because poor people deserve not to starve in the streets

I like forcing people whose skills and experience demand less pay than the minimum wage to work under the table or be unemployed

>>3467810
Because they'll totally have a job when they have to be paid more than they are worth.

Because you don't want workers to be exploited by their employers and be paid just one or two dollars/

Because people need to afford being able to eat.

File: 1338764778388.jpg-(111 KB, 500x500, 1318111356151.jpg)

>>3467831
What's stopping the worker from quitting a getting a better paying job?

>>3467834
What about the people who's labor isn't worth minimum wage? Being unemployed doesn't put food on the table.

File: 1338764827464.jpg-(149 KB, 462x435, 1335249237693.jpg)

>mfw Sweden and other Scandinavian countries don't have minimum wage laws

Union contracts and other consensual arrangements between workers and employers ensure that people receive a decent wage. You don't need the government to fix all your problems libtards.

Because unemployed low skilled workers and minorities make a good voting base

Plus I also want to feel that self satisfactory illusion of being "Progressive" and "helping" other.

>>3467831
If companies would pay people one or two dollars per hour without a minimum wage law, then why do about 98% of the workers make more than minimum wage currently? Why don't they just pay everyone minimum wage?

>>3467869

> implying the people who oppose a minimum wage don't also oppose unions.

File: 1338765069961.png-(99 KB, 247x248, 1332539346358.png)

>>3467869
>Union contracts and other consensual arrangements between workers and employers ensure that people receive a decent wage. You don't need the government to fix all your problems libtards.

You do realize that unions can be effective only if they get a legal monopoly?

>2012
>not understanding how unions work

File: 1338765072485.jpg-(83 KB, 570x560, captain-america-steve-rogers[1(...).jpg)

>>3467776
Sick and damn tired of these commie threads spreading commie propaganda. Stop posting immediately.

If anything, the min wage should be going up. You can't survive on just 8 dollars an hour.

>>3467827
>minimum wage will lead to employers destroying all jobs
Are you listening to yourself?

>>3467776

I think it parts from the idea that every worker should have a minimum standard of living, at least to survive.

It would be unnecessary if capitalism is abolished and replaced with a more fair system.

>>3467858
>What about the people who's labor isn't worth minimum wage?
Well gee I don't know, I don't think society should starve them because the work society gives them isn't quantified enough to be able to eat.

>Being unemployed doesn't put food on the table.
So I don't exactly see how axing minimum wage laws will incentivize companies to increase their wages especially when competition for unskilled labor is so high and anyone can step in and do the same work for less.

>>3467944
>abolishing the minimum wage and allowing the free market to run it's course
>commie

>>3467970
Companies are cutting employees and having the remaining workers take up more responsibilities. I don't even know what you're talking about.

It stops people being exploited.

>>3467947
i do. so suck it.

minimum wage is causing me to be poorer. it only inflates the price of the things that low-income people buy.

to keep manchester capitalism away - we need people to buy shit, and to buy shit they need $$$.

File: 1338765314158.jpg-(38 KB, 357x511, 543948-captainamerica1_super[1(...).jpg)

>>3468004
A commie like you would let people starve or send them to labor camps. Its not the American way and I won't have it.

>>3468013
this is dogma. as usual, people who accept things axiomatically without looking for evidence will believe backwards things without thinking.

Everybody has the right to a decent living. You should be at least able to afford a decent home, food, clothing, transportation, and basic entertainment.

>>3467858
>What's stopping the worker from quitting a getting a better paying job?

There is a high risk involved. The worker doesn't know for how long he will remain unemployed or if the next job will be any better.

Maybe he or she cannot afford to take such a risk.

Because it stops most companies from turning everyday jobs into sweatshops paying 60c an hour.

because MUH ENTITLEMENT

Also I enjoy exploiting children from other countries.

>>3467918

Not all. Most libertarians are OK with unions, I look at it as an important check on the power of businesses. If a company is abusing their workers, the workers should organize and demand better working conditions and better pay. Libertarians just oppose unions receiving special favor from government, just like they oppose corporations receiving special favor. I also think most unions aren't really necessary today, kind of ridiculous for example that some UAW worker tightening bolts on an assembly line can earn more money and get better benefits than a college grad like me with a degree in electrical engineering. In situations like this the unions aren't protecting workers from egregious abuses, they're just using their power to squeeze more money out of companies for employees than they probably deserve for the work they do. But it's whatever, none of my business, if the employees can get the companies to agree to union contracts like that then that's their business.

>>3468052
>Teenager unemployment has skyrocketed since minimum wage was implemented.

Correlation doesn't mean causation.

I guess you want to remove all laws against child labor you fucking degenerate randfag.

>>3467947
Why not just raise minimum wage to 200$? Wouldn't that be better.

There isn't anything wrong with minimum wage laws. The problem is that people whine that it should be something stupid like 14 an hour.

Minimum wage puts more money in the pockets of people, so they have more money to spend to support other businesses.

