Politics

[wizards8507]

So, eliminate the minimum wage so we can compete with Indonesia or China -- places where employees work in horrid conditions for pennies per hour? That's the fix? You claim that jobs will flood back into the United States. Horray! A new generation of American workers will now have the honor of sewing Nike swooshes onto sneakers they can not afford. Beyond base survival in a terrible existance, what is the incentive for employess to participate in your plan to "redevelop our human capital ... with work ethic and skills?" as they watch the richest people in the country grow ever wealthier while they work for the same wages as 13 year old girls in the Philippines do today? Spoiler alert: I've been to the Philippines, and the dynamic economy you are describing is hideous for the average worker. It doesn't look remotely like the American Dream that this country used to pride itself on providing its citizens.

Have you ever taken an economics course? A single one? Like in high school even?

What part of voluntary is beyond your ability to comprehend? If you don't want to work in poor conditions for poor wages, don't. If nobody is willing to work in poor conditions for poor wages, guess what happens? Wages rise. Why is an American man so far superior to a Chinese man that he should be paid $8.25 per hour to do a job that the Chinese man is willing to do for half that? The second an employer says "I am willing to do job "A" for wage "B" in conditions "C," then that's what that job is worth. Don't like it? Acquire a skill that provides protection from being undercut. Don't feel like it? Starve. Can't, because of a physical or mental condition that prevents you from working? You'll be taken care of.

 

[Cackalacky]

Poor in America have it pretty good by global and historical standards. Would you rather live on $12k in 2015 USA or $100k (inflation adjusted) in 1915?

Artificially inflating our wages with a "minimum" pushes jobs overseas. Standard of living has dramatically increased in those evil countries stealing our jobs. One of the struggles of China is that their wage inflation has reduced their competitive advantage, seeing jobs run away to lower cost areas. Excuse me for lacking sorrow for our poor when the true poor of humanity are provided opportunity to improve their lives much more dramatically than the USA poor who really need a new Iphone or second TV so they can watch cable while they play Xbox.

I may be wrong but what GoIrish is arguing is that when our wages are driven down to the level of say Vietnam or Brunei, which is where all of this is heading, the poor will look much more like their poor which is not a desirable standard of living.

 

[wizards8507]

I may be wrong but what GoIrish is arguing is that when our wages are driven down to the level of say Vietnam or Brunei, which is where all of this is heading, the poor will look much more like their poor which is not a desirable standard of living.

That would be terrible, but that's not what would happen. A "race to the bottom" in terms of wages only happens if there are people willing to work at the bottom. Right now, someone who is $5 an hour worth of skilled is making ZERO because nobody will hire him at the minimum wage. That's what the minimum wage does, it condemns people who are worth less than the arbitrarily-defined minimum to unemployment. Eliminating the minimum wage means that guy can get hired at a rate commensurate with his skill, $5 an hour, so that he can develop new skills and someday be worth more.

 

[Cackalacky]

That would be terrible, but that's not what would happen. A "race to the bottom" in terms of wages only happens if there are people willing to work at the bottom. Right now, someone who is $5 an hour worth of skilled is making ZERO because nobody will hire him at the minimum wage. That's what the minimum wage does, it condemns people who are worth less than the arbitrarily-defined minimum to unemployment. Eliminating the minimum wage means that guy can get hired at a rate commensurate with his skill, $5 an hour, so that he can develop new skills and someday be worth more.

I disagree with your assessment of the minimum wage but lets say you are reasonably correct...Ok well then what happens to prices of products produced then and the profits? Are they going to decrease? Are companies and shareholders willing to slash their profits on par with wages. Becasue a race to the bottom is exactly what would happen and would produce more jobs that pay shit and allow people to buy little.

 

[GoIrish41]

Isolate this core issue that you quickly gloss over. Why work when you can subsist for free? There is no need to fight for basic survival, it is a guaranteed human right in this country. Ingrained at an early age the entitlement.

We are talking about the working poor -- folks who go to work every day just like you and are just treding water as everything becomes more expensive. Wiz is talking about remaking the workforce into one that is more productive, even though American workers are more productive today than they have ever been. His "carrot" is lowering their wages. How do you think that is going to work? OK, so the country brings back more, once good paying jobs as shitty jobs to the country, so even more people can work harder for lower wages.

