the minimum wage: reality check

It isn't a lack of skills, knowledge, or ability. It's the result of unopposed "Market Forces" that always attempt to drive compensation down to the lowest possible level. At one time we had a balance between the downward pressure on compensation by the "Market Forces" and upward pressure on compensation by "Organized Labor" but right-wing Republican economic policies oppose organized labor. Union representation is at it's lowest point since the Great Depression because of anti-union Republican legislation and the balance that built the middle class in the 1950's and 1960's is virtually gone.

It isn't the lack of skills, knowledge or ability of the workers that results in low compensation but the fact that the "market" doesn't care about the skills, knowledge or ability of the worker in establishing compensation for employment.

 

You're kidding, right? Employers don't care about skills, knowledge, or ability of the people they hire. This is one of the most ridiculous statements you've made so far.

If that's the case (which it isn't), then why do we have government schools in the first place?

 

Ignorance of the law is no form of excuse?

 

If that could be done I would agree.

But its wishful thinking.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats not at allf act lololol.

The FACTS are that businesses have always sought to maximize profits at the expense of the consumer.

To think they will just stop if we up the way almost double is hilarious.

You are idiotic.

 

The equivocation is problematic. A minimum living wage for a single person is not the same as for a family of 3, which is different than a minimum living wage for a family of 12. If we are to set a minimum wage based on the concept of a living wage, It is unrealistic to make it high enough to support an entire family on 40 hours/week. Kids are just too expensive. It is irresponsible for people making minimum wage to become parents, and it is unfair to expect people who did not have sex with you to take responsibility for supporting your kids. (Yes, I understand that sometimes people have kids while making a family living wage, and then get laid off and take whatever job they can get.) The goal of reducing welfare by raising minimum wage to where it can support a family just shifts the burden of supporting people to everyone (including people making minimum wage) by raising the cost of goods and services, rather than just burdening the people who already make enough money to actually pay taxes.

 

translation: junior can't logically or factually disprove the FACTS I linked to, or the general reference to history...so he blows smokes, and will continue to stubbornly repeat his disproved contentions in various forms ad nausea.

 

I'm not denying the facts you linked to. But the facts you linked to in no way refute the economic law that if a price floor is set above the equilibrium price, ceteris paribus, a surplus will occur.

 

so what. Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment guarantees a surplus, simply for the sake of the bottom line.

why complain about attempts to solve some issues?

 

Ahhh, but the facts are not dealing in "IF", my friend....it is dealing in matters of recent fact and history which disprove the hue and cries of the right wing that a $15 minimum wage will destroy businesses throughout the country. So again, you assertion is irrelevant. But since insipid stubbornness seems to be your forte with this, do continue. Unless you've got something new to add, I'd say we're done here.

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=453983&p=1066611852#post1066611852

 

Do some research as to WHY the minimum wage was established...which essentially deconstructs your assertions here. What's fascinating to me is how you equate welfare with a raise in the minimum wage, as one is a safety net for the UNEMPLOYED, the other establishes a base to KEEP PEOPLE FROM GOING ON WELFARE....benefiting employer and employee, business sales and consumers.