Should minimum wage be raised?
- Thread starter acri1
- Start date
Minimum wage laws in general are usually set with no real knowledge of the economic realities and alternatives for either employers or employees. Third parties are simply enabled to indulge themselves by imagining what is "fair" — and pay no price for being wrong about the actual economic consequences.
That is why countries with minimum wage laws usually have much higher rates of unemployment than those few places where there have been no minimum wage laws, such as Switzerland or Singapore — or the United States, before the first federal minimum wage law was passed in 1931.
That is why countries with minimum wage laws usually have much higher rates of unemployment than those few places where there have been no minimum wage laws, such as Switzerland or Singapore — or the United States, before the first federal minimum wage law was passed in 1931.
Find me a politician that caters to logic over emotion and I'll show you a loser.
JMurder
SOHH Member since 01...
The only way we can truly affect minimum wage without hurting people at the bottom is to make sure businesses have a cap at the top. And that's too much like socialism for a lot of people
JMurder
SOHH Member since 01...
by this logic, lowering the minimum wage would actually improve the economyNot really the same at all, I was/am asking does raising the min-wage hurt the economy?(which was suggested) If it doesn't, then the number doesn't matter...
I think what you are trying to say is $12/hr wont hurt but $30/hr will?
If so, you are admitting it does hurt the economy, but you think we can raise it a little without too much pain...
My ideology has nothing to do with it... yet.
$1/hr minimum wage 
we'll be eating great 
I think minimum was should have kept pace with inflation, so around 20/hr
I also think earnings should be capped. No need for ANYONE on this earth to be worth more than a couple of million.
Why do we let Ayn Rand worshipping, Ronald Reagan quoting losers who always use platitudes on failed socialist states from 50 years ago, distort our logic? Socialism is not evil if it contained within Capitalism.
I also think earnings should be capped. No need for ANYONE on this earth to be worth more than a couple of million.
Why do we let Ayn Rand worshipping, Ronald Reagan quoting losers who always use platitudes on failed socialist states from 50 years ago, distort our logic? Socialism is not evil if it contained within Capitalism.
by this logic, lowering the minimum wage would actually improve the economy
Exactly.
It is beyond arrogant to think you or anyone else can, and should determine how much another person is or should be worth.
More over, it isn't a zero sum game.
There isn't some fixed pie that requires taking from others to get more from yourself. <--- This thinking is the root of over 80% of all economic misunderstandings.
Nope, the fact that people won't call out the "we aren't allowed to determine a person's worth" is why there is a 1% in the first place. What is the difference between 20 million and a billion? Come up with a logical reason why we should have a system that allows and maybe I'll consider.
It's ironic because most Billionaires are rich because they did exactly what you implied did not happen. They "took from others to get more for themselves." Objectivism is a false ideology.
Also Frederich Hayek > Milton Friedman
It's ironic because most Billionaires are rich because they did exactly what you implied did not happen. They "took from others to get more for themselves." Objectivism is a false ideology.
Also Frederich Hayek > Milton Friedman
No Breh, corporatism, poor policy, and lack of accountability(amongst law makers) created the 1%.
Secondly most billionaires provide(d) a desirable service to society that benefits the poor ie. Wal-Mart, Facebook, Microsoft/Apple, etc. This false idea floating around that the rich are going out and robbing the poor would be pure comedy if it wasn't believed by so many
Now giving Johnny Depp 20million to do The Lone Ranger... that's questionable or paying Flacco more than Tom Brady lol
Buddy really said "Walmart provides a desirable service to the poor"
The reason Corporatism and Cronyism exist is because we are not allowed to determine a person's worth or criticize their actions, and yet, these Milton Friedman worshippers would claim that it's the "market" determining shyt. Later, they will contradict themselves and go on about "individual freedoms" blahblahblah
The reason Corporatism and Cronyism exist is because we are not allowed to determine a person's worth or criticize their actions, and yet, these Milton Friedman worshippers would claim that it's the "market" determining shyt. Later, they will contradict themselves and go on about "individual freedoms" blahblahblah
Last edited:
JMurder
SOHH Member since 01...
I think you might be trolling breh
More over, it isn't a zero sum game.
There isn't some fixed pie that requires taking from others to get more from yourself. <--- This thinking is the root of over 80% of all economic misunderstandings.
Buddy really said "Walmart provides a desirable service to the poor"
The reason Corporatism and Cronyism exist is because we are not allowed to determine a person's worth or criticize their actions, and yet, these Milton Friedman worshippers would claim that it's the "market" determining shyt. Later, they will contradict themselves and go on about "individual freedoms" blahblahblah
Can you explain how they don't?
Can you explain how they don't?
Google Walmart and sweatshop
The poor service the poor at the expense of Walmart. There is no other way around that. Ayn Rand fetishization is beyond hilarious.
The case against sweatshops is an emotional one without logic. Not really worth debating.
"The poor service the poor"
Let's pretend that is true. How is wal-mart 1)harming the poor and 2) making society worse off?