I have always been under the impression that capitalism is based on incentives to improve ones' lot in life (the American Dream). I'm just wondering what incentive these newly poor employees would have to remake themselves into this new improved workforce that will presumably be even more productive than it is right now, when they have absolutely nothing to gain for their effort. Wages are going down in this country, and fortunately there is an artificial bottom for workers called the minimum wage. What do you think happens to workers when we remove that bottom? What do you think happens to our society?

If you hold people down long enough, they will eventually lose their will to fight to get back up. All of the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" talk does not take into account that millions of people in this country are already there. I know misery loves company, but the suggestion that we should expand their numbers and suddently people should just work harder for no reward ... well, that seems absurd to me.

 

[wizards8507]

We are talking about the working poor -- folks who go to work every day just like you and are just treding water as everything becomes more expensive. Wiz is talking about remaking the workforce into one that is more productive, even though American workers are more productive today than they have ever been. His "carrot" is lowering their wages. How do you think that is going to work? OK, so the country brings back more, once good paying jobs as shitty jobs to the country, so even more people can work harder for lower wages.

I have always been under the impression that capitalism is based on incentives to improve ones' lot in life (the American Dream). I'm just wondering what incentive these newly poor employees would have to remake themselves into this new improved workforce that will presumably be even more productive than it is right now, when they have absolutely nothing to gain for their effort. Wages are going down in this country, and fortunately there is an artificial bottom for workers called the minimum wage. What do you think happens to workers when we remove that bottom? What do you think happens to our society?

If you hold people down long enough, they will eventually lose their will to fight to get back up. All of the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" talk does not take into account that millions of people in this country are already there. I know misery loves company, but the suggestion that we should expand their numbers and suddently people should just work harder for no reward ... well, that seems absurd to me.

I don't think you really understand the vast chasm between the working poor and folks earning minimum wage. Eliminating the minimum wage would not mean that companies are going to start hiring people at $0.50 an hour. When I was a high school fry cook, the minimum wage in Rhode Island was about $6.75. I was hired at $7.50 and eventually earned about $9.00 when I left for college. I wasn't getting rich, but if I wasn't on a college path and had stuck around, I would have been a manager on my 18th birthday making about $30,000. Am I going to get rich on that? Of course not. But it's enough to buy food, gas, and groceries. With a wife making the same amount, $60,000 is a manageable income to raise a family. That wasn't the minimum wage that determined my compensation, it was the market. My McDonald's owner wanted workers who would show up on time and do their jobs with reasonable speed and accuracy, so he paid above minimum wage. Competition for the best workers keeps wages up even without an artificial floor. Again this was zero skill, zero experience Wiz working as a burger-flipper and toilet-scrubber. If you're a grown adult and you're actually earning minimum wage, you must be severely messed up with some kind of addiction (your fault), disability (not your fault), or just plain laziness (your fault).

 

[GoIrish41]

And yet there are how many jobs in this great country of ours that go unfilled because of the lack of one getting an education or the lack of someone wanting to work based on what their education level actually is? There will always be poor among us... and yes we all have an obligation to assist them through our benevolence. I give a tremendous amount of my salary to organizations designed to assist those less fortunate so don't talk to me about turning my nose to the poor. But there is a difference in assisting those in need who may not be able to do for themselves and those that are fully capable of working and taking care of themselves. But sadly, too many have the attitude that they will just live off the rich through whatever means necessary.

