Worker Shortage Crisis Deepening

The government!!!! It says so on the Preamble to the Constitution. It's the very reason why we constituted a nation (and a government to govern it). It's not the businesses' job. But if they somehow stand in the way of creating "a more perfect union" of the form and in the manner described in the Preamble... they lose!

Couldn't care less! That's up to the business owners. So long as they all make a living wage, I'm not interested....

So was slavery.... and we DID eliminate it!

 

You’re not understanding. The widget is a name for ANY good or service in the marketplace. That means food, housing, clothing, water, cars, etc etc etc. Which I think you’re aware of.

What I don’t think you’re aware of is the fact that the system I described is HOW THE MARKET OPERATES. What that means is... no matter how much you attempt to manipulate the market by artificially raising wages or giving people a monthly subsidy from the government, etc etc... the ONLY way you can stop the market from changing price to match the new supply with the new demand, is to use government intervention to control prices that businesses are allowed to offer for their goods and services.

Which is a primary function of ****ing Marxism.

 

Socialism only beats communism leaving it still the best of NO systems. Keep justifying the left's destruction of our country.

 

... if you assume that everybody in Chicago and everybody in Red Bud make minimum wage. I don't give a crap about how Illinois handles their minimum wage. My argument is about the Federal minimum wage.

 

In my mind, the rationale makes a huge difference here.

In one scenario, the call for increasing those numbers and caps are designed to fill a void.

In the other, an artificial void is being devised (or not being reversed) to put through an agenda for more visas and caps lifted.

They might both end in the same consequence but one has the potential of creating more unemployed American workers (and, the resulting animosity toward those visa workers). Employee morale is a fickle beast.

 

If every person needs one widget per hour to survive and lead average normal life, their minimum wage needs to be whatever that one widget costs. If that's $8, that the minimum wage... if it's $15, then it's that.

What is "artificial" about it? What does "artificial" even MEAN?

As for Marxism... that is more nonsense! There is no private industry in a Marxist economy. Therefore, there is no "market". Everybody makes the same. NOBODY is advocating (except maybe you) that everybody in the country should make minimum wage. In a capitalist society, everybody makes more than minimum wage as a result of studies, abilities, experience,... Minimum wage is just a basic income which relatively few people will be making while they learn and progress in their professional careers. One more thing you try to delve into without knowing anything about the topic. But completely off topic.

 

Difficult to prove that the demoralization and replacement of US workers is by design. But if you look at the individual policy moves, and see how they converge to create a singular outcome, it's hard to imagine it's anything but intentional.

 

there are good parts to all systems, America uses the best of each and doesn't limit ourselves to just one

if something works, we use it

 

Of course. I don't really see how anyone can think otherwise.

A few months back I was reading about a six year old girl who was gang-raped while in transit to the border. She had lost the ability to speak as a result of her traumas. I posted about it on another forum and most of the posters didn't care. I have a daughter (she's not 6, but still) and I can't begin to imagine allowing her to travel alone (or, maybe she didn't start out that way) to another country.

That got me to thinking more about what kind of conditions must exist in those areas for a parent to make such a drastic decision to their little girl that far. I can't even begin to conceptualize such an environment if the risk of being brutally raped by several boys and men looks like a reasonable idea.

Yet, using your statement, when looking at the individual policies that converge to one outcome, the motive becomes a bit clearer. I've been struggling with heartache ever since I learned of that little girl's plight, but the biggest sorrow has been facing a cold, hard truth about what that actually means and our government's complicity in that.

 

Artificial means that if the market can afford to pay it's staff $12.50 per hour based upon what consumers will bare, then paying workers not to work at a higher rate than the $12.50 means that in order for the market to get staffing, they will need to at least meet the governments enhanced benefits. So if now you are paying your staff $15, but now the market is not willing to bare the cost of the product, then both the business nor the employee benefit.

And those jobs that are paying the current minimum wage are entry level positions and were never intended to be career level. Primarily for teens doing the summer jobs. These jobs were never intended for mature adults and should not be paid a wage the market cannot bare.

 

I'm not sure I get your question. Employment works best and most equitable if the free market place determines who gets hired to do what and for what pay. Governments have a role in setting up the general rules of the game that legally have to be followed, like illegal immigration, employment of visa holders, child labor, discrimination, safety, and stuff like that. When government, activists, or crony capitalists and the like get heavily involved in the specifics you can rest assured the marketplace will not be equitable and not have the promised results.

 

Which is even worse than a state minimum wage. If the Feds set their minimum wage so that everyone living in SanFran has a "living wage" then the cost of living everywhere else will go up to match that of SanFran

 

It came from your earlier comment:

That lead me to wonder if you were opposed to ALL employment filled by non-Americans.

