You don't know what you are talking about. It's quite difficult to get into Australia these days. The days of the 10 quid pom are long gone. Australia would be absolutely flooded if there was an open door policy. The fundamental purpose of a society surely is to promote the well being of it's citizens, and social programs are surely part of a measure of how well that is goal is met. Quality of life and standard of living is another measure - in fact THE measure of economic success. How many mega corporations are headquartered in a country is at most incidental.
OldTrader and Algorithm are right on the money. Pick up an economics textbook and read the chapter on price floors. Artificial wage minimums lead to unemployment for entry level workers, the very people the laws are supposed to help. If a company has $100 an hour to pay for labor and the labor is worth $5 an hour then they can hire 20 workers. If the minimum is raised to $10 and hour then they can now only hire 10 people. Productivity goes down, thus revenues go down and next year they have even less money to pay for labor. The net result is 10 relatively happier people (for now) making $10 an hour, 10 newly unemployed people that no longer have a job, and a less productive company that will not be able to hire as many people in the future, which may cost even the happy workers their jobs. As usual, the consequences of liberalism are the exact opposite of its intentions. Oh, and as a Chrisitan, I have no qualms opposing the minimum wage, because its not meant to be a career path. There is no reason in America that someone has to support a family on minimum wage. I am not talking about the people who fall into unfortunate circumstances as one poster listed above, that is what food stamps and charitiable organizations are for. But if you are able bodied, then you have an obligation to do the best you can to provide for your family (1 Timothy 5:8). There is unlimited opportunity for anyone willing to work hard enough. The evidence is in the flow of immigrants doing everything they can to get here. I will take a country that allows me to achieve to my maximum potential in exchange for no guarantees any day over a country that guarantees a minimum living but punishes my acheivements.
Ahhhh the wonderful dead weight loss. Great post. It would be nice if people realized that there are better ways of accomplishing the goal that minimum wage claims to accomplish. Minimum wage is merely a tool for political PR. In this case republicans wanted the estate tax bill passed, so they grouped it. Most times it is proposed in an attempt to win an election. In any case there are better ways of achieving the goal. Personally I don't mind the situation right now. For all intents and purposes we have a non-binding minimum wage right now (or almost anyway). I live in one of the lowest paying states in the nation, and temp workers here make about $7/hr to start. The company I work for has to pay them $10/hr to start because we are having a hard time finding them. In this case the actual market equilibrium is higher than the MW, but the fact that a minimum wage does exist (albeit much lower than the competitive wage) protects illegals and high schoolers from being thrown into sweat shops at $1/hr. If MW is raised it accomplishes no purpose. All other workers then demand higher wages because if the least valuable employee is worth more, they are automatically worth more too. Not to mention that if companies are able to pass the increase on to the consumers, then the cost of living increases. Companies then have lay-offs and we have higher unemployment. This lasts until inflation has caused the MW to again drop below the competetive market wage, at which time we are in a situation much like the one we have now. Personally I say that if we are going to have a MW, we should always maintain it about $2 below the competetive wage.
Incidental???? LOL! Policies that encourage opportunity and success are hardly "incidental"...and it then follows that the economic and industrial achievements occur where those policies exist. Hello???? When policies exist that take from the producers of a country, to give to the non-producers, economic and industrial achievements dry up. History is full of examples of this. If you are right, that the "fundamental purpose of a society is to promote the well being of it's citizens", then who among you decides which members of society get their "well-being" satisfied? You?? Your statist buddies?? Who gives you the right to take from me to give to some minimum wage worker who is too lazy to get off his butt, get an education that then qualifies him for a higher wage? Who decides what the definition of "well-being" is???? Is it raising the wages at the low levels, or is it providing the opportunities that enable the productive members of society to build businesses that then hire the less productive members? As one poster here stated, they are paying well more than minimum wage at his company because they have to to find enough workers. In other words, enough success at the high levels provides opportunity all along the scale. You need to understand that when you have finally succeeded in hobbling the productive members of our society, that you will have destroyed the ability to provide employment, goods, and services. Jobs will dry up at even minimum wage. OldTrader
After reading Oldtraders posts, I realize that is what I like about trading, I can be a total loser and make a good living. My husband has a 1990 Plymouth Voyager with simulated wood grain siding that cannot even make it to Oklahoma...but he has more money than 2/3rds of the Globes individuals. (not combined *chuckle*) If you have dirt floors and no windows and water on Thursdays from the water truck, would you be more happy with a microwave and carpeting? Thank you America. Your the dreamweaver of the illusion of what people think they need. If you have lived in both conditions please reply to this post, if not...you do not have a clue, like me.