Certainly was not pointing the finger at you personally ... thus the collective "us" and "our" in my statement and not the "you" and "your". There are definately people who take advantage of the system. There are people at the top (see Donald Trump and the four instances in which he "took advantage of the nation's laws") and there are people at the bottom of the economy who do not want to work. Nobody is arguing anthing different. Just because people share the same circumstances does not mean they share the same mindset, work ethic, etc. Afterall, we are discussing the working poor and not cheating welfare queens, and there is no reason within the context of this conversation to lump them together. They are not the same people. I suspect that there is a higher percentage of people at the top gaming the system than at the bottom -- and they play for keeps, using their wealth and power to accomplish it institutionally. I'm talking to you Koch Brothers.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Certainly was not pointing the finger at you personally ... thus the collective "us" and "our" in my statement and not the "you" and "your". There are definately people who take advantage of the system. There are people at the top (see Donald Trump and the four instances in which he "took advantage of the nation's laws") and there are people at the bottom of the economy who do not want to work. Nobody is arguing anthing different. Just because people share the same circumstances does not mean they share the same mindset, work ethic, etc. Afterall, we are discussing the working poor and not cheating welfare queens, and there is no reason within the context of this conversation to lump them together. They are not the same people. I suspect that there is a higher percentage of people at the top gaming the system than at the bottom -- and they play for keeps, using their wealth and power to accomplish it institutionally. I'm talking to you Koch Brothers.

I can agree with most of that. There are crooks at both ends of the spectrum. But when we say "working poor" we should be more specific. That can cover a wide range. Nothing wrong with a family who makes $40k-50k a year based on the skills, knowledge, etc., they bring to the job. While it isn't a grand living by no means, I applaud those that actually do it and are paid according to what they offer as an employee. I also don't believe there is anything wrong with a person making millions either. To whom much is given, much should be required. While people want to sit around and bash the rich, they tend to forget that it is those very same people who are paying the way for a tremendous amount of people... deserving or not.

 

[RDU Irish]

1/6th of people age 55-65 are on SSDI, are they really disabled on such a grand scale or screwing a system than facilitates an early retirement. How many are working for cash off the books? How many are taking that instead of a $10/hour service job? Why work when you don't have to? Our jobs are much safer and lower strain on the body than 50 years ago but record numbers hit the SSDI rolls, unable to perform any job.

Labor participation rate is at a 40 or 50 year low, that is working age folks who hang up the cleats are as high as they were before women actively juiced up our labor markets. So this myth that is perpetrated by flat earth, peak oil, everyone fighting for the same dollar types is a complete fallacy.

Claiming people will live at the same level of 3rd world countries completely ignores all the safety hammocks in place to provide 10 times the global average per capita income. People are not going to work for less than they can receive for free.

Well some will, the ones trying to build a better life understanding they don't get ahead by sitting on their thumbs. Those folks see work as opportunity to prove and improve yourself which leads to better options down the road.

 

[GoIrish41]

Have you ever taken an economics course? A single one? Like in high school even?

What part of voluntary is beyond your ability to comprehend? If you don't want to work in poor conditions for poor wages, don't. If nobody is willing to work in poor conditions for poor wages, guess what happens? Wages rise. Why is an American man so far superior to a Chinese man that he should be paid $8.25 per hour to do a job that the Chinese man is willing to do for half that? The second an employer says "I am willing to do job "A" for wage "B" in conditions "C," then that's what that job is worth. Don't like it? Acquire a skill that provides protection from being undercut. Don't feel like it? Starve. Can't, because of a physical or mental condition that prevents you from working? You'll be taken care of.

Or jobs get shipped away to others willing to accept them. How low do you think wages in this country would have to dip before all these jobs come storming back into the United States, as you suggested? How poor do you want American workers to be?

During the Industrial Revolution, the same circumstances were present that you are ascribing to. How do you think that worked out for the average American worker? It worked out great for the rich guys, I can tell you. But it also led the to labor movement, and all of the mechanisms that you hate so much that keep people from being treated like they are no better than a common Southeast Asian worker who have no such protections. A U.S. man is no better than a Chinese man ... He just lives in a more compassionate country that respects human dignity. Have you ever taken an American history class? A single one? Like in high school even?

 

[wizards8507]

Or jobs get shipped away to others willing to accept them. How low do you think wages in this country would have to dip before all these jobs come storming back into the United States, as you suggested? How poor do you want American workers to be?

Not very far, actually. Shipping is expensive. You can pay a domestic worker more than an international worker and it'll still be cheaper, it's just a matter of "how much more."

During the Industrial Revolution, the same circumstances were present that you are ascribing to. How do you think that worked out for the average American worker? It worked out great for the rich guys, I can tell you. But it also led the to labor movement, and all of the mechanisms that you hate so much that keep people from being treated like they are no better than a common Southeast Asian worker who have no such protections. A U.S. man is no better than a Chinese man ... He just lives in a more compassionate country that respects human dignity. Have you ever taken an American history class? A single one? Like in high school even?

