Is "wage slavery" actually "slavery"? And is "capitalism" really "voluntary exchange"?

[Stevicus]

Gah... minimum wage. Don't even... I mean, you have to be so ignorant in economics to support it. And any candidate for office who champions it is either grossly uninformed or an unabashed flatterer. But Representative Barbara Lee in California wants to raise the minimum wage there to $50 per hour. Yeah, that'll work great. Push the gross payroll burden of a small business with a half dozen full-time minimum wage earners another $35,360 per month. Then tax that increase. I mean, every small business in California has an extra $5,893 per min-wage employee per month, plus taxes, to toss around.

Pure idiocy.

Minimum wage... sigh.

This is part of the reason why minimum wage increases may only be a partial solution. Another possible solution (especially for California) would be rent and price controls, to keep prices in check and to lessen the need of any minimum wage increase. Rent controls would also help small businesses cut their expenses.

Another idea worth trying would be to establish an unused/vacant property tax which would double each month a property remains unused - such as a vacant lot, empty storefront, empty house/apartment, etc. This would be a powerful disincentive to property owners sitting on vacant property in the hopes of making a higher profit. They would be under strong pressure to sell, and this would bring property values down to more manageable and affordable levels. It would be a win-win for all, for both the working class and small businesses.

So, if raising the minimum wage is too much of a hardship for small business, then there may be other ways of improving the economy without doing that.

 

[Yerda]

Gah... minimum wage. Don't even... I mean, you have to be so ignorant in economics to support it.

It would be better to have strong unions and robust labour laws. However, there are plenty of professional economists who will tell you that the claims coming from peope who "understand economics" about the effects of min wages are unfounded. People with phds and decades of experience advise governments all over the world about setting and raising min wages.

 

[PureX]

It would be better to have strong unions and robust labour laws. However, there are plenty of professional economists who will tell you that the claims coming from peope who "understand economics" about the effects of min wages are unfounded. People with phds and decades of experience advise governments all over the world about setting and raising min wages.

Most economists are nothing more than paid shills for the oligarchy. The rich pay them to tell them what they want to hear, and what they want us to hear, and they oblige so they can feel like they're "in the game". Economists love the ebb and flow of greed the way politicians love the ebb and flow of power. Even when they don't have any themselves, they want to be around those who do.

 

[Colt]

In a capitol

I once said on this site that capitalism is simply voluntary exchange, nothing more. Then people responded saying "it's not voluntary because 'wage slavery'".

I've thought about it since then. I still remain unconvinced that capitalism is not voluntary. You don't have to work, you can roll over and die in poverty instead. So there is a choice. "That's no choice!" Well, why are you blaming your source of income, saying they are "enslaving you"? Even if it really isn't a choice, I feel like the blame and anger is misdirected entirely. Instead of being mad at the person who provides you income, shouldn't you be mad at the universe or "God" for giving you a physical body with daily requirements to stay alive? It is in no way the employers fault that if you don't work you are screwed. That's just the physical nature of reality. And in the end, you don't have to work for the employer. So it's not slavery. You do have a choice. Obviously, you are going to choose to work, but if you don't feel that is fair, blame god, not capitalism.

Capitalism is simply voluntary exchange, nothing more. Certainly not slavery.

In a capitalist system taxation can be a form of slavery to the entity of the state who is the “master”.

 

[PureX]

In a capitol

In a capitalist system taxation can be a form of slavery to the entity of the state who is the “master”.

Taxation without effective representation can be, yes. But we live in a representational democracy, so we can't really claim that this is our predicament.

 

[an anarchist]

Taxation without effective representation can be, yes. But we live in a representational democracy, so we can't really claim that this is our predicament.

I didn't consent to be represented by my neighbors votes. I am not represented. Democracy is tyranny. Wah

 

[PureX]

I didn't consent to be represented by my neighbors votes. I am not represented. Democracy is tyranny. Wah

Yes, you did. Your citizenship is that consent. Your right to vote (or not) is it's proof. Not to mention that you are enjoying the benefits of your citizenship, AND of that taxation every day of your life.

 

[an anarchist]

Yes, you did. Your citizenship is that consent. Your right to vote (or not) is it's proof. Not to mention that you are enjoying the benefits of your citizenship, AND of that taxation every day of your life.

Me being born in a certain geographical region =/= me consenting to citizenship. That's how I became a citizen, and you are saying that is how I consented. Silly, a newborn can't consent!

If I did vote, you could make an argument that I am consenting. There are arguments for both sides of that question. But by refusing to use aggression on others (voting), how is that proof of consent? It's the opposite.

Government monopolizing essential services e.g. roads and me using them =/= anything. Yea dude, I'm gonna drive on the government roads to get to work. There are no other roads. I am not against roads itself. So you are making a pointless point.

 

[PureX]

Me being born in a certain geographical region =/= me consenting to citizenship. That's how I became a citizen, and you are saying that is how I consented. Silly, a newborn can't consent!

Your parents consented for you. That's how it works. And once you became an adult, you could have forfeited your citizenship if you'd wanted to. But you didn't. And now you are a part of the collective society that you live within. And they DO get to decide how things are done. Whether you like it or not. You should respect and appreciate that.

If I did vote, you could make an argument that I am consenting.

Not voting when you could is just foolishness. It's throwing away yout ability to participate just so you can whine about the results without having done anything to change them.

There are arguments for both sides of that question. But by refusing to use aggression on others (voting), how is that proof of consent? It's the opposite.

Voting is not "aggression on others".

Government monopolizing essential services e.g. roads and me using them =/= anything.

It is an example of you participating in and enjoying the benefits of your collective society. Perhaps you should try to respect and appreciate them for affording you these benefits, instead of complaining about taxation.