>>3468067
Why does any worker today make more than minimum wage?

>>3468052
>He deleted his post

Its fucking reddit in here anymore I swear to god.

>>3468085
Are you retarded?

It's common sense. Teenagers don't have many marketable skills and therefore aren't worth the same as other workers, yet businesses are still forced to pay them minimum wage. Therefore they don't hire them because it isn't profitable.

Who the fuck is talking about removing child labor laws? Boy you liberals sure are desperate.

>>3468029

Sounds good in theory, but what if the average productivity per worker (on a per capita basis) isn't sufficient to create an equivalent amount of wealth?

>>3467940

Err, how do you figure? Government need to give them a monopoly, if an employer's abuses of workers are egregious enough, current employees will refuse to work for the employer and it will be impossible for the employer to find employees to replace the current ones. If the abuses are bad enough, workers will organize and demand better pay without any coercion from the government. If workers are just being entitled and their demands are unreasonable and unnecessary, though, the employer will have no problem finding more reasonable people to work for them and they'll just fire all the current workers and hire less whiny ones.

>>3468136
>Government need not give them a monopoly

typo

>>3468125
>It's common sense

Such a fallacious argument will not get you anywhere. Also corporate cocksucking is not common sense.

... so apparently some people DESERVE to be paid less than is feasible to get by on?

Really?

>>3468115
What about all the unskilled workers that the minimum wage law drives out of the market? All these teenagers could be getting paid 3-4$ an hour and spending that money, but instead they are unemployed and spend 0.

>>3468177
>... so apparently some people DESERVE to be paid less than is feasible to get by on?

Don't worry the free markets will take care of the rotting bodies of the dead workers.

>>3468029
>basic entertainment

File: 1338765911594.jpg-(95 KB, 800x792, min-wage.jpg)

if you don't understand this doodle

>don't pretend like you know shit about economics
>don't vote because you aren't qualified to assess anything
>get better educated

File: 1338765925162.png-(215 KB, 316x331, 12979127559[2].png)

>>3468177
>Minimum wage
>Feasible to live on

>>3468191

Why are you so obsessed with putting kids to work?

>>3468174
> Teenagers don't have many marketable skills and therefore aren't worth the same as other workers, yet businesses are still forced to pay them minimum wage. Therefore they don't hire them because it isn't profitable.

Is this hard for you to comprehend?

>>3468177

No, but making a little is better than making nothing. There are lots of things we can do help to help unfortunate people. Making their lives even more difficult than they already are isn't one of them.

>>3468125
>Teenagers don't have many marketable skills and therefore aren't worth the same as other workers

That's an assumption, not common sense. Pay them what they're worth as an individual, but don't let that worth be below what it takes to support themselves to a decent degree.

>>3468204

Mainstream economic theory is a fraud that is not sustained on any real evidence.

>>3468204
>throw up a supply-demand chart
>expect people to find it difficult

>>3468177
This tripfag is a tranvestite feminist troll.

>>3468204
d'awwww someone just graduated high school econ. How cute.

minimum wage = minimum price

every single time the gvt increases the minimum wage, prices rise almost instantly

>>3468226

Actually it is easy but it really doesn't matter. A good business should hire and retain the most productive workers regardless of their age.

File: 1338766159458.jpg-(15 KB, 376x368, 1310429527116.jpg)

>>3468254
>mfw liberals fail econ 101

http://www.swifteconomics.com/2011/08/11/liberals-are-smarter-than-conservatives-but/

>>3468204

I understand the doodle. Here are the problems:
1. Almost illegible.
2. Complete bullshit.

There is no one whose labor is worth less than $10/hour.

File: 1338766202653.jpg-(55 KB, 570x348, CaptainAmerica[1].jpg)

OH SAY CAN YOU SEE
BY THE DAWN'S EARLY LIGHT
WHAT SO PROUDLY WE HAILED
AT THE TWILIGHT'S LAST GLEAMING

>>3468232
So to you they are worth, as an individual, nothing? Because minimum wage laws directly cause workers with no skills to be unemployed.

>>3468281
>it doesn't really matter

Liberals aren't good at debating, are they?

>>3468283
>A 2002 International Monetary Fund study looked at "consensus forecasts" (the forecasts of large groups of economists) that were made in advance of 60 different national recessions in the ’90s: in 97% of the cases the economists did not predict the contraction a year in advance.

It's a fact, deal with it.

>>3468284
>There is no one whose labor is worth less than $10/hour.
Assertions out the ass.

File: 1338766283045.jpg-(30 KB, 500x338, Milton-Friedman-Colour.jpg)

>mfw minimum wage debates on /pol/ will never get beyond "WELL BUSINESSES WILL FORCE THEM TO WORK FOR PENNIES AND PEOPLE NEED A LIVING WAGE TO BUY STUFF, THEREFORE THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD FORCE THE GOVERNMENT TO PAY WORKERS MORE BECAUSE THAT WILL TOTALLY NOT BACKFIRE"

>>3468284
>There is no one whose labor is worth less than $10/hour.