Labor unions are great. As long as A) you're not forced to join one and B) you're not a public employee.

 

[Cackalacky]

Or jobs get shipped away to others willing to accept them. How low do you think wages in this country would have to dip before all these jobs come storming back into the United States, as you suggested? How poor do you want American workers to be?

During the Industrial Revolution, the same circumstances were present that you are ascribing to. How do you think that worked out for the average American worker? It worked out great for the rich guys, I can tell you. But it also led the to labor movement, and all of the mechanisms that you hate so much that keep people from being treated like they are no better than a common Southeast Asian worker who have no such protections. A U.S. man is no better than a Chinese man ... He just lives in a more compassionate country that respects human dignity. Have you ever taken an American history class? A single one? Like in high school even?

I think this convo needs to straightened out. There is some confusion between low paying service jobs at McDonalds versus jobs capable of being outsourced to 3rd world countries. Obviously a dude from Brunei is not gonna be cooking you order at Wendy's but he will be the one at the meat house processing the beef product. Those are the jobs that could get brought back but they won't until the American worker wants to make 30 cents a day.

 

[potownhero]

I think this convo needs to straightened out. There is some confusion between low paying service jobs at McDonalds versus jobs capable of being outsourced to 3rd world countries. Obviously a dude from Brunei is not gonna be cooking you order at Wendy's but he will be the one at the meat house processing the beef product. Those are the jobs that could get brought back but they won't until the American worker wants to make 30 cents a day.

You need to factor in the cost of regulation and taxation. Unless you're a preferred company in the US, you pay more in taxes than just about anywhere else in the world... and on top of that, the cost of regulation is estimated to be approximately 10 times that.

Taxation and regulations are the primary drivers to the flight of many companies/jobs...I would add unrealistic union demands to that list... how else would you explain auto companies opening shop in the US-ex-Detroit? ...and not getting only minimum wage?

 

[T Town Tommy]

You need to factor in the cost of regulation and taxation. Unless you're a preferred company in the US, you pay more in taxes than just about anywhere else in the world... and on top of that, the cost of regulation is estimated to be approximately 10 times that.

Taxation and regulations are the primary drivers to the flight of many companies/jobs...I would add unrealistic union demands to that list... how else would you explain auto companies opening shop in the US-ex-Detroit? ...and not getting only minimum wage?

Not only that but what constitutes "poor?" In America the poor are not nearly as poor as those in other countries. The definition of poor has been skewed by many to mean a three bedroom home, two car garage, cable tv, internet, and smart phones for all. That's not poor.

 

[ACamp1900]

Not only that but what constitutes "poor?" In America the poor are not nearly as poor as those in other countries. The definition of poor has been skewed by many to mean a three bedroom home, two car garage, cable tv, internet, and smart phones for all. That's not poor.

In fact in most Southern States that's the Governor's Mansion.

 

[Cackalacky]

You need to factor in the cost of regulation and taxation. Unless you're a preferred company in the US, you pay more in taxes than just about anywhere else in the world... and on top of that, the cost of regulation is estimated to be approximately 10 times that.

Taxation and regulations are the primary drivers to the flight of many companies/jobs...I would add unrealistic union demands to that list... how else would you explain auto companies opening shop in the US-ex-Detroit? ...and not getting only minimum wage?

Not only that but what constitutes "poor?" In America the poor are not nearly as poor as those in other countries. The definition of poor has been skewed by many to mean a three bedroom home, two car garage, cable tv, internet, and smart phones for all. That's not poor.

The convo keeps going in circles. The argument is that minimum wage if removed and wages are allowed to go as low as 3rd world countries, then yes poor people here in the US will become poorer. Becasue wages will decrease. Regulations and taxes (which are relatively low here compared to other places) and other things that keep us moderately protected from harm will go away to. This includes worker safety, environmental protection blah blah vlah.... What is being argued is this is a race to the bottom.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I am not making the argument, I'm saying that the argument was made.

