Minimum wage must be abolished!

We would not need minimum wage laws if solve simple poverty.

 

It is Alice in Wonderland when businesses get unregulated control over things like labor. We already tried this experiment and it FAILED. Minimum wage and labor regulations are there for a reason.

 

would you care to document this? in 1912 a good days wage for a foreman at the DuPont company was a $1.20 (I have seen the weekly payroll records from that time period, they are available at the Hagley Museum in Wilmington, DE.) He lived in company owned housing for which he paid rent. In 1912 the middle class made up less than 10% of the population, most people were working poor and barely made subsistence wages.

When there is a surplus of workers available, as you had during the period between 1870 and 1932 and today, employers can easily drive wages down. especially when there is no social safety net (which prior to 1932 there wasn't). I have yet to meet someone who thinks we should eliminate the minimum wage who also doesn't think we need to eliminate welfare, unemployment compensation and disability compensation.

- - - Updated - - -

would you care to document this? in 1912 a good days wage for a foreman at the DuPont company was a $1.20 (I have seen the weekly payroll records from that time period, they are available at the Hagley Museum in Wilmington, DE.) He lived in company owned housing for which he paid rent. In 1912 the middle class made up less than 10% of the population, most people were working poor and barely made subsistence wages.

When there is a surplus of workers available, as you had during the period between 1870 and 1932 and today, employers can easily drive wages down. especially when there is no social safety net (which prior to 1932 there wasn't). I have yet to meet someone who thinks we should eliminate the minimum wage who also doesn't think we need to eliminate welfare, unemployment compensation and disability compensation.

 

Actually, "such practices" were the norm during the progressive era of politics, practices which continue in earnest until this day. They're the ones who created the corrupt political patronage system that characterizes progressive municipalities like New York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington DC, all which are characterized to this day by deep racial segregation, exploding prison populations, and unsustainable spending. Progressives are the reason why Washington DC has a $1+ trillion dollar slush-fund to gorge itself on every year, and why the US military is spread all across the globe engaging in unsustainable imperialism. Modern government as we know it was forced on the American people by the progressive movement, and we've been living under corporate tyranny ever since. The ironic part is that progressives actually believe they're fighting the corporate cartels!

Get real! It was your beloved federal government (and their Pinkerton slugs) that did most of the union-busting in those days. In fact, the federal government used the Sherman anti-trust legislation to justify their military intervention during the Pullman strikes. Virtually everything the federal government did in the progressive era (and these days) was at the behest of some big banking interest like the Morgan family.

Everything I said was a fact. The great depression occurred in the progressive era of money and banking. There is no denying that, because in 1913 Woodrow Wilson, the Democratic arch-progressive gave us the federal income tax and the federal reserve system, the latter of which was designed by JP Morgan himself.

I'm well aware of the mainstream economic perspective on the great depression. They are wrong and history will recognize this in due time. The great depression was caused by over-centralization of money and banking with Washington DC, a trend that started early in American history and which was militarily imposed by Lincoln during the northern war of aggression.

 

Not a big salary, just a livable wage, some reward for working, rather than feathering your portfolio with 'extras'. Why do you think paying someone a fair wage is a bad thing? Is everybody that works for you only working to make you rich, or something other than that? You default to a low wage right off the bat, and it has become the norm. Any talk of changing that mentality, you seem to think is 'demanding a big salary'.

 

pure fantasy. It was the progressives who fought the cartels, who fought for safe working conditions, who promoted unions against the goons of the corporations and robber barons. To claim otherwise is a pack of lies.

And it was the progressives who ended those practices when they finally gained control of Congress. Your revisionist history would get you laughed out of any history department in the nation. The rest of your post is not worth responding to since it is pure garbage.

 

Jackster, I cannot object to your quoting anyone. Your posts includes what you attribute to an “American Jewish Professor and Marxist Dr Noel Ignatiev” without offering your own comment on the matter are odd.
I speculate it’s your prefer to appear simply illogical rather than publish what’s likely to confirm expose of your indecency.