And how, pray tell, did you come to that conclusion? Did you just pull it out of your ass or was there some kind of methodology and calculation involved? I'm all ears.

>>3468232
Funny you bring up degrees since that is another thing the government has fucked up do to intervention under the guise of "equality".

There shouldn't be a minimum wage, people should be forced to work without pay, they can be fed whatever gruel is cheapest and they can be used until they die, even if they don't last long, its not as if we're going to run out of humans any time soon.

>>3468330
>liberals falling back on baseless strawman because they can't form a coherent argument

Absolutely pathetic.

>>3468327

Are you talking about the American government? That government has been at the servitude of corporations for decades and they have not cared about any equality ever since.

>>3468284
Do you seriously think it's impossible for someone to value a task less than $10 for an hour of it?

>>3468254
>>3468204

Economics and economic theory is worthless. It removes any consideration of human decency, morals, and instead tries to create 'laws' quantifying relationships and goods.

Its like a North Korean coming up with a theory of 'Ooga Booga' to express how they efficiently allocate resources and explain supply / demand in their North Korean labor camp of starvation.

To all the supporters of minimum wage, answer me this.

Why doesn't the government just raise the minimum wage to 500$ an hour?

>>3468368
dem evil corporations

File: 1338766548657.jpg-(65 KB, 409x501, captainamerica[1].jpg___SQUARE(...).jpg)

I am a real American
Fight for the rights of every man
I am a real American
Fight for what's right - Fight for your life!

>>3468368
Because it's the minimum wage, not the extravagance wage.

>>3468338

I wasn't joking fagtard. Bring back slavery for the poor. It's little different from how it is now, only there's less of an illusion of freedom. People are forced to work, they get to survive in return.

I suppose you think money should just be handed out to retards like yourself who don't have well paying and valued jobs. Typical liberal negro.

>>3468368
>Why doesn't the government just raise the minimum wage to 500$ an hour?

Reductions to the absurd are pointless in this case.

People are arguing that people should have a basic standard of living just to survive (under the constraints of the capitalist system), not that the minimum wage works like a magical invisible hand that fixes everything.

>>3468283

Holy shit. That survey is fucking terrible.

>6. Third-world workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited.
Define "exploited". Your definition is not the same as mine.
>7. Free trade leads to unemployment.
Yes it does, at times.
Socialism = zero unemployment.
Reductio ad absurdum.
>8. Minimum wage laws raise unemployment.
The correlation is minimal at best.
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/11/18/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-unemployment/
Not the best source, but it's good enough.

Libertarianfags cannot into statistics.

Minimum wage is retarded.
If your education is too low (or useless, like majoring in philosophy) to find a job which is paid good enough to provide for your family you shouldn't be allowed to breed anyway.
The absence of a minimum wage is the only thing we have left of the originally so well working natural selection.

>>3468230
Yeah working at a shitty job all for a completely shitty wage that probably wont even help their situations sure sounds like an improvement.

>>3468029
you do understand that is everyone lived that way the earth couldn't sustain us right? it our way of life right now is unsustainable.
fuck.

>>3468426

>People are arguing that people should have a basic standard of living just to survive

And what we're trying to tell you is that the minimum wage is a terrible way of achieving this goal. It makes people relatively worse off, not better.

File: 1338766874873.jpg-(47 KB, 347x600, 1338427378379.jpg)

>>3468435

Yes, if too many poor people are allowed to breed the jewish master race be too outnumbered and will never take over america.

>>3468368

To supporters to abolishing minimum wage, why doesn't the government lower it to $2/hr?

>>3468426
You are forcing unskilled poor workers out of the market, because their labor isn't worth the minimum wage. How is that giving people a basic standard of living? You're hurting the people who need the most help of all.

>>3468368
Because that will raise the price of everything else.
That's like saying "The govt can print more money, so why don't they just do that?"
That devalues the money already there.

Having a stupid high minimum wage just makes goods cost more. Minimum wage is meant to be the minimum amount of money you can support yourself with. It has to be balanced with current market prices not far exceeding or far below them.

Having a national minimum isn't really ideal because some areas have a higher cost of living than others. $60K may make for a nice life in northern Michigan, but it won't get you a cardboard box in central New York. Having states set their own minimum wouldn't really work out either, because the CoL varies even within states.

>>3468422

>waah i have to work for a living, i'm a slave, why can't everything i want fall out of the sky whenever i want it, feel sorry for me and give me your money

>>3468477
Why? Because the government loves to look like they're helping.

>>3467776
living costs.

>>3468477
It should be 0.

>>3468464

And what we're telling you is that we just don't buy it. Abolishing minimum wage doesn't incentivize companies to increase wages. Prove it.

Have better solutions to improve the economy? Go for it, but till then why abolish minimum wage?

>>3468499

>Thinks I'm being sarcastic.