 

Then that business is not producing, it's not helping the country, and it needs to be shut down.

Easy as that.

As for the rest of your post, one more time: jobs that people take for "fun" (or extra cash to take the girl out on the weekend) should not be the parameter that determines what thousands of single mothers who are struggling to support themselves and kid or two should be earning.

 

Apparently you've not run a business? Competing against large corporations means that you work an extremely low margin and have to keep your prices competitive. Reducing your GM by a mere 1% is catastrophic for most small businesses while large corporation (like Dine Brands Global) can weather such a reduction without increasing cost. What is happening right now is large corporations knocking out their largest competitors, that being small businesses.

And you do realize that increasing the minimum wage for those single mothers can actually be MORE catastrophic as they will no longer qualify for benefits such as medicaid, EBT (should still qualify for SNAP) and housing allowances. They would actually be more in poverty than if they were earning the lower wage. There are consequences for your actions.

 

Oh no! Everybody living with the living standards of San Francisco??? Oh... the humanity! Next thing you know, everybody will be required to become gay!

Seriously, establishing a minimum federal wage will be done by professionals in a professional manner. I can tell you one thing: it will likely be closer to $20 than it will be to the current one of $7.25.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with increasing living costs so long as they come with better living standards. I'm sure banks and multibillionaires who keep lots of money in them won't be thrilled that their dollars won't be worth as much as they used to, but.... don't worry about them. They'll survive... Our country has thrived when we have had a strong middle class. And if that means Bill Gates and the Koch family need to move to China... I'll be the first to wish them good luck!

 

Why do right wingers who have no clue how to run a business tell me that? I DO run a business. I have run it for over 12 years! It thrives. And I have NEVER paid any of my workers anything near the minimum wage. I have always more than doubled it! The person I pay the least right now almost triples the minimum wage.

So what????? Do you have something against large corporations... comrade? If the only way to compete with them is paying wages that don't allow them to make a living wage, then they need to start applying on the Amazon website, instead of starting a business!
\

What nonsense! Of course they will no longer qualify for the goodies of the nanny state! That's the point. They won't need to! Because they'll be earning a living wage!

Looks like I found somebody further to the left than myself! There aren't that many of them at this stage in 21st Century America

 

Not the standard of living in SF, but the cost of living in SF. Not the same thing

If the guy flipping burgers starts getting $20 an hour, the nurses that were working for $22 are going to want a big ass raise, and they will deserve that raise. As well as the lineman fixing your electricity. You cannot raise the bottom pay rate without adjusting all those above it.

But that won't happen. Standard of living does not go up with the cost of living, often they go the opposite way.

They will not care, they have plenty that the drop in the value of the dollar will not mean a thing to them.

But the guy and his wife that had 250 grand saved for retirement will be ****ed when that 250,000 is not worth as much as they thought it would be.

Under your plan all that happens is that line for living in poverty goes higher, and the same people are still living in poverty.

 

Not in the least. The market bears what the market bears. Any legal employee should be hired, if the work requires it, without any regard to race, color, creed, sex, or national origin,

 

The basic standard of living in SF for a middle class person. I see no problem with that being the living standard everywhere.

So? Did you intend to make some sort of point?

BTW, a nurse makes $22 an hour? I didn't know that. They should make more now! It's less than a computer technician makes. And saving lives is more important than saving computers.

Often people are poor. It's what we're trying to eliminate: all those "often".

I'm sure they will care. But it's them accumulating more billions, or millions of people making a decent living.

But they will be making more at retirement, so... all is good.

What happens is that NOBODY who works a full time job will EVER be under the line of poverty regardless of how high it goes.

 

Keep in mind, he thinks businesses folding is somehow a GOOD thing....

 

As long as the government keeps giving hand outs, what does anyone expect?

But the reckoning is coming. So many states are dropping the federal weekly addition of $300 and that is the first step in the right direction.

 

Thanks for clarifying your position on this.

 

Again, raising the cost of living does not raise the standard of living.

Yes, it is not just the cost of paying low income workers that goes up, a business will have to pay everyone more.

That is where they start. Both my wife and daughter are nurses. I agree they should make more, but hospitals will not pay them more. And when they finally do your healthcare cost go up, erasing the rise in pay everyone is going to get.

Why would they care if they money is now only worth 3 billion instead of 6? are they going to suffer?

How is that? Unless they keep working they will not be making more.

That cannot happen. Salaries will keep going up and the level where poverty starts will just keep going up. There will always be people that are in the 10% bottom of wages, it is mathematically impossible to get rid of them.

You run a business, but you really do not understand basic math.

 

Many of the Jersey shore summer businesses that used to get a lot of foreign kids for the Summer employment say that between Trumps cut back on visas coupled with the Covid pandemic they are not getting any this year.