But, now that you mention it, there were agriculture sector jobs until the Industrial Revolution made the manufacturing sector the engine of American growth and prosperity (while engulfing most of the farming jobs.) Manufacturing jobs were great until they were shipped overseas to the lowest bidders, leaving many Americans to settle for service sector jobs. What comes after the service sector jobs are devoured by "progress?" Eventually, we run out of "sectors" in which people can make a living, don't we?

While most of what you said is accurate, you're failing to mention the NEW industries that have provided millions of jobs through capitalism. Just start with the IT field alone. Professionals in that sector have a less than 1% unemployment rate, get paid very well because they're so high in demand, and many don't even need a 4 year degree. That field is huge on certifications.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

While most of what you said is accurate, you're failing to mention the NEW industries that have provided millions of jobs through capitalism. Just start with the IT field alone. Professionals in that sector have a less than 1% unemployment rate, get paid very well because they're so high in demand, and many don't even need a 4 year degree. That field is huge on certifications.

That's not how technological advancement works. Automation always destroys more jobs than it creates. That's the entire point of the enterprise-- the remove expensive, error-prone humans from a process.

Yes, in the near future those with the skills to maintain and repair robots will have similarly robust employment prospects; but the number of those jobs will be truly insignificant compared to the millions of obsolete bus & truck drivers, fast food workers, Amazon shelf stockers, etc.

 

[phgreek]

The convo keeps going in circles. The argument is that minimum wage if removed and wages are allowed to go as low as 3rd world countries, then yes poor people here in the US will become poorer. Becasue wages will decrease. Regulations and taxes (which are relatively low here compared to other places) and other things that keep us moderately protected from harm will go away to. This includes worker safety, environmental protection blah blah vlah.... What is being argued is this is a race to the bottom.

always was a race to the bottom...the only thing that helps that is competition for work force...scarcity of good help and a backlog of work. Once we openly welcomed third world countries into the every day competition w/o first making them adhere to basic standards...well, I'm not sure what folks expected. They define the competitive atmosphere now for manufacturing, assembly, etc. So the middle class now must redefine itself within electronics, software, engineering, accounting, and some trades. Once you do what we did...well, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

The other thing you can't do is take what once were teenager jobs and try to make them surrogates for what once were middle class jobs.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

That's not how technological advancement works. Automation always destroys more jobs than it creates. That's the entire point of the enterprise-- the remove expensive, error-prone humans from a process.

Yes, in the near future those with the skills to maintain and repair robots will have similarly robust employment prospects; but the number of those jobs will be truly insignificant compared to the millions of obsolete bus & truck drivers, fast food workers, Amazon shelf stockers, etc.

Transportation: My industry. Behind every truck is a driver, and behind every driver is a human dispatcher and a huge IT department deploying an internal network and a mobile app for customers.

Fast food workers: Servers/ bartenders will be needed no matter what, and people in management and finance will still be in charge.

Amazon: More of an argument for my case than against it. How many jobs have Amazon and Ebay created?

Side note: We have a national truck driver shortage now, and it's getting worse quickly with so many retiring. The price of transportation is going to rise even more than it has because companies like mine have to do so much more with so much less resources/ people.

 

[GoIrish41]

Transportation: My industry. Behind every truck is a driver, and behind every driver is a human dispatcher and a huge IT department deploying an internal network and a mobile app for customers.

Fast food workers: Servers/ bartenders will be needed no matter what, and people in management and finance will still be in charge.

Amazon: More of an argument for my case than against it. How many jobs have Amazon and Ebay created?

Side note: We have a national truck driver shortage now, and it's getting worse quickly with so many retiring. The price of transportation is going to rise even more than it has because companies like mine have to do so much more with so much less resources/ people.

Transportation -- Self driving automobiles (including trucks) are not far away. Automated dispatchers? that seems a lot more simpler to accomplish than self driving vehicles.

Fast food workers -- I was at a restaurant a few weeks ago that had automated ordering computers at the table. We ordered, ate, and paid our bill all from ther terminal. The entire time I was in the restaurant, I saw one server, whose job it was to bring food to the table. I'm sure there were still cooks in the back making the food, but there was almost no wait staff.

Amazon -- a few months ago there were stories about their plans to use drones to deliver products to people.