What's the matter, don't recognize it when someone isn't being a liberal pussy whipped nigger lover, like yourself?

File: 1338767124937.jpg-(780 KB, 1600x1201, 1338622706006.jpg)

>>3468460
>you do understand that is everyone lived that way the earth couldn't sustain us right?

Actually it would be perfectly sustainable as long as we tax the rich fairly.

>>3468476
uneducated people breeding leads to more uneducated people.
who then again breed, thus creating more uneducated people.

all in favour of minimum wage should just watch the movie "Idiocracy". it pretty much shows where we're heading with our stupid "we need to help the less privileged" state of mind.

I say let them fucking starve, what do I care? I never had rich parents or anything but I'm able to do a proper job.

If an individual supposedly can't even survive on $X an hour, then why would they take a job paying that much even if it were legal? Such a job would be worthless to people - if it really wasn't enough to survive on they would be just as well off by being unemployed. So why would there even be a market available for labor that's worth less than a "living wage"?

>>3468512
What about the living costs of the people minimum wage forces into unemployment?

>>3468526
Unemployment would drop, leading to more people receiving wages, which would result in more people spending money.

Abolishing minimum wage would also improve the countries overall standard of living because it would allow the poor people, the ones who are hurting the most.

>>3468535
>Tax
>Fair
MFW

>you do understand that is everyone lived that way the earth couldn't sustain us right?

>Capitalistpropaganda.jpg

There's enough for everyone, if everyone does their part and people don't take more then they deserve.

>>3468526

Maybe you don't buy it, but that may simply be because you're stubborn and base your political opinions on feelings rather than facts, rather than any failure on anyone else's part.

>Abolishing minimum wage doesn't incentivize companies to increase wages.

Maybe it doesn't, but that's not what is being claimed. What is being claimed is that a minimum wage increase makes low-skilled labour relatively more expensive. Other things equal, employers will look for relatively cheaper replacements, such as more skilled labour or automated machinery. People who don't have a marginal product to justify the minimum wage will tend to find fewer jobs than otherwise.

File: 1338767330975.jpg-(33 KB, 300x350, 1333323214340.jpg)

>>3468464
>And what we're trying to tell you is that the minimum wage is a terrible way of achieving this goal

I don't take in consideration arguments that part from the logic of a religious fundamentalist. Sorry.

>>3468484
>You are forcing unskilled poor workers out of the market, because their labor isn't worth the minimum wage. How is that giving people a basic standard of living?

Following Rawlsian principles even the unemployed would be given the means for a basic standard of living.

>>3468550
>So why would there even be a market available for labor that's worth less than a "living wage"?

Sure is entitled middle class white kids in here. A paycheck, even if it isn't as big as you'd like, is better than nothing. It could be the difference between a man starving or not.

File: 1338767385461.jpg-(199 KB, 1920x1080, 1327459562070.jpg)

>>3468548
You know I constantly read people recommending others to watch that movie. I always figured it was another Zeitgeist or What the bleep Do We Know. What exactly is it about? Is it interesting or an hour and a half of WAKE UP THE MEDIA IS BAD?

>>3468594
If it's enough not to starve, is that not a living wage?

>>3468550

Because herp derp wage slavery or something like that

Makes you wonder how the hell illegal Mexicans manage to live off a couple dollars an hour. Probably helps that they don't have taxes withheld from their paycheck, they actually skimp instead of buying iPhones and $100/mo cellular plans, etc.

>>3468578
except there isn't.
the average life expectancy worldwide has increased by >10 years over the past 50 years. during this time the world population has doubled.

the resources however are still limited

heading for oblivion and everyone's too much of a faggy twat to say out loud what needs to be done.

>>3468561
>What about the living costs of the people minimum wage forces into unemployment?

that's what I'm talking about. the issue is on both sides, minimum wages too low and the prices of basic things like rent too high.
Too damn high I might add.
If someone worked 40 hours a week at minimum wage, that's 1160 before any bills.
A one bedroom apartment in NYC is twice that.

>>3468604
Living wage isn't just food.

And again, if someone is struggling to pay their bills, isn't a low paying job better than the unemployment their are forced to endure because of the minimum wage laws?

>>3467940

Not true. Sweden is a good example. Any european nation is a good example. There are many different unions.

>>3468550

Durr, if starving is an acceptable option then please hand me over your food money.

Having a 'market for labor' is a bad way to put it. There's always a market for work because people would rather pawn off work to others. People accept a job because there's no better option for their circumstances (besides welfare, but that's arguably worse than the effort required of a job).

>>3468630

Explain to me why the lowest producing members of society are entitled to live by themselves in one of the most coveted areas in the country.

There is only so much to go around.

>>3468630
But if you raised the minimum wage, that would just further increase unemployment among the unskilled and the uneducated, and those are the people who are the most in need of money.

>>3468636

I have seen the fancy graphs and all but I would like to see if someone can post a real-world example of a government abolishing minimum wages which reduces unemployment.

