Just do away with the Minimum wage already, how else will we be able to compete with China and India at 25 cents an hr?
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Well... I've a solution.. To level the field so to speak.. You simply impute an entry factor equal to the variance between our wage structure and that paid by the exporting nation on the estimated person hours needed to produce the product at 100% productivity. It would encourage the exporting nation to speed up their standard of living criteria. If we made the product or would using minimum wage factors or a mix or rates we simply take the standard direct labor for the product.. Simple.... then we go back to having full employment here while they eat their rice or what ever.. We've plenty of competition here..
Demand Siders want money in the hands of our people not their people..
Awwww Walmart made Christmas Sad for all other Toy Retailers:
1-3-2004 Sad Holiday Season For Toy Stores, Blame Walmart
Toy sales at toy stores, which would include Toys R Us, slipped 7.7 percent, compared with last year
The toy sales figures do not include toys sold by discount stores..."It was a disappointing season for the toy business," said Jim Silver, publisher of Toy Wishes magazine. "It could have been a lot better, but the pricing of toys at cost or below cost created havoc and destroyed profit margins."
Discount retailers have increasingly dominated toy selling. Wal-Mart Stores, the world's largest company, is the No. 1 toy seller. Wal-Mart kicked off the holiday season by slashing prices on toys.
"Wal-Mart's pricing strategy created deflation in toy prices, killing profit margins for other retailers," Silver said.
1-3-2004 Sad Holiday Season For Toy Stores, Blame Walmart
Toy sales at toy stores, which would include Toys R Us, slipped 7.7 percent, compared with last year
The toy sales figures do not include toys sold by discount stores..."It was a disappointing season for the toy business," said Jim Silver, publisher of Toy Wishes magazine. "It could have been a lot better, but the pricing of toys at cost or below cost created havoc and destroyed profit margins."
Discount retailers have increasingly dominated toy selling. Wal-Mart Stores, the world's largest company, is the No. 1 toy seller. Wal-Mart kicked off the holiday season by slashing prices on toys.
"Wal-Mart's pricing strategy created deflation in toy prices, killing profit margins for other retailers," Silver said.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
No, the point isn't to compete with China and India and their wages
And to your most recent post - Ever think that the other stores toys were overpriced or too expensive? A toy is a toy - no? Is walmart supposed to artificially keep their prices on toys high just so other toy stores can keep theirs high too? I fail to see why it's walmarts responsibility to keep their competitors in business. Also - if Walmart didn't discount their toys - wouldn't you be in here bitching about all the profit Walmart was making off of their toy sales?
CkG
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
No, the point isn't to compete with China and India and their wages
And to your most recent post - Ever think that the other stores toys were overpriced or too expensive? A toy is a toy - no? Is walmart supposed to artificially keep their prices on toys high just so other toy stores can keep theirs high too? I fail to see why it's walmarts responsibility to keep their competitors in business. Also - if Walmart didn't discount their toys - wouldn't you be in here bitching about all the profit Walmart was making off of their toy sales?
CkG
Walmart is suppose to maximize profits.. Why not? It is what we all do... create wealth. The issue is the absence of protective legislation, in fact, the creation of anti protection legislation. We all know WE can't compete with China's labor structure but, we don't enact law to protect OUR industry from the reality of World Economies. We actually encourage it. The only way the US can compete is to reduce our labor structure to the competition... which is in China and elsewhere..
edit: I should add; to do so will result in the top 65% of income tax filers paying 99% of the tax burden.. or the debt will climb out of sight. I would expect the median income to drop to maybe 23k$ a year from 28K$ if we were a mind to compete against China.. a myriad of problems live in that change..
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
No, the point isn't to compete with China and India and their wages
And to your most recent post - Ever think that the other stores toys were overpriced or too expensive? A toy is a toy - no? Is walmart supposed to artificially keep their prices on toys high just so other toy stores can keep theirs high too? I fail to see why it's walmarts responsibility to keep their competitors in business. Also - if Walmart didn't discount their toys - wouldn't you be in here bitching about all the profit Walmart was making off of their toy sales?
CkG
Walmart is suppose to maximize profits.. Why not? It is what we all do... create wealth. The issue is the absence of protective legislation, in fact, the creation of anti protection legislation. We all know WE can't compete with China's labor structure but, we don't enact law to protect OUR industry from the reality of World Economies. We actually encourage it. The only way the US can compete is to reduce our labor structure to the competition... which is in China and elsewhere..