Aww, only 7 posts to your name. Clearly I've underachieved, how do you come about that? My God my posts aren't good material, egads, people are judged by quality of work here? OMG, you've missed the good stuff especially the Hussman crap I had a good laugh at long ago. I just wonder how hard the Chinese laughed at Snow when he tried to talk about the currency. Ya know whats pretty amusing on this site, I had the article: "Global: Globalization's New Underclass " by Stephen Roach and along with the Gini Index. A lot of people responded to the article and liked it. But it doesn't exist on this site cause dumbo moderators deleted it. Even articles I posted up from mises.org get deleted or moved to chit chat. Did you go through those too before making your remarks. I have posted quite a few articles relating to the economy, but when they criticize Bush, its either deleted or moved to chit chat. I'm not really surprised by this poster, he has but you only have 7 posts and hallow criticism. Is he a moderator? I really don't care seeing this site is more entertainment than trading. Now now children take note, when ya don't like the message a poster is giving, attack the poster.
Studies show that the overwhelming majority of minimum wage employees either do not head households (students ect.) or are seniors supplementing retirement income. Bumping the 16 yo working behind the soda fountain in the Fashion Plaza a buck or two is not of paramount moral concern. We should all be sensitive to the plight of those raising families at or near the poverty level. However the reality is most "working poor" are already making more than the MW. (jobs in the $7-$10.00 per hour zone). For many poor it's not so much about wages as it is other factors like finding available time to work that makes economic survival difficult. Try being a single mom raising a couple of toddlers and still be able to put in a 40 hour week. Empty, feel good symbolism is pointless. We must deal with a wide strata of issues such as developing transportation networks that help folks commute from affordable neighborhoods to jobs in outlying areas, enabling mom's with innovative child care options, free alcohol and substance abuse help, and job training/networking programs. However those institutional changes require wholesale commitment. I guess it's easier to just say "raise MW by a buck and call it a day."
In 2000 posts you've said very little other than the tired, worn cliches heard over and over on Air America. (are they still around?) 90% of your input is snide one liners on the Chit Chat forum. The other 10% is cheerleading the housing bubble. Do you trade? I don't mean for a living. I mean have you ever traded? Doubtful. I ask anyone here, use search and peruse this idiot's posts. Drivel personified.
I hear your points Pabst...but I'm tired already....develop transportation, innovative child care options, alcohol and drug abuse programs, job training....whew! Tell you what...it sounds easier to just outsource the jobs to India! LOL! What's minimum wage in India? Anyone? OldTrader
retarded michael howard was makin' a similar case for not pushin' min wage here in britain; labor was for it and thx gawd the conservatives were not in power...as soon as the party raised the min wage the whole economy begun to show improvements; from more consumer spendin' to reduced benefit claims and increased overall quality of life leadin' to better health and less expenses in the medicare dept. the benefits were sure noticeable and blair kept raisin' it every yr; consequences were reduced unemployment and more people shoppin'; biz owner also strangely benefit since people were more likely to stay at their current jobs and get better at it..no need to keep hirin' new workers that costs time, effort and money...no more need to keep teachin' new poeple new skills since better wages attacted more qualified and skilled workers that otherwise would have been either on benefits or doin' sometin' else....not an inch of inflation was created in the meanwhile. all your arguments are based on hot air.