>>3468603
it's sort of a sci-fi comedy.
plays in the future where all of humanity are pretty much retarded because over the past 500 years the uneducated people have been the ones breeding like hell while the smart ones died out.

>>3468630

Living in NYC is fucking retarded unless you're rich. Move to a smaller city and you can get a 1 BR apartment for like $400 a month. Not sure how poor people without rent control can even survive in NYC, cost of living is re-fucking-diculous.

Either way works. It really doesn't matter.

>>3468636
Tell me then, what else is included? If that small paycheck isn't enough for them to survive, they're going to die just like if they were unemployed.

Because it regulates corporarations, which is always good.

File: 1338767752278.jpg-(37 KB, 465x308, 1325423853655.jpg)

>>3468670
Haha oh wow. I might check it out if I can find it online.

>>3468685
Rent, water, electricity ,etc etc.

If you were poor and barely getting by, would you rather have a job paying 5$ an hour, or unemployed?

>>3468366
I take it you are against Math for the same reasons?

File: 1338767946492.jpg-(55 KB, 454x558, 1318222550293.jpg)

>>3468686
>"regulates" corporations by effectively prohibiting them from hiring anyone without a certain level of skills
>good

>>3468719
>water
Okay, if you're going to make that separate from food.
>rent, electricity
Homeless people survive without that.

>>3468663
>lowest producing members of society

you mean trust fund kids and rich fucks living off inheiritance?

>>3468749
And homeless peoples lives are fucking awful
You argue like shit

>>3468667
>that would just further increase unemployment among the unskilled and the uneducate

How?

>>3468719
>If you were poor and barely getting by, would you rather have a job paying 5$ an hour, or unemployed?

If you're barely getting by, it sounds like you're making a living wage already.

>>3468749
>In public policy, a living wage is the minimum hourly income necessary for a worker to meet basic needs (for an extended period of time or for a lifetime). These needs include shelter (housing) and other incidentals such as clothing and nutrition.

Do you know what you're talking about?

You fucktards don't understand why everything is more expensive in liberalfuck cities/states like CA and NY. Minimum wage is higher, thus the employer has to pay more (plus whatever shit benefits as well) thus they have to increase the costs of pretty much everything.

Hurr durr it costs so much to live in the city, thurrfore I should get paid more mannn lets keep raising minimum wage....so employers have to pay more and they have to raise the prices on everything. durrr i can't understand why everytime they raise min wage I still struggle to pay for stuff. hhurrrr.

>>3468677
I am in a smaller city.
a 2 bedroom is 800. Electricity is 400.

>>3468766
Because if they aren't educated or skilled enough to meet the standard set by minimum wage, they are forced into unemployment.

>>3468774
I'm trying to say that a living wage covers a lot more than what's actually necessary.

>>3468561
>Unemployment would drop, leading to more people receiving wages, which would result in more people spending money.

Let's see here, cutting wages to take from worker and give to another would somehow increase spending? No it won't. You'll have less spending because the poor will be busy saving what little money they earn as it is.

I agree that it might help unemployment though, but everyone would still be suffering austerity.

>Abolishing minimum wage would also improve the countries overall standard of living because it would allow the poor people, the ones who are hurting the most.

Methinks you didn't finish the thought.

>>3468789
So minimum wage has a set standard now? I thought it was the jobs that had the standard, not the wages.

>>3468814
>So minimum wage has a set standard now?

As in, if your skills are not worth the price, you are unemployed? Do I have to spoonfeed you?

There are good reasons for minimum wage, but the Unions will look after most people in a situation without minimum wage.

>>3468807

Nobody's wages would be cut. People above the minimum wage would continue to earn what they earn because they actually have a marginal productivity to justify it.

>>3468788
>Electricity is 400.

da fuq?

>There are good reasons for minimum wage
Such as?

>>3468822
No, you have to make your words make sense though.

And remind me, how many minimum wage jobs require skills that are not offered as on-the-job training?

>>3468844
Pudget Sound Energy. fucking vampires.

>>3467858
>What's stopping the worker from quitting a getting a better paying job?

The lack of other jobs or a competitive job market.

When you have fewer jobs than workers the wages can be as uncompetitive as they like.

>>3468807
>cutting wages to take from worker and give to another would somehow increase spending?

98% of workers make are at or above minimum wage, your argument has no basis in reality. You are not taking wages from anyone.

Also funny you mention stealing wages, because that's exactly what trade unions do to get increased pay for their members.

>Abolishing minimum wage would also improve the countries overall standard of living because it would allow the poor people to get jobs, the ones who are hurting the most.

fixed

America has a minimum wage China does not.
The Fortune 500 companies moved production jobs to China where workers earn $15 to $20 a day and are earning more than the $2 a day they would otherwise earn.
If YOU would work for $30 to $40 a day your production jobs would return. You would need to change your lifestyle (dormatories, eating habits, minimum health care, and no 401K's).

Do you think America should pay every worker in the world our minimum wage or only our legal citizens?

