They don't, that is the whole point.

As we appear to agree that a proportion of society have to remain poor, to enable the wealthy to become and remain wealthy, you must surely see that a proportion of society, even if they really do try as hard as you, will still remain poor.

Tell me, if everyone takes the opportunity to become rich, try as hard as you, achieve the qualifications you talk of, work really hard to lift themselves, because if they do, they will better themselves, who is left to carry out the low paid menial jobs that will always be there?

This is a serious point, or to put it another way, if everyone becomes rich or wealthy even (and you feel they would if they take the three step advice you gave in your post, your solution) any monetary gains would be rendered useless, monetary values would be destroyed within the economic systems we have in place. Surely the ladder effect would ensure this.

Who would employ all these engineers? The market place would be saturated with engineers, which in turn would lower the status and monetary worth of said engineers. Hence my point that one would see a large number of people with engineering degrees for example, working as refuse collectors or in some other menial employment.

I disagree, I am sure it would matter to you a great deal, if you were a hard working person, who by some quirk of fate have no academic ability. I also disagree that everyone has the same chance to get ahead, you have totally dismissed valid points made, regarding lack of academic ability and genuine vulnerability.

Quite a large percentage now I would imagine, as many jobs in the US, due to a huge loss of manufacturing within your country are within the service industry. An industry which is renowned for low paid menial work.

Yes it does, to the detriment of many unfortunate people, they still need basic living requirements, also a wage that provides said living requirements in one of the richest countries in the modern world.

I would say this is a moral imperative.

With respect, I find your answer, naive and selfish in the extreme.

At the discretion of the employer? Again I feel you are being extremely naive. In an ideal world, yes of course. In some cases this does happen, employers do pay a viable wage, unfortunately, this is far from an ideal world, where exploitation is rife. This takes us full circle, back to my original point, which, with respect I must add, you have failed to address. To enable the wealthy to remain wealthy, a proportion of society has to remain poor.

Not a valid answer regarding this point.

To be honest: I don't really care if someone is wrongfully underpaid. I really don't.


I don't care if they're smart, work their ass off, and are still homeless. I'm sure there's food they can rummage for in the garbage and cardboard boxes they can live in.


You going to cry about it? "Oh Koga you're so mean! Boohoohoo!"


That's right, Koga is so mean. Koga doesn't give a crap about you cause you're all baby killing communist (*)(*)(*)(*)s who wouldn't bleed if I stabbed you.

I'm definitely against the minimum wage.

It isn't necessary and typically is (like most (all) government intervention) is a worse peice of legislation for those it professes to trying to help)

Explain Big Red how this is so, if you would?

Many countries have embraced a minimum wage, whilst at the same time have also maintained economic growth.

Red I tried to give you rep points there but they say I need to spread it around a little before I give you more.

It is a brilliant point. Name one thing the government has done well (other than tax).

__________________
ABoyNamedSue - Speaking of Crestwoods posts - And then there'll be some link to some page, written in hindu or something, talking about sherpas and A&W root beer, and how George Bush is to blame for some Jewish neo-nazi death camp, run by Elvis Presley, on the far side of the moon that's been busted for killing kittens or something

If many countries jumped off a bridge are you going to as well?

Do I poke my tongue out at you now Koga, scream until I am sick, or do I just run crying to the teacher?

I am sure you will be able to advise me here, as you appear to be extremely conversant regarding classical kindergarten activities

if you're going to have a minimum wage, it has to go up with inflation (~2%/year). The initial minimum wage can't be set too high as it will create too much equality. too much equality doesn't work within a capitalistic economy.

I got no problem with a minimum wage. Just keep it at a reasonable level, and don't touch it (aside from the inflation change).

Ironically most of the people in poverty are there because they didn't have an abortion and having a child knocked them below the poverty threshold.

The people who took care of their little problem are the ones who are doing better.

Under your system the ideal method to end poverty would be cheap drive through abortion clinics where you can get a shake, fries, and an abortion pill plus some anti-bleeding agents.

You know since nearly every country employs some form of minimum wage, and they've had to keep changing them, there must be thousands of isntances of applications of minimum wage.

To my knowledge there are none at all where things went bad, hence why nearly every country does so.

I'm open to evidence of economies tanking/things going bad as a result of the application of a minimum wage.

If you can find any.

http://mises.org/story/2596

Interesting take on it from one of my favorite places: mises.

Government shouldn't intervene in businesses. I mean, if minimum wage is such a "noble" idea or concept, why not go with $200 an hour? $300? The only "fair" or "correct" wage is what an employer and employee voluntarily agree upon.