Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Minimum Wage Solution

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 9:24:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I say raise the minimum wage to a billion dollars an hour! Every family works one hour in their entire life and is rich. Bam! Take that free market witch doctors!
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 9:42:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
ignoring every other problem with this solution, if I was rich, I'd never work again, and so no-one would ever work again, and so no-one would want to be my servants or prostitutes...
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 2:40:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 9:51:51 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Is this supposed to be an argument against the minimum wage?

It's definitely not an argument for it!
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 12:15:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 9:51:51 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Is this supposed to be an argument against the minimum wage?

No. It appears to be an argument against the idea that you can magically bypass market forces by government edict. In the case of the minimum wage, by having one at all (let alone raising it) you're essentially putting out of work anyone who's labor is worth less then the minimum wage to an employer. This in effect hurts those who need their jobs the most, unskilled workers who are already getting paid shat. To relate this to the OP then, he's pointing out that you can't just ignore these forces, otherwise you'd be able to set a minimum wage at 1 billion dollars and we'd all be rich.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).

But I totally agree that it should be a billion of something. Can we make high-fives legal tender?
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 1:43:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).
All this can logically mean is that the "positive" effects are just as null because they set it too low to alter the market much.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 1:59:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The thing that people in favor of raising minimum wage don't understand is that raising minimum wage raises cost of living.

It's a viscous cycle in which hourly wage workers will always be left at the bottom of. That'll never change.

All they do is cause unemployment and inflation by raising minimum wage.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 2:30:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 12:15:33 AM, socialpinko wrote:
No. It appears to be an argument against the idea that you can magically bypass market forces by government edict. In the case of the minimum wage, by having one at all (let alone raising it) you're essentially putting out of work anyone who's labor is worth less then the minimum wage to an employer.

Assumes complete elasticity of demand for work, which is false. Though, it's presumably true that the minimum wage increases unemployment to some degree. The empirical studies on the issue are mixed though. The UK's OBR investigated the effects of the minimum wage on unemployment a while ago and found that it had little measurable effect.

This in effect hurts those who need their jobs the most, unskilled workers who are already getting paid shat. To relate this to the OP then, he's pointing out that you can't just ignore these forces, otherwise you'd be able to set a minimum wage at 1 billion dollars and we'd all be rich.

They only 'need' the jobs if there's no welfare state or charities to help them out. I don't know what evidence you have that advocates of the minimum wage ignore market forces. Economists seem split down the middle about whether the minimum wage is desirable.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 2:54:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 2:30:46 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 7/21/2012 12:15:33 AM, socialpinko wrote:
No. It appears to be an argument against the idea that you can magically bypass market forces by government edict. In the case of the minimum wage, by having one at all (let alone raising it) you're essentially putting out of work anyone who's labor is worth less then the minimum wage to an employer.

Assumes complete elasticity of demand for work, which is false. Though, it's presumably true that the minimum wage increases unemployment to some degree. The empirical studies on the issue are mixed though. The UK's OBR investigated the effects of the minimum wage on unemployment a while ago and found that it had little measurable effect.

This in effect hurts those who need their jobs the most, unskilled workers who are already getting paid shat. To relate this to the OP then, he's pointing out that you can't just ignore these forces, otherwise you'd be able to set a minimum wage at 1 billion dollars and we'd all be rich.

They only 'need' the jobs if there's no welfare state or charities to help them out. I don't know what evidence you have that advocates of the minimum wage ignore market forces. Economists seem split down the middle about whether the minimum wage is desirable.

Well they only 'need' the high wages if there's no welfare state or charity to help them out.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 2:56:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 1:43:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).
All this can logically mean is that the "positive" effects are just as null because they set it too low to alter the market much.

Only if you assume that the goals of the minimum wage, ie: a livable wage, by definition effect the market much. It's sort of circular to assume that, "The market hasn't taken a hit, the minimum wage must not be working."
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 2:57:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 1:59:21 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
The thing that people in favor of raising minimum wage don't understand is that raising minimum wage raises cost of living.

It's a viscous cycle in which hourly wage workers will always be left at the bottom of. That'll never change.

It doesn't raise the cost of living rate more than the wage rate though (unless employers raise their wages by an equal rate, and in which case, everything balances out).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 3:10:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 2:54:13 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Well they only 'need' the high wages if there's no welfare state or charity to help them out.

I guess, if there's a basic income that the government guarantees and will make up the difference if you have a very low paying job.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 4:46:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 2:30:46 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 7/21/2012 12:15:33 AM, socialpinko wrote:
No. It appears to be an argument against the idea that you can magically bypass market forces by government edict. In the case of the minimum wage, by having one at all (let alone raising it) you're essentially putting out of work anyone who's labor is worth less then the minimum wage to an employer.

Assumes complete elasticity of demand for work, which is false. Though, it's presumably true that the minimum wage increases unemployment to some degree. The empirical studies on the issue are mixed though. The UK's OBR investigated the effects of the minimum wage on unemployment a while ago and found that it had little measurable effect.

It's true that the effects I described are existent in proportion to elasticity of demand for work. But what jobs are generally the most elastic? It's not the types of jobs that are already paid well like CEO's and other highly skilled workers, it's the types of jobs and workers where the minimum wage is supposed to effect i.e. low skilled workers already facing low pay. The reason for the low pay is specifically owing to the elasticity in demand for their labor. There's no shortage of burger flippers so employers can afford to pay a shatty wage. So yes your first point is correct, but you're ignoring the fact that it's specifically low skilled workers that have the most elasticity in demand.