>muh compassion
>muh moral highground
>muh slippery slope fallacy]
>muh economic illiteracy

So have any leftist fag made any argument that isn't an appeal to emotion?

Ask yourself what people did before minimum wage, did everyone starve and die in the streets? No.

Everything actually cost less back then. Candy for a penny, a quarter for a burger, homes for less than 30k in decent cities. Is there any economist that would doubt that minimum wage causes inflation?

>>3468907
>So have any leftist fag made any argument that isn't an appeal to emotion?

Plenty. Go back through the thread, there's dozens you just simply stopped responding to because you got cornered.

>>3468912
>Is there any economist that would doubt that minimum wage causes inflation?

Have you seen some of the left's economists? It wouldn't surprise me.

>>3468912
problem is, people back then didn't gouge the fuck out of everything.

>>3468849
So you think it's efficient to pay someone minimum wage while training them for a position that isn't worth minimum wage?

Minimum wage laws fon't increase unemplyment you guyz trust me.

>In 2007, the United States enacted a law incrementally raising the minimum wages in American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) until they equal the U.S. minimum wage

>In American Samoa, employment fell 19 percent from 2008 to 2009 and 14 percent from 2006 to 2009

> Average inflation-adjusted earnings fell by 5 percent from 2008 to 2009 and by 11 percent from 2006 to 2009

>n the CNMI, employment fell 13 percent from 2008 to 2009 and 35 percent from 2006 to 2009. Average inflation-adjusted earnings rose by 3 percent from 2008 to 2009 and remained largely unchanged from 2006 to 2009

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-427

>>3468907

How does that make any sense? Pretty much anything regarding the welfare of people in general is going to result in an "appeal to emotion" from that perspective. But when you're trying to create a functioning society, you're trying not to fuck people over. If you're just going to propose some survival of the fittest bullshit, nobody needs to listen to you.

>>3468962
See this faggot >>3468931

I won't. Wage labor differs from slavery only in that the slave has to buy his own food.

>>3468931
The only arguments that liberals have made is "but mah living standards".

What they don't understand is that a minimum wage causes the people who's labor isn't worth the wage to be unemployed, thereby worsening his standard of living.

>>3468962

Do you remember what happened between 2008 and 2009?

Just trying to figure out if you're intellectually dishonest or an idiot.

>>3468580

>Maybe it doesn't, but that's not what is being claimed. What is being claimed is that a minimum wage increase makes low-skilled labour relatively more expensive. Other things equal, employers will look for relatively cheaper replacements, such as more skilled labour or automated machinery. People who don't have a marginal product to justify the minimum wage will tend to find fewer jobs than otherwise.

That happens regardless, people always try to lower costs in business by using machinery.

Low skill labor is only high cost because workers are getting paid more. You still need low skill labor in basic businesses.

Now sure, if you raise minimum wage too high then businesses can't operate, but when businesses can operate then they have every incentive to keep workers' wages as low as possible.

As far as my personal opinion on minimum wage goes, I'm only ok with abolishing minimum wage laws if all other business laws and zoning regulations are abolished (basically no government), leveling the playing field for the worker to leave any time and become a business operator.

Otherwise, you're just re-establishing perpetual slave labor.

>>3468987

>What they don't understand is that a minimum wage causes the people who's labor isn't worth the wage to be unemployed, thereby worsening his standard of living.

Like who's labour?

Nobody should work a full week for less than what your minimum wage is now. If you're unemployed, at least you can stay and home then and don't have to exhaust yourself with repetitive labour. You're just making an argument here for how welfare can be used to elevate the standard of living without realising it.

>>3467776
>You have 10 seconds to justify the existence of a minimum wage.

Placation and/or pacification.
Poorfags believe it works, therefore it does, so they shut up about it and put bottoms in the pails.

What do I win?

>>3469003
>when businesses can operate then they have every incentive to keep workers' wages as low as possible.

I'll ask one more time: why then do about 98% of the workers in the US make more than minimum wage?

>>3468957
nobody said what the position was. Seems like you're arguing just to justify a pre-determined view...

File: 1338769094366.png-(221 KB, 407x308, Ari Winetraub.png)

>>3468670
>That intro
>IMMA FUCK ALL YA'LL!

Oh shit I love it already. Its so damn true.

>>3469007
> If you're unemployed, at least you can stay and home then and don't have to exhaust yourself with repetitive labour.

PFFFTTTHAHAHAHA. Are liberals THIS retarded? You think that an unemployed poor person is better off than one with a low paying job?

>>3468973
With all the sunk costs involved in the implementation of a minimum wage society ends up worse off along ofcourse with the supposed beneficiaries. So stop that rhetoric stupid bitch the policies you propose end up being detrimental to the poor so how can you claim "moral superiority" in this case?

Also nice try playing the "social darwinism" card cunt straight out of the textbook.

>>3468839
>Nobody's wages would be cut. People above the minimum wage would continue to earn what they earn because they actually have a marginal productivity to justify it.

