Assertions require something to back them up. Otherwise, it's considered as the asserter running his dick sucker.
Minimum wage rate and labors’ market prices.
- Thread starter Supposn
- Start date
Assertions require something to back them up. Otherwise, it's considered as the asserter running his dick sucker.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
I don't believe a possibility automatically means something happens. Since you do that makes you an idiot.
If so, provide proof. I don't accept your baseless claim.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Supposn,
A minimum wage is needed because if we didn't have one that would result in a 'race to the bottom' to see just how little pay desperate people will work for.
The result of no minimum wage would be increased dependency on government assistance, and the need for higher taxes to pay for it.
Setting a fair minimum wage results in lower tax burden on the higher income tax payers who pay for the government assistance.
So then the question becomes: "How much should the minimum wage be?"
Ideally, it should be above the poverty level, so that a full time worker can afford a life.
It should also be enough to sustain a small family.
The reason it should sustain a small family is that young people are rarely willing to wait for financial adequacy before starting a family.
If minimum wage does not support a small family, then poor families will be depending on government assistance.
When people get the idea that all they have to do is have babies to get paid by the government, then they will be having babies for the wrong reasons.
We need good parents who want to do a good job of raising kids, not parents who are only doing it for the money.
Since there are too many humans on Earth, we should discourage large families. Any government assistance for having children should be cut off after 2 children. Poor people who have large families should instead be offered a place to live in government-controlled 'poor houses' where they are required to work to maintain the house, do all the chores, take turns caring for the multitudes of children they can't seem to stop having, and also work at whatever the government requires them to do to pay for their accommodations. Duties could include such things as city clean-ups, car washing, and city grounds maintenance work. If they have higher skills and can learn to work a better job they should be provided child care by the facility so they can learn and work a better job, and then be required to pay rent to the 'poor house' until they can afford a place of their own. Once they move out and get on their own two feet, they would still be eligible for the 'poor house' child care services.
All poor people should be offered free birth control and/or surgery to prevent further pregnancy from the government.
A minimum wage is needed because if we didn't have one that would result in a 'race to the bottom' to see just how little pay desperate people will work for.
The result of no minimum wage would be increased dependency on government assistance, and the need for higher taxes to pay for it.
Setting a fair minimum wage results in lower tax burden on the higher income tax payers who pay for the government assistance.
So then the question becomes: "How much should the minimum wage be?"
Ideally, it should be above the poverty level, so that a full time worker can afford a life.
It should also be enough to sustain a small family.
The reason it should sustain a small family is that young people are rarely willing to wait for financial adequacy before starting a family.
If minimum wage does not support a small family, then poor families will be depending on government assistance.
When people get the idea that all they have to do is have babies to get paid by the government, then they will be having babies for the wrong reasons.
We need good parents who want to do a good job of raising kids, not parents who are only doing it for the money.
Since there are too many humans on Earth, we should discourage large families. Any government assistance for having children should be cut off after 2 children. Poor people who have large families should instead be offered a place to live in government-controlled 'poor houses' where they are required to work to maintain the house, do all the chores, take turns caring for the multitudes of children they can't seem to stop having, and also work at whatever the government requires them to do to pay for their accommodations. Duties could include such things as city clean-ups, car washing, and city grounds maintenance work. If they have higher skills and can learn to work a better job they should be provided child care by the facility so they can learn and work a better job, and then be required to pay rent to the 'poor house' until they can afford a place of their own. Once they move out and get on their own two feet, they would still be eligible for the 'poor house' child care services.
All poor people should be offered free birth control and/or surgery to prevent further pregnancy from the government.
Last edited:
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
You're the one that made the claim they do and equated the possibility of it with it automatically happening. Support your claim. Your BISSO argument has been ignored. Afraid to try, boy?
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
Is that your claim?
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
The government should offer free child care to all minimum and low wage workers.
The 'poor houses' for people who can't stop having children could be utilized to provide the free child care for responsible workers who are able to support themselves on a properly-set minimum wage which pays enough for workers to support themselves.
