will removing minimum wage accelerate job growth?

[nobodyknows]

Sure, not having a minimum wage might lead to job growth. But what kind of growth? Third world poverty wage job growth? Is that what we really want?

America can have all of its jobs back. We can have all of our manufacturing, engineering, IT, accounting, computer programming, legal-related, animation, and science-related jobs back--just as soon as Americans are willing to work for third world wages and third world conditions (no labor laws, no environmental regulations). We can have our jobs back if we agree to live the way people live in India and China.

Global Labor Arbitrage -- Are you ready to join the third world?

Are you speaking to me?

Hell, the backwater, agricultural based rural state I live in has been like living in a 3rd world country scenario ever since Reagan was elected. We consistently rank in the bottom 5 for per capita income yet rank in the top five for the humber of households with 2 wage earners. So even with more people working then most places we still have some of the lowest per capita income. Figure that one out??

HELL NO I'm not supporting moving jobs out of the country and never have. I was even dead set against NAFTA and am pissed of at all the illegal immigrants that think they can just move in like a bunch of squatters.

 

[nobodyknows]

So if you found your paycheck cut in half, that would be good with you?

Now that's commitment!

Half of nothing is still nothing.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Half of nothing is still nothing.

So you are unemployed. How do you pay your bills?

 

[nobodyknows]

So you are unemployed. How do you pay your bills?

I lie, cheat, and steal. Just like the other REPUBLICANS.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I lie, cheat, and steal. Just like the other REPUBLICANS.

I may not agree with many of your views, but I admire a sense of humor

 

[nobodyknows]

I may not agree with many of your views, but I admire a sense of humor

I've always beleived that laughter is the best medicine. Without my sense of humor I probably would have went postal long ago. Still might, who knows? Nobodyknows.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Entry level pay should be unregulated. These jobs are meant to be a learning experience and a place to show what you've got. I'm not going to release my treasure to you until I can trust your integrity and reliability. If I have to pay you top wages to discover your qualifications, I'm not interested.

What if the free market dictates that you need to pay people in order for them to want to work for you and in order for you to find those people of "integrity and reliability" that you want? What if our nation had a healthy economy and thus did not have a huge oversupply of labor? What if not hiring someone meant that you could not produce the goods or services to sell to other people in order to make a profit?

I'll ship that work overseas.

Suppose that foreign outsourcing, H-1B and L-1 visas, and mass immigration were made illegal in order to prevent the disastrous effects of Global Labor Arbitrage and that an insulated American Free Market were created? If you want to do business in the United States then you must produce the good or service in the United States. Then what? Would you have a John Galt-like hissy-fit and just disappear to a valley in Colorado?

No adult with responsibilities should still be looking at minimum wage jobs. They should be well beyond that. If they have not been diligent and put a lot into the work, they will end up living under the bridge.

Adults want to work better jobs, but if those jobs don't exist in sufficient quantity then the minimum wage or working for poverty wages becomes the only options. Our nation is filled with people who have advanced degrees and professional degrees who cannot find jobs in their fields and it's filled with unemployed and under-employed college-educated people. It's sad, but that's how it is right now--you don't always benefit from your meritorious actions--sometimes jobs that allow you to achieve to the best of your ability just don't exist in sufficient quantity for people to be able to do that.

I read your posts and you strike me as being a free market dogmatist with high-brow ideals such as the non-initiation of physical force principle and the insane notion that conflicts of interest do not exist among rational men who has little understanding of how the real world works.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Why do you think so many jobs are leaving the country?
(Hint: Its not because the job magically pays more when they raise the minimum wage)

Because barriers to moving goods and services from one part of the world to another part of the world have decreased and the world has a tremendous oversupply of labor relative to capital? In other words, jobs are leaving the U.S. simply because the world is full of poor people who are willing to work those jobs for third world poverty-wages and without labor regulations and environmental protections. This is called Global Labor Arbitrage or "The Race to the Bottom".

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I want the government out of everything possible. W need the fed to stop mandating employers on everything. If I want to employ someone for $2 an hour, offer no health care, work them for 80 hours a week, that should be my choice as long as the employee is not forced to take the job and knows before he starts that those are the terms then the fed should stay out of it.

Why people are willing to accept the 'you don't know any better, so we will make choices for you' mindset makes me think they never understood the concept of freedom.

You want real laissez-faire capitalism? That means no tariffs, no import restrictions, no immigration restrictions and a merger of the United States population with the billions of impoverished people in the world. Are you ready to watch the United States become an overpopulated, impoverished third world country?

Will you feel the same way when your family is kidnapped and held for ransom or when they are killed in a mugging? Are you ready to move into a walled enclave for the wealthy and hire security guards (who, being from the lower classes, may or may not hold you in contempt)?

 

[blackangst1]

Because barriers to moving goods and services from one part of the world to another part of the world have decreased and the world has a tremendous oversupply of labor relative to capital? In other words, jobs are leaving the U.S. simply because the world is full of poor people who are willing to work those jobs for third world poverty-wages and without labor regulations and environmental protections. This is called Global Labor Arbitrage or "The Race to the Bottom".

