Should minimum wage be increased?
- Thread starter Jabberwocky
- Start date
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
You say that as if working a minimum wage job isn't straight up poverty...
oh btw, did any of you ever wonder why the minimum wage laws so rarely keep up with inflation? I don't wonder why. It seems pretty self-explanatory to me.
If we had an actual incentive to make sure working people were not living in poverty, the minimum wage laws would change monthly/yearly, if not more frequently.
this is true, we merely need to revert to a more equitable distribution of profit. the money was there before for the workers, but the rich people took it, and they still want more
23536
Bluelight Crew
Why do you call it a tax?
The money is already there.
Plus, most companies benefit from a wider distribution of disposable income, because nearly all of this income is rapidly spent on the products or services they produce.
Which industries don't directly benefit from people spending more? Hospitals and Defense. Most people who get a raise don't go spend it on a Predator drone, or a prostate exam. But I don't think these industries have many minimum wage employees.
Wyld 4 X
Bluelighter
Minimum wage should be tied to max salary of the CEO, Chairman, etc. of the company. Let's say the top salary/compensation of any company cannot be any more than 10x the lowest wage. So if a mail clerk is making $25k a year, the CEO cannot be compensated for any more than $250k. If the CEO wants more for himself, he will have to compensate the mail clerk's salary more generously.
It has already been said that the money is already there. The top just takes more and gives back less. Why not make the company more fulfilling by allowing everyone to prosper instead of just the top company officers?
It has already been said that the money is already there. The top just takes more and gives back less. Why not make the company more fulfilling by allowing everyone to prosper instead of just the top company officers?
Exactly. Unlike with the CEO's and top brass who stash all their wealth in offshore accounts and places where it will never trickle back into the economy that just produced it! The wealth gap is straight up criminal and pure greed. A part of me thinks it has been part of a long term economic conspiracy to destroy the "middle class" (aka the hard working taxed masses).. just look at what has happened in the past 5-6 years as all this "bad" economic planning from the 70's comes to a head.. bailouts, IMF loans, funding cuts..
We're well overdue for a system restructure. It still suprises me there hasn't been some kind of violent outburst in the UK or USA yet. People are struggling to pay gas bills for heating and yet on the front of todays papers the top brass of gas companies have just awarded themselves a 6% pay increase!!!! What the fuck is wrong with us.. seriously ball-less public we are.
23536
Bluelight Crew
The riots of 2011 had something to do with with economics, right?
More to do with black people getting pissed off that Mark Duggan was shot by police.. even though he was a gangster.. and then the police failing to contain the situation. It then spread with idiots stealing booze, shoes, and cheap shit from shops, and then trashing small businesses. Banks were left untouched. People say that there was economic's involved but that's bullshit, it was just yobs and losers getting angry.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Whatever happen to Occupy WallStreet? Didn't it have something to do with the "wealth gap"?
MrGrunge
Bluelighter
^ Apparently some of their latest efforts involve Debt Forgiveness. Supposedly they've raised around $130,000 which roughly translates to $2.5 million of debt leverage.
this, this, a million times this.
anyone using bullshit rhetoric to argue against this is a corrupt leech who considers themselves over their fellow citizens/humanity.
Marx pretty much predicted all of this in his writings. The one thing he didn't take into account though was the ability of imperialism to buy off the masses in developed countries. He predicted a worldwide revolution against the capitalist class that never happened because developed nations exploit resources in underdeveloped areas. By doing this, capitalists are able to both maintain their system of wealth and power, and at the same time create a world that is just good enough for the people to live in so that they wont rebel.
Until things get really, really bad like they were in Russia before the Bolsheviks took over I doubt we will see any kind of revolution against the system, and even then administering such a system correctly will be such a monumental task that it will likely cause immense suffering before it is able to fully realize the dream of socialism.
Escher's Waterfall
Bluelight Crew
So as a hypothetical CEO wanting to earn $25 million a year, but not willing to pay the mail clerk $2.5 million/year, what is to prevent me from contracting out my mail room services for much, much less than $2.5 million/year?