With regard to the federal minimum wage, I recommend to others that they refer to the thread “Consequences of repealing minimum wage rates”.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=270559

I’m a proponent of a federal minimum wage rate pegged to the cost/price index in the same manner as our Social Security retirement benefits’ annual cost of living adjustments.

Respectfully, Supposn1

 

Why not merely stimulate the economy by increasing the circulation of money in our Institution money based markets and form of capitalism?

 

So it appears leftista cant really justify removing people's right to earn a living other than some feeling based on some moral belief.

Which just happens to feed more govt dependents who require their collectivism to live. The state is their god who must control every aspect of your life, restrict your rights because its what their god wants. Seems this is how they justify force over other people's property (inc labor). Yet watch them squeal should a Christian state their beliefs let alone apply force upon others. Its only moral for one group of hypocrites.

 

Actually, it seems to some on the left, that right can't be bothered to be moral enough to simply bear true witness to our own laws and engender that form of respect for the rule of law.

 

Daniel Palos, the federal minimum wage, (FMW) is a net economic benefit to our nation.

Statisticians rather than politicians adjusting the FMW’s rate to retain its purchasing power would increase the net economic benefit to our nation and our failure to do so is net detrimental to our economy.

The FMW does not increase our federal budget’s deficit, our federal debt or increase our taxes;
it does not deny funds or (in any other manner that I’m aware of), conflicts with any other reasonably creditable proposed federal program that may possibly stimulate the economy.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

You have bull(*)(*)(*)(*) trade agreements mixed up with minimum wage.

 

The consequences of eliminating the minimum wage.

Object 227, I agree that elimination of the federal minimum wage, (FMW) rate evokes an indefinite and unenforceable minimum rate of much lesser purchasing power that would create many more jobs.
But you describe them as entry level jobs.

I contend that the majority of these additional jobs with purchasing powers extremely less than that of the federal minimum wage rate are for tasks that did not justify paying the FMW rate.
The minimum wage affects wages for all tasks for which labor's not scarce. The proportional effect of a minimum rate upon all other job rates is inversely related to the difference between the minimum and the other job rate; (i.e. the minimum's effect upon the working poor is proportionally greater for the working poor and lesser for high income employees.

The reduced purchasing powers of additional jobs of drastically lesser than FMW rate’s and all other jobs, (as would be indicated by the updated median wage) would not imply an updated GDP of increased purchasing power.

Additionally, the purchasing powers of some jobs that now (under the federal minimum wage rate) are above the poverty level will fall through to poverty levels. These additional jobs of drastically lesser pay rates enables employment of many people that were not previously considered as employable. The increased number of low income jobs will be exceeded by the increased numbers of job applicants. If we eliminate those unemployed that were previously unemployable at FMW rate, it’s likely that our unemployment rate would remain net increased.

Under the FMW’ minimum rate, the unmarried working poor do not generally receive public assistance. Under an indefinite minimum rate all of our working poor population will require public assistance.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

I believe we could abolish that form of public sector intervention in private sector markets through public sector competition with the private sector in the market for labor. Providing recourse to the opportunity cost of a form of minimum wage by exercising our enumerated and expressly defined rights concerning employment at will, could have the effect of the laws of demand and supply bailing out laissez-fare Capitalism's laziness regarding full employment in that market.

 

The left is the LAST place I'd look for in terms of supporting basic rights. They can't even keep their filthy fingers off your paycheck.

 

yeah cause the republicans are the party of "read my lips, no more taxes" -- that lie may have worked once for your party, but fool me twice... NOT..... lol

 

(paraphrased) I will not raise taxes on the poor and middle class!" shrieked Barack Obama, the winner of the coveted Pinocchio Award of the year for being the freaking biggest consistently dedicated liar on the entire planet.

(paraphrased) "ObamaCare IS a tax (and an onerous one at that) on the poor and middle class," the Supreme Court calmly and coolly replied.

Oh my!

 

Obama has done a pretty good job at keeping republicans from raising our taxes

 

Hmmm . . . I honestly have no idea how to reply to that statement.