bill lays out the current 5-year increase that is in progress:

H.R.603 2021 Raise the Wage Act

SEC. 2. MINIMUM WAGE INCREASES.


(a) In General.—Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
“(1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not less than—
“(A) $9.50 an hour, beginning on the effective date under section 7 of the Raise the Wage Act of 2021;
“(B) $11.00 an hour, beginning 1 year after such effective date;
“(C) $12.50 an hour, beginning 2 years after such effective date;
“(D) $14.00 an hour, beginning 3 years after such effective date;
“(E) $15.00 an hour, beginning 4 years after such effective date; and
“(F) beginning on the date that is 5 years after such effective date, and annually thereafter, the amount determined by the Secretary under subsection (h);”.

I never worked for minimum wage. I went to an inner city community college, learn electronics and computers all for free. Didn't cost me a dime. So started out as a microprocessor technician @ 18.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Moving from California to Florida there was quite a wage difference. Enough that my wife continues to work in California for the higher pay even though she also has to pay the additional rent.

That's what I found in California over Indiana. Even though it's a bit more exoensive in the part I'm at the theres so much more money to make you come out on top.
And since I left Indiana it has gotten way more crazy expensive (I've seen rent that's on par with Bakersfield) but it hasn't got the minimum wage increases we have.

Yes, well it depends on the company but the companies did the research on other companies for competing wages. They'd have to offer with in the same range of other local companies in order to attract employees else they'd go someplace else.

Except there are some companies who egregiously underpay because they know they can get a revolving door of people who need a job and can't get one elsewhere.
During the Recession many of us found ourselves getting ahead and getting promoted but we were still getting less than tbose before us in similar positions.
There's no market formula or determination of a wage. It's just what an employer is willing to pay and often times it isn't much.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What other factors do you have in mind?

Well, for one all that happened, was that BLM claimed that George Floyd was killed by police and there was no evidence for that. In fact the police officer convincted of unlawfully causing the death was convincted solely based on BLM claiming it was the case.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

Well, for one all that happened, was that BLM claimed that George Floyd was killed by police and there was no evidence for that. In fact the police officer convincted of unlawfully causing the death was convincted solely based on BLM claiming it was the case.

No, I would say the officer was at least a contributor. I'd need more info to say he was a primary factor, but I would suspect so.

 

[PureX]

Where can we see "the decider's table"?

It's where the capital investors are sitting when they decide what labor is worth, to them. (As little as they can get away with paying, of course.)

Our difference here may come from how when I work for people and when I hire people, we set wages near the prevailing wage level for the given kind of labor in our area.

Sure, and you ALL set them as low as you can get away with paying so you can take as much as possible for yourselves. Because you are ALL looking to gain the maximum return on the labor of others. Monopolies don't require that the capitalists get together in back rooms and make secret deals. All it requires is that they all have the same goals. And they do ... feeding their own greed. That is the goal of capitalism: to promote and reward greed.

Are you personally familiar w/ a real life "bunch of capital investors" in particular? If not, you might consider this to be a fantasy.

And you might look up the term "gaslighting".

Isn't it interesting that it's always the people who are doing very well by capitalism that are defending and promoting it as humankind's salvation. Why is that, do you think? Do you personally now any of those millions of people living in tents and broken down shacks all across the United States because the capitalists decided labor would be cheaper in third world countries, and so screwed their own fellow citizens out of their jobs so they could "maximize profits returned on their capital investment" elsewhere? Perhaps you should go tell those people that their tents and shacks are a "fantasy". And tell them how it's all their fault that they are suffering.

 

[Pete in Panama]

The units of measurement may be (and perhaps the language used), but the observable properties are not. It's the difference between a natural, hard science (physics, chemistry, biology, etc.), as opposed to social sciences (economics, law, political science, philosophy).

Arguments over economic systems are not arguments over science or mathematics (despite how many capitalists seem to think of it that way). They are arguments over philosophy and value systems.

Let's get together on the fact that most folks prefer to live in areas where free markets are allowed, and they tend to flee areas where prices are managed by government dictate.

Well, no, it's not like that, but I was just using that as an analogy. You may think that environmental regulations are an example of government being too intrusive in the free markets, but again, that's a philosophical position based on societal values.

Likewise, if there are those who advocate for wage/price controls, that too is a philosophical position. I've heard some people reply to such proposals with snarky, unfounded criticisms as "Well, you know nothing about economics," when such a statement reveals their own ignorance about that field of study, since such a statement implies a belief that economics is a hard, natural science and not a social science. Economists certainly know that economics is a social science, but many capitalists obviously do not.

We can agree that usually when we hear some moron say "Well, you know nothing about economics", that the convo just goes downhill. Facts speak for themselves and my preference is our getting together on what we can both agree that we're looking at.

 

[Pete in Panama]

It's where the capital investors are sitting when they decide what labor is worth, to them. (As little as they can get away with paying, of course.)...