Why do we want/need to "compete" on low end manufacturing jobs? We as an industrialized nation have shifted to a technologically advanced way of manufacturing goods and thus are less dependant on unskilled laborers. Why do we need to compete for more of those jobs? Why not focus on upward mobility instead of focusing on low end labor? Why lower our standards to "compete"? Shouldn't we focus on how to create the things we need cheaply and if we can't then find someone who can/will? Why prop up something that will keep us reliant on unskilled labor so the unskilled come here for opportunity? This discussion is quite similar to the Reich article thread. I don't think we need to focus on low end labor - I think we need to keep looking forward and upward so we aren't left behind like we once were after we rebuilt Japan who then left us in the dust technologically. Focusing on unskilled labor and trying to grow it here(competing with "them") is doomed to shackle us as a nation - especially with the growing pains of globalization.
I (and my company) work daily on trying to put unskilled people out of work...but in turn we are putting skilled people to work and providing greater efficiency and mobility for our clients. But hey - if people want to go back to the days of manually stamping/filling boxes, husking corn, mixing/measuring ingredients, or manually tracking/controlling batches and product - so be it - just don't count me in on those jobs even if they paid as well as what I am currently paid(not that I am paid well
).CkG
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
CAD,
Reich sees the NAFTA as Clinton did.. I just disagree.. I just see the economy as a means to an end.. I agree you've valid points so it boils down to the basic philosophical difference in our thinking. At Harvard Reich thought a bit differently than at Brandies.. I see the means to an end to be considerate for the taxpaying half of the folks. I want those low paying jobs as incremental to where you want to go. I want them folks working to their capabilities.. if they can't earn Ph.D's or MBA's or MSEE's etc.. I'd like to see them in factories holding their heads high knowing they too work at being a citizen.. may not pay tax but, don't need the dole either..
Three points: First, you are correct for the long run objective. I couldn't agree more. But, secondly, there is a transititon period for this and we've not seen the demand for nor the supply of (either side of the economic spectrum) the economic alternative to the China production. We've bought from them for good reason.. no argument from me. The techno stuff is my main gripe, I suppose and not the toys. The $500 monitor and stuff and things computer. We too have robotics to make this stuff but we still procure from elsewhere... even stuff with low DL hour input.. This is the stuff we should be good at making and did back when. Thirdly, We must always remember to accomodate the spectrum of intellect resident in this nation. Provide jobs for the less mentally advantaged. Not welfare..
Reich sees the NAFTA as Clinton did.. I just disagree.. I just see the economy as a means to an end.. I agree you've valid points so it boils down to the basic philosophical difference in our thinking. At Harvard Reich thought a bit differently than at Brandies.. I see the means to an end to be considerate for the taxpaying half of the folks. I want those low paying jobs as incremental to where you want to go. I want them folks working to their capabilities.. if they can't earn Ph.D's or MBA's or MSEE's etc.. I'd like to see them in factories holding their heads high knowing they too work at being a citizen.. may not pay tax but, don't need the dole either..
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Well, I think there is a balance to be struck for sure and I don't and won't advocate getting rid of all unskilled manufacturing if that's what you think I'm saying. My main beef is with the line of thinking that - "we need to FOCUS on keeping and creating more of these jobs". Focusing on that IMO would infact distract us from loftier goals. We could infact focus on and "create" more unskilled manufactuing jobs - but the question of "why" needs to be answered first? Why do we need more unskilled jobs? Just so people have a job? Or should we focus on "better" jobs for our people so they don't limit themselves to just a job.
Yeah - it's a perspective thing - I am of the clan that thinks we should focus on striving to better our selves as a nation and individually - not just be, so as to live. Will there always be a need for unskilled labor/manufacturing here? Sure - but again that shouldn't be our focus and we shouldn't strive to create more of it.
All IMO ofcourse
CkG
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
CAD,
But, of course.. One vote and our opinion... for better or worse, there it is! (I hope no one gets up set that I misspelled Brandeis.. besides Reich is short sighted now but not earlier in his School of Government diatribes at Harvard)
Well... I will simply argue that we should have as many of 'those' kind of jobs as the labor force demands. And, as many 'skilled' jobs as that sector of the labor force demands, and etc.. You see.. I want a job for every American who wants one not for only every American who can meet the higher criteria to survive in the technological transition.. In time, CAD, the next generation will be taught and grow up in the environment that expects your kind of approach.. but, for the next 40 or so years.. cut them some slack.. not every one has the requisite qualifications to function at the level your philosophy dictates.. but, again you pay the tax that pays the welfare so it's your call..