 

[an anarchist]

It is an example of you participating in and enjoying the benefits of your collective society. Perhaps you should try to respect and appreciate them for affording you these benefits, instead of complaining about taxation.

It's bribery for the common man to accept statism. The same taxes that build roads also blow up women and children elsewhere in the world. I am forced to accept the bribe, so I do so with disgust.

 

[PureX]

It's bribery for the common man to accept statism. The same taxes that build roads also blow up women and children elsewhere in the world. I am forced to accept the bribe, so I do so with disgust.

See, this is why I view anarchists as silly children.

 

[an anarchist]

See, this is why I view anarchists as silly children.

Great non-point... Not!

If you have nothing to add to the debate, that's fine, but I'd appreciate it if you kept the insults to yourself. I am here for discourse, not disrespect. Take it elsewhere.

 

[Revoltingest]

See, this is why I view anarchists as silly children.

They speak poorly of you too.

 

[Balthazzar]

I once said on this site that capitalism is simply voluntary exchange, nothing more. Then people responded saying "it's not voluntary because 'wage slavery'".

I've thought about it since then. I still remain unconvinced that capitalism is not voluntary. You don't have to work, you can roll over and die in poverty instead. So there is a choice. "That's no choice!" Well, why are you blaming your source of income, saying they are "enslaving you"? Even if it really isn't a choice, I feel like the blame and anger is misdirected entirely. Instead of being mad at the person who provides you income, shouldn't you be mad at the universe or "God" for giving you a physical body with daily requirements to stay alive? It is in no way the employers fault that if you don't work you are screwed. That's just the physical nature of reality. And in the end, you don't have to work for the employer. So it's not slavery. You do have a choice. Obviously, you are going to choose to work, but if you don't feel that is fair, blame god, not capitalism.

Capitalism is simply voluntary exchange, nothing more. Certainly not slavery.

Good points. I liked using "slave to the grind" as a way of suggesting that we are in essence slaves as people. On one hand, we have requirements as living creatures. On the other, our choices can be limited. But, as you suggest, that's life and the struggle for survival is far from being a joking matter. Capitalism is a tool or vehicle that helps enable us to survive in this ever-changing world. The exchange? You work, we pay, we buy ... it's its own ecosystem of supply demand and human - social economic mechanics. It works, it sometimes doesn't work. It's easy. It's sometimes difficult. It's fair. It's sometimes unfair. That's life.

The alternative to a commerce driven ecosystem for human survival? Grab a gun, fishing pole, spear, bow and arrow or find somewhere to forage greens, nuts, and berries.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Government monopolizing essential services e.g. roads and me using them =/= anything. Yea dude, I'm gonna drive on the government roads to get to work. There are no other roads. I am not against roads itself. So you are making a pointless point.

There's generally no law preventing a company from building roads. If there are no privately-owned highways near you (and these do exist in many places, BTW), then this is because roads are one of those things that lend themselves to a natural monopoly.

 

[Unfettered]

This is part of the reason why minimum wage increases may only be a partial solution. Another possible solution (especially for California) would be rent and price controls, to keep prices in check and to lessen the need of any minimum wage increase. Rent controls would also help small businesses cut their expenses.

Another idea worth trying would be to establish an unused/vacant property tax which would double each month a property remains unused - such as a vacant lot, empty storefront, empty house/apartment, etc. This would be a powerful disincentive to property owners sitting on vacant property in the hopes of making a higher profit. They would be under strong pressure to sell, and this would bring property values down to more manageable and affordable levels. It would be a win-win for all, for both the working class and small businesses.

So, if raising the minimum wage is too much of a hardship for small business, then there may be other ways of improving the economy without doing that.

Beyond executing its authority to enforce the law on criminals and exploitative interstate trade, government can only ruin the economy; it can never improve it. History has shown that clearly. We are $34 trillion dollars in debt because of government, not because the economy is poor.

 

[Stevicus]

Beyond executing its authority to enforce the law on criminals and exploitative interstate trade, government can only ruin the economy; it can never improve it. History has shown that clearly. We are $34 trillion dollars in debt because of government, not because the economy is poor.

We're $34 trillion in debt because of unchecked corruption in government.

Some of what government does today came about through trials and errors of the past - as well as learning from the mistakes of other countries.

One of the primary jobs of government is to maintain political stability in society, and the more successful countries in the world realized that it's easier to do that with honey rather than vinegar.

The reason why America is teetering towards instability in recent times is because, apparently, they've run out of honey (or they don't want to share it anymore).

 

[Heyo]

We're $34 trillion in debt because of unchecked corruption in government.

And $21 trillion from those is the bill for the "war on terror", i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq (by one estimate).

And that shows who the corrupt politicians are, nearly everyone in politics. The "defence" budget (it's attack, really) gets increased every year without significant opposition.

 

[Stevicus]

And $21 trillion from those is the bill for the "war on terror", i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq (by one estimate).

And that shows who the corrupt politicians are, nearly everyone in politics. The "defence" budget (it's attack, really) gets increased every year without significant opposition.

Yeah, the warmongers seem to rule the roost. Of course, even they're going to be out of luck if the country goes broke because of their recklessness and short-sightedness.

 

[PureX]

Yeah, the warmongers seem to rule the roost. Of course, even they're going to be out of luck if the country goes broke because of their recklessness and short-sightedness.

They are all feeding at the public trough. The politicians and the capitalists that sponsor their political careers. And they swallow up so much wealth that there's nothing left to run the country. So then they borrow, and borrow, and borrow. And they ignore the consequences because all any of them care about is keeping their place feeding at the public trough.

And we keep electing and re-electing them as everything falls apart around us. Mostly because we're too afraid to do anything else.