I could do that with all the low-paying jobs on the staff (janitorial, transportation, etc), then keep my fat paycheck.
In fact, since I am no longer paying low wage workers, the workers on my payroll are making pretty good money and probably have some decent benefits (relatively speaking). I think it may be time for our PR department to brag about how we pay a livable wage to all our employees.
The whole "we should stop giving aid to other countries and help ourselves" thing is getting really tired and old and demonstrates a pretty naive understanding of what aid is and why we do it. We have plenty of money to take care of everyone here in the US, the tiny portion of our GDP that we give as "aid" is really irrelevant.
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of "aid" that the US gives to other countries comes with strings attached. Lets take Nigeria for example. We give them developmental aid to try to stabilize the region so they dont have popular revolts and the government will support us. In turn they sell us their oil at a reasonable price.
The same can be said for humanitarian aid in places in the world where people are starving. Much of the aid that the US only likes to show as a dollar sign given to a country because it makes us look good is not really american dollars. What they will do is buy grain from US producers , and pay US shipping companies to ship it there and distribute it. In this way we're helping ourselves by supporting US agricultural and shipping interests and helping to alleviate the problem of world hunger.
Military aid follows the same line of reasoning (although in most cases I think cutting the hell out of military aid would be appropriate). The US buys military equipment from US manufacturers and either sells it cheap or gives it to a government that will be our ally in the region.
Much of our aid is in the form of loans aswell (although they show up in the "aid" column), which cause some countries to be indebted to us and basically at our mercy.
Its not like we're just shoveling dollars onto a boat and sending it on its way without expecting anything from it. Almost all of our aid is bilateral and anything the aid that we give is more self serving and less focused on helping the people that receive it than it should be.
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of "aid" that the US gives to other countries comes with strings attached. Lets take Nigeria for example. We give them developmental aid to try to stabilize the region so they dont have popular revolts and the government will support us. In turn they sell us their oil at a reasonable price.
The same can be said for humanitarian aid in places in the world where people are starving. Much of the aid that the US only likes to show as a dollar sign given to a country because it makes us look good is not really american dollars. What they will do is buy grain from US producers , and pay US shipping companies to ship it there and distribute it. In this way we're helping ourselves by supporting US agricultural and shipping interests and helping to alleviate the problem of world hunger.
Military aid follows the same line of reasoning (although in most cases I think cutting the hell out of military aid would be appropriate). The US buys military equipment from US manufacturers and either sells it cheap or gives it to a government that will be our ally in the region.
Much of our aid is in the form of loans aswell (although they show up in the "aid" column), which cause some countries to be indebted to us and basically at our mercy.
Its not like we're just shoveling dollars onto a boat and sending it on its way without expecting anything from it. Almost all of our aid is bilateral and anything the aid that we give is more self serving and less focused on helping the people that receive it than it should be.
Much of the humanitarian aid is simply a way to funnel money into certain peoples pockets.
Building hospitals in africa sounds nice. Then a large contractor (friendly with the politico in charge of the megabucks) sucks profit out of it.
Building hospitals in africa sounds nice. Then a large contractor (friendly with the politico in charge of the megabucks) sucks profit out of it.
^ thats another great example of how "aid" isnt really aid.
Much of the time the infrastructure (roads, hospitals, ect) dont have the required resources/staff to operate once the aid agency pulls out either so they wont be used to their potential.
Another important thing to note about aid is that the vast majority of money that flows from the developed world to the undeveloped world comes from private companies that are either investing or donating for one reason or another.
Much of the time the infrastructure (roads, hospitals, ect) dont have the required resources/staff to operate once the aid agency pulls out either so they wont be used to their potential.
Another important thing to note about aid is that the vast majority of money that flows from the developed world to the undeveloped world comes from private companies that are either investing or donating for one reason or another.
Escher's Waterfall
Bluelight Crew
Would eradicating Polio fall under "aiding ourselves"?
Because I could think of some pretty big benefits if a US polio epidemic wasn't just a plane flight away.
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
If you take away the profit motive, the world stops turning.