I agree with your statement except for the last sentence. Countries that are taking on these jobs have seen a substantial increase in their standard of living in the last 20 years. 4 countries with which I have personal experience, Philippines, Argentina, Thailand, and Vietnam, have changed DRASTICALLY in the last 20 years. For sure the last 15 that I have been travelling there. And much of it is US based worldwide companies (not all though. Europe exports jobs also). So to say its a race to the bottom is wrong when so many people's lives have improved because of these jobs. Incorrectly, people have this misconception that labor overseas is brutal. Sometimes that may be the case; however, most of the time, at least in my experience, it isnt. They make a decent wage (for their country) and many companies (like Chase, my company, and many others) even provide heath care benefits. Do what we think of as sweat shops exist? Sure they do. They exist in this country. But overall I would say its an exception rather than the rule.

 

[Carmen813]

You want real laissez-faire capitalism? That means no tariffs, no import restrictions, no immigration restrictions and a merger of the United States population with the billions of impoverished people in the world. Are you ready to watch the United States become an overpopulated, impoverished third world country?

Will you feel the same way when your family is kidnapped and held for ransom or when they are killed in a mugging? Are you ready to move into a walled enclave for the wealthy and hire security guards (who, being from the lower classes, may or may not hold you in contempt)?

Sounds a lot like Detroit.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

If a majority of people have subsistence jobs, who's going to purchase the products and services offered by rich people? without a big stable middle class nobody will be offered any opportunity to advance, including rich folks. I think it's in everyone's best interest, including the wealthy, to increase living wages.

Other rich people would purchase the products and services.

There are wealthy people in third world countries. If the wealthy keep a larger fraction of employees' contributions to the act of production, people would still be needed to produce the wealth that the wealthy are consuming. Instead of manufacturing TVs for the masses people would be employed to build tenth and eleventh villas or sixth and seventh yachts for the wealthy lords.

 

[blackangst1]

Sounds a lot like Detroit.

Actually it sounds like my beloved Phoenix...the kidnapping capital of the world

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I agree with your statement except for the last sentence. Countries that are taking on these jobs have seen a substantial increase in their standard of living in the last 20 years. 4 countries with which I have personal experience, Philippines, Argentina, Thailand, and Vietnam, have changed DRASTICALLY in the last 20 years. For sure the last 15 that I have been travelling there. And much of it is US based worldwide companies (not all though. Europe exports jobs also). So to say its a race to the bottom is wrong when so many people's lives have improved because of these jobs.

I never said that other nations would not benefit in a parasitical, hollow sort of way. One other reason why people may be doing better there is simply an end to communism or at least a reduction in the amount of communist elements in the economy.

The issue, as I see it, isn't about what is good for other countries, but rather what is good for Americans? What is in Americans rational economic selfish interest?

I do wonder what would happen to those other nations if we isolated ourselves and withdrew from the world economy, producing all of the goods and services we need with American labor. Would those other nations discover that they have hollow economies that were only sustained by selling goods and services to the West and that they cannot produce wealth if left isolated? Would they find that economic activity in their countries was not self-generated?

 

[Carmen813]

I never said that other nations would not benefit in a parasitical, hollow sort of way. One other reason why people may be doing better there is simply an end to communism or at least a reduction in the amount of communist elements in the economy.

The issue, as I see it, isn't about what is good for other countries, but rather what is good for Americans? What is in Americans rational economic selfish interest?

I do wonder what would happen to those other nations if we isolated ourselves and withdrew from the world economy, producing all of the goods and services we need with American labor. Would those other nations discover that they have hollow economies that were only sustained by selling goods and services to the West and that they cannot produce wealth if left isolated? Would they find that economic activity in their countries was not self-generated?

We'd run out of electricity in about 2 months and sustain a total societal collapse?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Actually it sounds like my beloved Phoenix...the kidnapping capital of the world

Really? Perhaps that's because Phoenix is too close to Mexico. I don't think kidnappings for ransom are a huge problem in the Detroit area yet. Here's an interesting excerpt about kidnapping for ransom in the third world from an interview about a PBS show called "Ransom City":

Charlotte Mangin: Yes, kidnapping occurs around the world and is particularly a threat in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Russia, the Philippines, and South Africa. It is of course happening in Iraq these days too, with journalists and politicians and judges major targets. In Brazil, wealthy businessmen and their families have traditionally been the main victims of kidnapping for large ransoms. The soccer stars have been targeted, as you mention, because of their fame and large salaries. But as upper class Brazilians increasingly hide behind gate homes and bodyguards, and commute in helicopters and armored cars, kidnappers in Sao Paulo have begun to prey on all social classes. Anyone who dresses nicely or drives a fancy car may be a potential target these days as "express" or "flash" kidnappings are increasingly common. Here, victims are driven to ATM bank machines and forced to withdraw the daily limit on their bank accounts. This can go on for days until the bank account is drained.