Lol, so what? Businesses will magically spring into hiring mode after minimum wage is abolished for shits and giggles? No, they continue to only hire if they can afford it.

File: 1338769223928.png-(102 KB, 286x400, income2[1].png)

>>3469003

Yes, it's true that businesses are always trying to lower their costs, relatively speaking. But normally that doesn't occur at the expense of employment. A business that lowers its costs and prices creates savings for consumers, who spend the money elsewhere, creating new jobs in other industries. The minimum wage does not have this effect because it isn't accompanied by an increase in productivity. It is a net loss for the population, not a net gain.

It's also true that businesses need low skilled labour. But the point is that the minimum wage will lead employers to get other people to do that labour more than they otherwise would.

>when businesses can operate then they have every incentive to keep workers' wages as low as possible

Maybe, but that's not their only incentive. Their main incentive is to match pay with productivity to keep workers from being bid away.

I would be happy if all regulations were repealed. I don't have a real preference for one over the other. And of course, I don't consider it "slavery" to make the standard of living of some people at least marginally better than it would have been otherwise.

Mexicans will pull the daily wage down to dirt.

Here's a chalange.

You get a paycheck, right?

use some simple math and only allow yourself a five dollars a day. You are now no longer working a minimum wage, but instead working a maximum wage.

See how it works out. See how quickly you become homeless or unemployed.

Oh, not getting enough? just get a better job. Because it's as easy as just saying it.

>>3469074
Hiring unskilled people would now be profitable because they don't have to pay them a certain amount for their work. Understand?

> If you're unemployed, at least you can stay and home then and don't have to exhaust yourself with repetitive labour.
>A paycheck, even if it isn't as big as you'd like, is better than nothing. It could be the difference between a man starving or not.

Liberal survey:
[ ] Have cake
[ ] Eat cake

>>3469063
Yes. You should only work if it's worth your time.

>>3468988
Read the whole report stupid cunt. It also comes from an independent non partisan government group so you can't scream "Koch brothers or "neoliberals".

>>3468136
>If the abuses are bad enough.

So what if the employer exploits them just a tiiiiiiiny bit less that it takes to be "enough"?

>>3469110
>Yes. You should only work if it's worth your time.

This is too stupid to be a liberal viewpoint. This is like, sarah palin stupid.

>>3469116
If the workers don't give enough fucks to unionize, why should you?

>>3469137
but unions are socialist. why would I join something that hates america?

>>3469094

>hurr durr if we take away minimum wage, everything won't cost less.
>lets take a little money and pretend living costs don't change...SEE YOURE HOMELESS NAO

fuck off

>>3469110
>I would really like not to starve in the streets, but I don't know if working for 5$ is worth my time..

>>3468912
Yes they did.
There were Poor Houses.
There were Charity Hospitals.
There were Soup Kitchens.
People were homeless and lived in shanty towns.
People froze and starved to death.

We no longer allow child labor in factories but farm children still work on family farms.
There are no jobs for those who don't complete secondary school and computers have eliminated middle managment jobs.

>>3468884
>98% of workers make are at or above minimum wage, your argument has no basis in reality. You are not taking wages from anyone.

Look dude, he said "Unemployment would drop." How do you think unemployment drops? How would businesses somehow get the money to hire someone new? By cutting costs elsewhere. That's the current argument about minimum wage, you abolish it and can hire more people (lowering unemployment) by lowering wages.

>Also funny you mention stealing wages, because that's exactly what trade unions do to get increased pay for their members.

That's kinda my point. The money has to come from somewhere (unless you're a bank).

>Abolishing minimum wage would also improve the countries overall standard of living because it would allow the poor people to get jobs, the ones who are hurting the most.

I agree with you there, abolishing minimum wage would most likely increase employment.

But raise standards of living? Doubt it.

File: 1338769547178.png-(232 KB, 720x520, 1334613903428.png)

>>3469094
>You get a paycheck, right?

Nope. Sorry, homeless people don't get paychecks because they were forced into unemployment thanks to your beloved minimum wage laws.

>>3469094
see >>3468912

>>3469121
No, it's common sense. If it's worth your time to work, you do it. Nobody is forcing you to get a job, and if you don't think it's worth it, you don't do it. Why the fuck would I get a job that pays a dollar an hour if I don't need it. It wont help with bills or putting food on the table, and it takes time and energy away from doing other things that are far more productive.

>>3469179
see>>3469149

>>3469148
Congrats, you get it. it's the same logic you guys are using, thinking somehow abolishing the minimum wage will make the cost of living go away.

>>3468230

That's why we have welfare, which is also an added bonus in times of recession as it keeps people spending instead of suddenly losing their income.

Why do these threads keep assuming that countries better than the US don't exist.

>>3468912
>Did people starve and die in the street?

http://en.allexperts.com/q/U-S-History-672/2012/4/poverty-1890-new-york.htm

Yes.

>>3469055
told you. this flick made me realize it's time for a radical change.