The 'poor houses' for people who can't stop having children could be utilized to provide the free child care for responsible workers who are able to support themselves on a properly-set minimum wage which pays enough for workers to support themselves.
Can you actually stand up for what you claim you believe and support it with proof?
We'll let you and those like you pay for it. It's not free you stupid motherfucker.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
Is it your claim that they do? Have the guts to say what you believe.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Michael_Panetta,
It is inevitable that the work week should be shortened.
This will occur. It is only a matter of when.
The biggest driver is automation.
As our technology improves many jobs of low-wage workers will be eliminated. Too few new higher-paying jobs will be created. The result of that will be many low skill job-seekers going after too few available jobs.
All of this productivity-improving technology is going to greatly reduce the number of available jobs.
As technology continues to improve, even higher-paying jobs will be automated.
There just won't be as much work that is needed to be done in the USA.
Americans currently work more hours per year than most other nations. Something like 1800 hours per year, as opposed to as few as 1400 hours per year in Europe.
We are going to have shorter work weeks and longer paid vacations. As it should be for humans who can invent machines to do work.
The new productivity-improving technology is also going to create vastly increased profits for the holders of big capital. The very rich will be getting vastly richer with every job eliminated because the largest expense in producing goods and services is labor.
Since the rich will be much richer, they will be able to pay higher taxes and still be very rich, living in opulent luxury.
These taxes will be needed to pay for a new Universal Basic Income. UBI
Since there won't be enough jobs to go around, and many new jobs will not be 40 hour jobs, the government is going to eventually have to go to a UBI.
The UBI will be more than minimum wage. It will begin as a low figure, but be increased over time until it is enough for a middle class lifestyle.
Humans will enter a Star-Trek like existence where poverty is eliminated and everyone has all they need.
The big challenge will be to keep people from fighting over the implementation, and accepting the new reality.
Fight it or not, this is our future.
It is inevitable.
The only question is when.
Not if, but when.
The big trigger will be artificial intelligence.
Once that happens, things will change drastically. We will have to reassess our values when there is not enough work for everybody to have a job.
It will be a different world, and a different economy.
It is inevitable that the work week should be shortened.
This will occur. It is only a matter of when.
The biggest driver is automation.
As our technology improves many jobs of low-wage workers will be eliminated. Too few new higher-paying jobs will be created. The result of that will be many low skill job-seekers going after too few available jobs.
All of this productivity-improving technology is going to greatly reduce the number of available jobs.
As technology continues to improve, even higher-paying jobs will be automated.
There just won't be as much work that is needed to be done in the USA.
Americans currently work more hours per year than most other nations. Something like 1800 hours per year, as opposed to as few as 1400 hours per year in Europe.
We are going to have shorter work weeks and longer paid vacations. As it should be for humans who can invent machines to do work.
The new productivity-improving technology is also going to create vastly increased profits for the holders of big capital. The very rich will be getting vastly richer with every job eliminated because the largest expense in producing goods and services is labor.
Since the rich will be much richer, they will be able to pay higher taxes and still be very rich, living in opulent luxury.
These taxes will be needed to pay for a new Universal Basic Income. UBI
Since there won't be enough jobs to go around, and many new jobs will not be 40 hour jobs, the government is going to eventually have to go to a UBI.
The UBI will be more than minimum wage. It will begin as a low figure, but be increased over time until it is enough for a middle class lifestyle.
Humans will enter a Star-Trek like existence where poverty is eliminated and everyone has all they need.
The big challenge will be to keep people from fighting over the implementation, and accepting the new reality.
Fight it or not, this is our future.
It is inevitable.
The only question is when.
Not if, but when.
The big trigger will be artificial intelligence.
Once that happens, things will change drastically. We will have to reassess our values when there is not enough work for everybody to have a job.
It will be a different world, and a different economy.
My observation is that you make claims then refuse to support it with facts.