But, of course.. One vote and our opinion... for better or worse, there it is!
(I hope no one gets up set that I misspelled Brandeis.. besides Reich is short sighted now but not earlier in his School of Government diatribes at Harvard) Well... I will simply argue that we should have as many of 'those' kind of jobs as the labor force demands. And, as many 'skilled' jobs as that sector of the labor force demands, and etc.. You see.. I want a job for every American who wants one not for only every American who can meet the higher criteria to survive in the technological transition.. In time, CAD, the next generation will be taught and grow up in the environment that expects your kind of approach.. but, for the next 40 or so years.. cut them some slack.. not every one has the requisite qualifications to function at the level your philosophy dictates.. but, again you pay the tax that pays the welfare so it's your call..
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: LunarRay
CAD,
But, of course.. One vote and our opinion... for better or worse, there it is!
Well... I will simply argue that we should have as many of 'those' kind of jobs as the labor force demands. And, as many 'skilled' jobs as that sector of the labor force demands, and etc.. You see.. I want a job for every American who wants one not for only every American who can meet the higher criteria to survive in the technological transition.. In time, CAD, the next generation will be taught and grow up in the environment that expects your kind of approach.. but, for the next 40 or so years.. cut them some slack.. not every one has the requisite qualifications to function at the level your philosophy dictates.. but, again you pay the tax that pays the welfare so it's your call..
That's a nice try Luny but "my kind of approach" is infact a transitional one. I'm not saying we need to dump all unskilled manufacturing - I'm just saying that it shouldn't be our focus. If we focus on it because of some percieved short-term ill - it'll only prove to be limiting in the future and won't aid in the transition to that "better" level. Creating more of "those" jobs seems to say - certain people "can't" or "aren't smart enough" or whatever. I say BS - we are smart enough and CAN learn - (granted there will always be a portion who really truly "can't") it's just that we are too stubborn to change, learn, and adapt. Creating more unskilled manufacturing jobs in the US won't make us a stronger or better nation.
CkG
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
CAD,
Well... there appears to be enough folks who share your view and they are in control - for the moment.. So it will be as you opine - for the moment.. The downside could reach out an grab lots of the 'secure' folks if the demand for the 'secure' folks becomes moot. There are quite a few Archie Bunkers out there who are very right leaning but, rely on the shipping dock for their security... take that or put it in jeopardy and they will roost on the bench of the left and then the pendulum swings again. Folks is funny that way... hit them in the pocket book and they will swing their purse with a force seen a few times this past century. I really think we are ready for an American lock down.. not quite there but the folks who are hurting are the less advantaged. They care less about the national debt and probably don't know who owes or holds it.. but, they do know their reality. If they are outta work and you tell them to go to school you might limp back to the idealistic tower from whence you came... as they might see it. Remember the tax is paid by the top 50% of tax return filers... it is your $ that foots the bill.. try to eliminate the programs that they rely on - which must happen to avoid a more massive debt and you'll have a revolt to the left that will eliminate the ability to reasonably implement the prudent actions you advocate.
Well... there appears to be enough folks who share your view and they are in control - for the moment.. So it will be as you opine - for the moment..
The downside could reach out an grab lots of the 'secure' folks if the demand for the 'secure' folks becomes moot. There are quite a few Archie Bunkers out there who are very right leaning but, rely on the shipping dock for their security... take that or put it in jeopardy and they will roost on the bench of the left and then the pendulum swings again. Folks is funny that way... hit them in the pocket book and they will swing their purse with a force seen a few times this past century. I really think we are ready for an American lock down.. not quite there but the folks who are hurting are the less advantaged. They care less about the national debt and probably don't know who owes or holds it.. but, they do know their reality. If they are outta work and you tell them to go to school you might limp back to the idealistic tower from whence you came... as they might see it. Remember the tax is paid by the top 50% of tax return filers... it is your $ that foots the bill.. try to eliminate the programs that they rely on - which must happen to avoid a more massive debt and you'll have a revolt to the left that will eliminate the ability to reasonably implement the prudent actions you advocate.Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
No, the point isn't to compete with China and India and their wages
And to your most recent post - Ever think that the other stores toys were overpriced or too expensive? A toy is a toy - no? Is walmart supposed to artificially keep their prices on toys high just so other toy stores can keep theirs high too? I fail to see why it's walmarts responsibility to keep their competitors in business. Also - if Walmart didn't discount their toys - wouldn't you be in here bitching about all the profit Walmart was making off of their toy sales?