This in effect hurts those who need their jobs the most, unskilled workers who are already getting paid shat. To relate this to the OP then, he's pointing out that you can't just ignore these forces, otherwise you'd be able to set a minimum wage at 1 billion dollars and we'd all be rich.

They only 'need' the jobs if there's no welfare state or charities to help them out. I don't know what evidence you have that advocates of the minimum wage ignore market forces. Economists seem split down the middle about whether the minimum wage is desirable.

To me, putting low skilled workers out of work and then "fixing" the solution via welfare is counter-productive since there's no reason to put the aforementioned workers out of work in the first place.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 5:10:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 3:10:07 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 7/21/2012 2:54:13 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Well they only 'need' the high wages if there's no welfare state or charity to help them out.

I guess, if there's a basic income that the government guarantees and will make up the difference if you have a very low paying job.

Doesn't make sense to have an *if* clause because then because there would be no reason to want a high paying salary, if you can get the same wage for doing less.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 5:33:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 2:56:27 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/21/2012 1:43:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).
All this can logically mean is that the "positive" effects are just as null because they set it too low to alter the market much.

Only if you assume that the goals of the minimum wage, ie: a livable wage, by definition effect the market much. It's sort of circular to assume that, "The market hasn't taken a hit, the minimum wage must not be working."

It's not circular, though it is indeed an assumption of the argument.

Or rather, supply and demand are assumptions of the argument.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 6:19:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 5:33:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 2:56:27 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/21/2012 1:43:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).
All this can logically mean is that the "positive" effects are just as null because they set it too low to alter the market much.

Only if you assume that the goals of the minimum wage, ie: a livable wage, by definition effect the market much. It's sort of circular to assume that, "The market hasn't taken a hit, the minimum wage must not be working."

It's not circular, though it is indeed an assumption of the argument.

Or rather, supply and demand are assumptions of the argument.

It is circular, because the minimum wage being bad for the market has become definitionally true for the minimum wage, which is why, presumably, you said, "All this can logically mean ...", ie: the only logical possibility was that the minimum wage wasn't working properly, because if it was it would be bad. Whereas, a logical alternative would be that the theory is wrong.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2012 1:13:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 6:19:29 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/21/2012 5:33:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 2:56:27 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/21/2012 1:43:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).
All this can logically mean is that the "positive" effects are just as null because they set it too low to alter the market much.

Only if you assume that the goals of the minimum wage, ie: a livable wage, by definition effect the market much. It's sort of circular to assume that, "The market hasn't taken a hit, the minimum wage must not be working."

It's not circular, though it is indeed an assumption of the argument.

Or rather, supply and demand are assumptions of the argument.

It is circular, because the minimum wage being bad for the market has become definitionally true for the minimum wage
It's derivable from the definition and from supply and demand.

Whereas, a logical alternative would be that the theory is wrong.
Under no assumptions I know of do employers leave wages out of hiring decisions.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2012 5:30:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/23/2012 1:13:17 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 6:19:29 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/21/2012 5:33:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 2:56:27 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/21/2012 1:43:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:41:07 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
The problem with the minimum wage is, in theory it makes people unemployed, but the evidence is conflicted (as in, it's effects might be more limited than is intuitive).
All this can logically mean is that the "positive" effects are just as null because they set it too low to alter the market much.

Only if you assume that the goals of the minimum wage, ie: a livable wage, by definition effect the market much. It's sort of circular to assume that, "The market hasn't taken a hit, the minimum wage must not be working."

It's not circular, though it is indeed an assumption of the argument.

Or rather, supply and demand are assumptions of the argument.

It is circular, because the minimum wage being bad for the market has become definitionally true for the minimum wage
It's derivable from the definition and from supply and demand.


It's circular to assume that the minimum wage must not be working if it hasn't negatively effected the market in a significant way. It doesn't necessarily follow from the minimum wage being bad for the market that it's bad for the market in proportion to the degree that it helps those on a low wage. Even if it were $ for $ true that the low-wageds' gain was the markets' loss, you could theoretically have a small island community composed of the wealthy (due to location) that only had three people on the minimum wage - they might be adequately provided for via the MW, but the island's market might take a negligible hit because of it.

Whereas, a logical alternative would be that the theory is wrong.
Under no assumptions I know of do employers leave wages out of hiring decisions.

I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that being so definitive was mistaken. Also, the discussion seems to be over the extent to which it has an effect, which is arguable.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2012 7:47:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 9:24:46 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
I say raise the minimum wage to a billion dollars an hour! Every family works one hour in their entire life and is rich. Bam! Take that free market witch doctors!

Your thought was thought of 30 years ago. Except in a more educated and intellectually concise way.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2012 8:59:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/24/2012 7:47:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 7/20/2012 9:24:46 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
I say raise the minimum wage to a billion dollars an hour! Every family works one hour in their entire life and is rich. Bam! Take that free market witch doctors!

Your thought was thought of 30 years ago. Except in a more educated and intellectually concise way.

'Twas a joke, cretin. socialpinko hit it right on the money.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2012 9:17:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 9:24:46 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
I say raise the minimum wage to a billion dollars an hour! Every family works one hour in their entire life and is rich. Bam! Take that free market witch doctors!

If I wasn't sure you weren't being serious...

For some reason there are people in the world who seem to believe that if only we regulate the income people make that somehow living standards will be raised (as if somehow raising the price of labor will not impact the cost to the business that employs minimum wage workers). What nonsense!

There should be NO minimum wage. There is ALWAYS an option NOT to work if the wage is unacceptable. Because that is the case, there is NO reason to fvck the rest of the economy up because of some beading heart fantasy that everyone will enjoy a "living wage."
Tsar of DDO