Between those three industries, automation will cost millions of jobs if it goes the way its looking like its going to go. It's a brave new world, and there will be a lot of poor people in it.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Between those three industries, automation will cost millions of jobs if it goes the way its looking like its going to go. It's a brave new world, and there will be a lot of poor people in it.

Yep. But instead of Soma, our unemployable underclass will be anesthetized through marijuana, online porn, Netflix and a Basic Income.

 

[Cackalacky]

Yep. But instead of Soma, our unemployable underclass will be anesthetized through marijuana, online porn, Netflix and a Basic Income.

 

[potownhero]

Fast food workers -- I was at a restaurant a few weeks ago that had automated ordering computers at the table. We ordered, ate, and paid our bill all from ther terminal. The entire time I was in the restaurant, I saw one server, whose job it was to bring food to the table. I'm sure there were still cooks in the back making the food, but there was almost no wait staff.

This has been expedited with rising minimum wage regulations.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Transportation -- Self driving automobiles (including trucks) are not far away. Automated dispatchers? that seems a lot more simpler to accomplish than self driving vehicles.

Fast food workers -- I was at a restaurant a few weeks ago that had automated ordering computers at the table. We ordered, ate, and paid our bill all from ther terminal. The entire time I was in the restaurant, I saw one server, whose job it was to bring food to the table. I'm sure there were still cooks in the back making the food, but there was almost no wait staff.

Amazon -- a few months ago there were stories about their plans to use drones to deliver products to people.

Between those three industries, automation will cost millions of jobs if it goes the way its looking like its going to go. It's a brave new world, and there will be a lot of poor people in it.

Transportation: That's a brave guess in your brave new world (great book), but if you think we're putting a robot behind a truck carrying 80,000 pounds of goods you're kidding yourself.

Fast food: Still need cooks, servers, bartenders, management, etc.

Amazon: They have enough FAA roadblocks in their way of drone deliveries to divert those plans for about 20 years.

 

[pkt77242]

Transportation: That's a brave guess in your brave new world (great book), but if you think we're putting a robot behind a truck carrying 80,000 pounds of goods you're kidding yourself.

Fast food: Still need cooks, servers, bartenders, management, etc.

Amazon: They have enough FAA roadblocks in their way of drone deliveries to divert those plans for about 20 years.

As to self driving big trucks you are kidding yourself, it is much closer than you think.
Here Comes A Self-Driving 18-Wheeler Truck

Also bartendimg and delivery of food at restaurants can be easily automated.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

As to self driving big trucks you are kidding yourself, it is much closer than you think.
Here Comes A Self-Driving 18-Wheeler Truck

Also bartendimg and delivery of food at restaurants can be easily automated.

You get an A+ for going on Google and typing "Self Driving 18 Wheeler." You get an F for reading it.

"Though a human driver will need to sit in the driver's seat, the truck has an autopilot feature that can take over on long highways. Fatigue is a leading factor in large truck crashes, and Daimler hopes a self-driving rig will give drivers a break during long hauls."

 

[pkt77242]

You get an A+ for going on Google and typing "Self Driving 18 Wheeler." You get an F for reading it.

"Though a human driver will need to sit in the driver's seat, the truck has an autopilot feature that can take over on long highways. Fatigue is a leading factor in large truck crashes, and Daimler hopes a self-driving rig will give drivers a break during long hauls."

Nope, I read the article. You do realize that with self-driving cars someone needs to sit in the front seat right? You also realize that the fact that they are this far along tells you that it won't be that much longer before it is in use in cities as well?

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Nope, I read the article. You do realize that with self-driving cars someone needs to sit in the front seat right? You also realize that the fact that they are this far along tells you that it won't be that much longer before it is in use in cities as well?

1) It's in test mode. Nowhere near turning the trucking industry upside down.

2) These are NOT replacing drivers, which was the original point. The automatic burger flipper? Yeah there's an argument to be made. Not in this case.

 

[GoIrish41]

1) It's in test mode. Nowhere near turning the trucking industry upside down.

2) These are NOT replacing drivers, which was the original point. The automatic burger flipper? Yeah there's an argument to be made. Not in this case.

So your industry will manage its problematic driver shortage by ignoring a technology that would solve the problem at a reduced long term cost? That does not seem like a sound business decision.