CkG
What's more, discounters use toys as a loss leader, selling them at rock-bottom prices, and making up the profit on sales of other items.
"Wal-Mart's pricing strategy created deflation in toy prices, killing profit margins for other retailers," Silver said.
------------------------------------------
"were overpriced or too expensive?" Yep, that sure looks like overpriced and too expensive to me, of course, what was I thinking, I'm sorry. I forgot, it's the New American Dream according to CAD & Walmart, it used to be called "Unfair Business Practices" but is now the great American Way.
Edit: Excellent discussion of the race to Manufacturer to the bottom and sell at Walmart at Slashdot:
The Hidden Costs of Bargain Electronics
LOL.. where do you live?
Where I live tons of people get paid minimum wage. All the people at every fast-food store, pharmacy, depanneur, grocery store, etc... add all those people up and you're talking hundreds of thousands of people that are making minimum wage. Don't forget the waiters etc.. that make less than minimum wage.Originally posted by: Ultima
LOL.. where do you live?
Many jobs start at minimum wage, but in a rather short period of time they are given a raise, thus raising them over the minimum.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Originally posted by: dirtboy
Originally posted by: Ultima
LOL.. where do you live?
Many jobs start at minimum wage, but in a rather short period of time they are given a raise, thus raising them over the minimum.
Some perhaps but certainly not many. But, IF what you say is true, then again, I'd say minimum wage is a non issue.
Originally posted by: dirtboy
Originally posted by: Ultima
LOL.. where do you live?
Many jobs start at minimum wage, but in a rather short period of time they are given a raise, thus raising them over the minimum.
Yeah.. raises of like 10-15 cents an hour after 6 months
Originally posted by: Ultima
Originally posted by: dirtboy
Originally posted by: Ultima
LOL.. where do you live?
Many jobs start at minimum wage, but in a rather short period of time they are given a raise, thus raising them over the minimum.
Yeah.. raises of like 10-15 cents an hour after 6 months
Only takes .1 to be the highest wages ever.
Yeah.. raises of like 10-15 cents an hour after 6 months
[/quote]Exactly my point. So they aren't making minimum wage, they are making more.
Since you are so familiar with BIG wages and BIG raises, why don't you help us all understand this issue Dave.
Why don't you chronical your salary history from the very first job you ever had until now. I want to see the BIG RAISES you got year after year. I want to see your BIG salary that everyone else should be getting. Please be sure to include any milestones, like earning a college degree or something like that.
Given the BIG WAGES you say everyone should be earning and the BIG RAISES they should get every month or year, I would imagine you were making a few hundred thousand a year at your last job and must be well over a half a million a year now.
Please enlighten me.
I'm only echoing your buddy CAD & Co's echoing of the Govt Reports and Economists stating that there are more jobs than ever before, that Bush has created more jobs than lost under his Administration and that wages are the highest ever by a penny. Guess you haven't been paying attention again, I have been unemployed since Aug 2001 but I'm sure the Govt reports count me as working
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Which is largely irrelevant to the effect of raising the minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage broadly affects on people earning near-minimum wage salaries. This is because as the minimum wage increases, employers increase the salaries of other low-wage employees as well. Economists on both sides of the issue agree on this; the analysis standard is those employees earning up to one dollar per hour ($1.00/hour) more than the new minimum wage. As one gets beyond $1/hour more, the effect dwindles.Originally posted by: dirtboy
Exactly my point. So they aren't making minimum wage, they are making more.Originally posted by: Ultima
Yeah.. raises of like 10-15 cents an hour after 6 months
An increase in minimum wage affects far more employees than those earning exactly minimum wage.
Looks like you just want to drag people down and make people poorer. If someone is earning above minimum wage and you raise the minimum to the amount they are making, they have essentially, due to the inflation of prices from a wage increase, become poorer.
I have now seen the light! Let's raise the minimum wage so more people can be poor! This *must* be the new American dream. Minimum wage for all!!!!
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Perhaps you should read what I said a little more closely: "as the minimum wage increases, employers increase the salaries of other low-wage employees as well. Economists on both sides of the issue agree on this; the analysis standard is those employees earning up to one dollar per hour ($1.00/hour) more than the new minimum wage. As one gets beyond $1/hour more, the effect dwindles."
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter