Yeah, that's what they are asking for ... they call it social justice. I've been debating others elsewhere and when I pointed that out, they said, well they need to pay nurses more then.
I'm trying to explain that if you give everyone a 200% raise, that just means the cost of labor attributed to whatever good or service they provide will go up by a proportionate amount and we have this thing called inflation. Do that across teh economy and no one gets ahead.
If I get a 20k raise this year, but I end up paying 20k more for all the goods and services I purchase over the course of a year, because the cost of labor has gone up 20k for all those goods and services, I haven't really gotten a raise.
The only way for you to come out as a winner on such a scheme is for you and folks in your profession to get the 200% raise and for no one else or very limited other folks in other professions to get that raise.
In such a situation, while the person getting the raise might be better off, everyone else who doesn't get that 200% raise is worse off, because they will have to pay more when they buy whatever goods or services made or provided by the folks who actually received the 200% raise! Also, if a lot of folks decide that these goods and services now cost too much and no longer purchase them because the cost has gone up because the labor cost has gone up, you could wind up out of a job rather than with a 200% raise
Wait a minute, Wilbur- it sounds like he's really defending the multi-million dollar bonuses that CEO's get. Like somebody has to get rewarded for the good year the company is having and it has to be the CEO because, if you take $8 million and divvy it up among the help, financial chaos ensues because of inflation. You actually wind hurting more people by giving them more money because the prices for goods and services go up. The 200% raise can't keep pace with inflation. Giving a several million dollar bonus to one person or several CEO's, however, means only a few CEO's suffer the raise in pay and prices don't go up as much.
Well, fuck me but, that's the dumbest thing this guy has said since he explained that business hires only when their tax liability is low. Evidently the law of supply and demand had been repealed when he argued that.
Today, thousands of fast food workers in about 58 cities from coast to coast are striking, in protest of their low wages. The minimum wage is $7.25 and the fast food average is $8.94 an hour. Folks may argue that fast food is geared towards a teenage labor force but, those folks might still be supporting the Vietnam war and Richard Nixon too. The reality is that most fast food employees are over 20 and 30% have some college. They didn't go to college to work in fast food but...there they are. People are trying to support their families in fast food, not saving for prom.
I know that figures lie and liars figure but, I also know that when I was making the then minimum wage of $2 an hour when Nixon was president and the Vietnam War was going on, it was pretty decent money. You can't add decades and only $5.25 to that and expect that it's the normal course of things. Some financial experts think the minimum should (adjusted for inflation) be $21 an hour. The fast fooders are only asking $15. It seems like they're offering a bargain- off the dollar menu of sorts.
Interesting as well is that the same folks who are so dead set against raising the minimum wage also happen to be against the fact that there is a minimum wage at all! Forget raising it. They want to eliminate it.
Curiously, like our educated friend above, these folks argue that paying less would actually be better for everyone! I don't get how that works. You have to have a college education to fathom such economic theories. Ask your counterman tomorrow or maybe the fry guy. Odds are they will know.
5 comments:
Excellent post, Ferrerman. You brought out the travesty of this argument over the minimum wage and the fact that, in reality, this is about social change.
Quotable is "People are trying to support their families in fast food, not saving for prom."
The necessity to increase the minimum wage for fast food workers, or any minimum wage worker, has long been a festering boil and now it's at a head. And even $15 is not enough, depending on where you live, but it is a healthy start.
What disappoints me is the very people fighting this, whether in public or private, are the same who are outraged because we have too many social programs.
Well, gee, the law of supply and demand is applied here, too, is it not? Give our workers an opportunity to support themselves so they don’t need food stamps, housing vouchers, and free medical care.
What's this about nurses needing more pay? Really? What we need are more nursing schools in our own country. Our high school and junior college grads are on waiting lists to get into the few nursing schools we have! It's shameful. Meanwhile, they're working at McDonald's.
It's not a job if you still qualify for food stamps. We as a nation of taxpayers are subsidizing corporate ventures. Walmart refuses to enter the Washington DC market because they require a wage of $12 an hour. Walmart has no stores in Australia because their minimum is $15 an hour. I think it's the thought that counts with Wally World rather than economic numbers crunching. They just don't want this catching on.
I don't know what dude was talking about with nurses. Probably something dirty.
My opinion is that if a company can't pay a living wage to it's employees, it shouldn't be allowed to trade. It is unfair competition to a rival company who would be willing to treat it's employees decently.
I can't believe that tax payers would allow their government to subsidize a multinational company in this way while criticising the workers who want the dignity of a fair wage.
IrishAnon.
True. It's absurdly comical that they can't make the connection between a too-low minimum wage, and welfare. Walmart is America's largest employer and 30% of their workers qualify for food stamps. That is obscene. We are, indeed, subsidizing HUGE corporations who can afford to pay their employees more and STILL reap billions in profits. No wonder Walmart won't operate in Australia! No corporate welfare AND a living wage! They recently refused to open in Washington DC because DC's wage is $12.
They can pay a living wage but, sadly, they refuse to. And they have the backing of a major political to screw Americans.
In Florida, the voters approved a petition that provided for an increase in the minimum wage whenever the CPI rose annually. That gives us a higher than federally mandated minimum wage. I voted for it.
Post a Comment