In real life, payroll decisions are NOT made by "capital investors" but rather by personnel managers. Also in real life, the fact is that "as little as they can get away with paying" is zero, and any personnel manager who tries that will not have any personnel to manage and will get fired.

...Sure, and you ALL set them as low as you can get away with paying so you can take as much as possible for yourselves. Because you are ALL looking to gain the maximum return on the labor of others...

Something else about real life, we both know that sometimes the work will only get done if we hire qualified (expensive) labor to do it.

...Isn't it interesting that it's always the people who are doing very well by capitalism that are defending and promoting it as humankind's salvation. Why is that, do you think? Do you personally now any of those millions of people living in tents and broken down shacks all across the United States...

Please tell me who you're talking about? I'm paying $500/month for my home, how much are you paying? You live in the U.S., I don't. The U.S. may present a fourth of the world's economic activity but it's only a twentieth of the world's population. The folks there may be wealthy but they're no way near as rich as the Swiss. Happiness is not a function of how well things are going, it's a decision people make regardless of circumstances. Some of us are naturally happy and then there are a lot of folks (like me) to have to work at it --but we can all be generally happy.

Something else is that everyone in every nation has to deal w/ market realities. My econ prof used to refer to the system of the old soviet union as "state capitalism".

 

[Stevicus]

Let's get together on the fact that most folks prefer to live in areas where free markets are allowed, and they tend to flee areas where prices are managed by government dictate.

I don't think we can draw that conclusion based on the available facts, since this would not explain the vast majority of immigrants to the US coming from capitalist countries. It might be more correct to say that people tend to gravitate to wherever they perceive the centers of wealth and power to be, regardless of how or why it became that way (or where they're coming from). Just as Rome had many immigrants back during their empire's heyday. It wasn't because they were free, but because they were wealthy and powerful (the "shining city on the hill").

We can agree that usually when we hear some moron say "Well, you know nothing about economics", that the convo just goes downhill. Facts speak for themselves and my preference is our getting together on what we can both agree that we're looking at.

I generally prefer a historical analysis of real-world events, their causes and effects, taking into consideration the larger picture. That, to me, carries more factual weight than the theoretical, abstract models associated with system-building.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, I would say the officer was at least a contributor. I'd need more info to say he was a primary factor, but I would suspect so.

One thing that changed over time, is technology. The ability to record a video have changed, how justice plays out.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

but we can all be generally happy.

Both the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence have something to say about this.

We aren't afforded or promised happiness, rather the pursuit of happiness. You can't make everyone happy, and I'm not sure you would want to.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

One thing that changed over time, is technology. The ability to record a video have changed, how justice plays out.

As long as it's not too grainy/distant footage so that it prevents a clear identification of suspects or events. Forensics has been the thing that crushed most criminal minded people in recent history, if you ask me.

 

[PureX]

Well, for one all that happened, was that BLM claimed that George Floyd was killed by police and there was no evidence for that. In fact the police officer convincted of unlawfully causing the death was convincted solely based on BLM claiming it was the case.

Well, that and we all saw him do it on video.

 

[PureX]

In real life, payroll decisions are NOT made by "capital investors" but rather by personnel managers.

Except that if any personnel manager decides to pay an employee more than the boss tells him to pay, he will be replaced with someone that will do as he's told. So his "decision" as you call it is the result of having no other options.

And if the boss allows the manager to pay more then necessary the CEO will replace him with someone that will 'toe the line'. And the CEO is going to get himself a big fat bonus for keeping wages down and profits up by the people that really do make all the decisions ... the greedy investors.

So, no, the personnel managers are not making any wage decisions, really. They're just carrying out the decisions made by their bosses, who are likewise just carrying out the decisions of the business owners/investors. Because in a capitalist system, the owners/investors have sole control of the enterprise they are invested in. And they do so for their own gain, exclusively.

Also in real life, the fact is that "as little as they can get away with paying" is zero, and any personnel manager who tries that will not have any personnel to manage and will get fired.

Well, only if they can't find a way to legalize and then enforce slavery again. But if they can, you can bet your butt they will. The capital investors can justify ANYTHING in the name of maximizing their profits.

Something else about real life, we both know that sometimes the work will only get done if we hire qualified (expensive) labor to do it.

Sure, but you only do that as a last resort. The first choice is to exploit the cheap labor for all you can get out of them. THEN, grudgingly pay a decent wage for the few that you have to have to keep your 'money pump' running.

Something else is that everyone in every nation has to deal w/ market realities. My econ prof used to refer to the system of the old soviet union as "state capitalism".

They love to preach the gospel of the market gods and how there is nothing we mere mortals can do about them, don't they! But like you, they're just doing the bidding of their capitalist bosses. Preaching the gospel of the inevitability and even the virtues of greed. But of course they are jus paid liars. Because greed is neither inevitable nor virtuous. It's a social pestilence that we need to stamp out before it kills us all. Not praise and reward at.