One thing the wealthy don't understand is that the well-being of other people in your country really is important for your own health, safety, and well-being.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082901003.html

BTW, if anyone can find a link to the Ransom City program, please post it here.

 

[Carmen813]

Really? Perhaps that's because Phoenix is too close to Mexico. I don't think kidnappings for ransom are a huge problem in the Detroit area yet. Here's an interesting excerpt about kidnapping for ransom in the third world from an interview about a PBS show called "Ransom City":

One thing the wealthy don't understand is that the well-being of other people in your country really is important for your own health, safety, and well-being.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082901003.html

Don't be silly, I can be the richest mofo on the planet and walk through the ghetto dressed in a suit of gold wearing a Rolex and be completely unmolested. So long as I have a gun. At least, that's what 2nd amendment advocates tell me...

^-The above post should be read with a heavy dose of sarcasm.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

We'd run out of electricity in about 2 months and sustain a total societal collapse?

How so? I think our biggest problem would be with oil.

For clarification, I'm not really an advocate of outright isolation, just an advocate of a zero-dollar trade deficit and of "real trade". That is, I think we should trade an equal amount of goods and services for others' goods and services as opposed to running a trade deficit or exchanging our hard capital assets (land, business ownership, infrastructure ownership).

 

[Carmen813]

How so? I think our biggest problem would be with oil.

For clarification, I'm not really an advocate of outright isolation, just an advocate of a zero-dollar trade deficit and of "real trade". That is, I think we should trade an equal amount of goods and services for others' goods and services as opposed to running a trade deficit or exchanging our hard capital assets (land, business ownership, infrastructure ownership).

Oil would be a massive problem. It would cripple interstate trade because trucks/planes/boats wouldn't operate. Not to mention millions of plastic products use oil...it would just be bad.

Of course we could probably conquer Canada inside of 2 months, and they have a lot of oil...so maybe we'd be alright.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Oil would be a massive problem. It would cripple interstate trade because trucks/planes/boats wouldn't operate. Not to mention millions of plastic products use oil...it would just be bad.

Of course we could probably conquer Canada inside of 2 months, and they have a lot of oil...so maybe we'd be alright.

We have bullshit oil, you don't really want it.

You don't have to shut down international trade to 'fix' anything.

The best way to balance growth in developed and underdeveloped nations is to severely limit foreign ownership of production, but have few limits on trade of goods across borders.

 

[blackangst1]

I never said that other nations would not benefit in a parasitical, hollow sort of way. One other reason why people may be doing better there is simply an end to communism or at least a reduction in the amount of communist elements in the economy.

The issue, as I see it, isn't about what is good for other countries, but rather what is good for Americans? What is in Americans rational economic selfish interest?

I do wonder what would happen to those other nations if we isolated ourselves and withdrew from the world economy, producing all of the goods and services we need with American labor. Would those other nations discover that they have hollow economies that were only sustained by selling goods and services to the West and that they cannot produce wealth if left isolated? Would they find that economic activity in their countries was not self-generated?

I understnad your POV; however, your phrasing is a bit...selfish. I know its not this black and white, but how would you feel if the US flourished at the expense of other countries? Are you that much of an isolationist? I tend to be on the isolationist side of things, but I also realize we are not an island, and whether we like it not the world is getting smaller every day. Theres ups and down to this, of course. But Im wondering if we somehow became a blue collar labor type industrial cojntry like we were until the 60's or so if you would think of us as "hollow" and "parasitical"?

 

[blackangst1]

Really? Perhaps that's because Phoenix is too close to Mexico. I don't think kidnappings for ransom are a huge problem in the Detroit area yet. Here's an interesting excerpt about kidnapping for ransom in the third world from an interview about a PBS show called "Ransom City":

You are correct. The majority of kidnappings here are drug cartel related. And I also stand corrected...we are second highest kidnapping in the world...first in the USA.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6848672&page=1

In what officials caution is now a dangerous and even deadly crime wave, Phoenix, Arizona has become the kidnapping capital of America, with more incidents than any other city in the world outside of Mexico City and over 370 cases last year alone.

 

[nobodyknows]

Don't be silly, I can be the richest mofo on the planet and walk through the ghetto dressed in a suit of gold wearing a Rolex and be completely unmolested. So long as I have a gun. At least, that's what 2nd amendment advocates tell me...

^-The above post should be read with a heavy dose of sarcasm.

Only if the gold suit was made of gold spum from straw.

 

[ChunkiMunki]

Other rich people would purchase the products and services.

There are wealthy people in third world countries. If the wealthy keep a larger fraction of employees' contributions to the act of production, people would still be needed to produce the wealth that the wealthy are consuming. Instead of manufacturing TVs for the masses people would be employed to build tenth and eleventh villas or sixth and seventh yachts for the wealthy lords.

too funny, excellent recipe for....uh third-world style living. guaranteed to keep the US as a world power.

 

[AreaCode707]

I'm about as pro-capitalist as they come but I don't see a benefit in removing the minimum wage. All it would mean is a greater need for government assistance for people that hold jobs with ridiculously low salaries.