>>3467858
ah, study story, It happened before, without control you end up with retarded low wages. Even now wages are too low compared to what employers gain in comparison. I really don't know what system would be better, but you really need some cultural brainwashing to not see how the current system benefits those who already have money rather than those that want to work. And your "free of limits wage" would be even worse.

>>3469216
>Even now wages are too low compared to what employers gain in comparison
>too low

Can I get a definition of that?

>>3469149

>hurr durr 5$ isn't worth my time, good starve to death faggot
>implying this shouldn't be the reason we take welfare, unemployment and entitlements away

>>3469169
>How would businesses somehow get the money to hire someone new?

In order for a business to stay afloat, it needs to be making a profit. It it's making a profit, it can invest some of that profit into a new worker who's productivity will cause his overall profit to increase. Right now he can only make investments in workers that perform jobs that are worth minimum wage. If there was no minimum wage, businesses could afford to invest in unskilled workers who perform tasks that, despite not being worthy of minimum wage, are still beneficial.

File: 1338769878613.jpg-(30 KB, 140x160, 1279743376205.jpg)

There isn't any, it l leads to less jobs overall. And some jobs don't deserve to be paid minimum wage at all.
>mfw I was packaging stuff for 11EUR/hour (minimum wage) during a summer job
>mfw I didn't deserve that 11EUR/hour

>>3469170
We're talking about you.
But thanks for moving the goals and admitting your concession.

No empirical evidence to suggest it increases unemployment.

File: 1338770000690.gif-(10 KB, 284x321, teen unemployment.gif)

>>3469248

ITT: if we pay them less, there will somehow be more jobs! Nevermind where these jobs come from, I have no freaking clue since there's no increase in demand for work and thus no increase in available positions, just a decrease in pay for existing positions. And if you question that, <insert appeal to emotion via "wages cause homelessness">! also, facts? we don't need no stinkin' facts!

>>3469270
>aparently teen unemployment = total unemployment
>aparently three years is a suitable sample for long term economic policy

File: 1338770168070.jpg-(27 KB, 305x457, liberal4.jpg)

What really infuriates me is how these leftist faggots can keep playing the "moral superiority/compassion" card when the policies they advocate are actually hurting the poor. They can only make appeals to emotion when everything else has predictably failed and we have to expose them for that.

Because in the long-run it creates a feedback loop. The more people who have more disposable money to spend on stuff, it creates demand. The more demand for products and services, the more people they have to hire.

Short-term, it will allow people who are used to not having much money, suddenly have money to spend on necessities.

>>3469303
>attack the person instead of the argument, that'll win the debate!

>>3469302
Teen unemployment is the best way to illustrate the trend because they are generally the most unskilled.

Are leftists incapable of critical thinking?

>>3469248

...are you serious? Ask any mainstream economist about the effect of minimum wage on unemployment, it's pretty much an undisputed fact that decreases employment. This isn't some fringe Austrian theory or something like that, it's something that the vast majority of economists suggest.

Now, how big of an effect it has on employment and whether the pros outweigh the cons are debatable. IIRC the negative effects on employment are usually pretty tiny (usually only increases unemployment by fractions of a percent) and it mainly hurts high school students and other younger workers with fewer marketable skills but who can still get by since they have mommy and daddy to help them out. But claiming that there's no empirical evidence to suggest it increases employment... yeah, no, learn what the fuck you're talking about first.

>>3469289

If you pay them less, you can get two workers!
If labor costs go up, why hire at all?
Imagine you ran a business for once in your life, i know it'll never happen in a million years because you're a dumb sheep, why pay someone 10$ an hour if you can pay two people 5$ an hour and double the workload?

Liberals cannot into logic or economics.

>>3469313
>Teen unemployment is the best way to illustrate the trend because they are generally the most unskilled.
>never mind that teens can't legaly work in most states until they're no longer teens, making most of them unemployed by reason of law

>>3469289
Lump of labour fallacy.

>>3469319
>If you pay them less, you can get two workers!
>Never mind that there's already someone doing the job and no openings, we'll hire someone anyway!

Really?

File: 1338770332124.jpg-(31 KB, 350x351, 1319924343253.jpg)

>>3469324
>never mind that teens can't legaly work in most states until they're no longer teens, making most of them unemployed by reason of law

At this point I can't tell if I'm being trolled or not.

>>3469246
if you were in germany you could have been payed €2/hour and the government would have subsidized it to the minimum wage.

where are you? it sounds like france

>>3469328
>Lump of labour fallacy.
Refried bean burrito fallacy.

>>3467869

Not to mention Singapore and until very recently Hong Kong.

minimum wage does not improve people's quality of life, period.

Raising minimum wage will make companies get rid of jobs, but lowering it wont make them create jobs.

Companies will always employ the least amount of people possible. If they can profit with their current number of employees, why would they hire new people without minimum wage? That would just increase their management overhead. You can always make some dumb bastard do more and more work. Who is he going to jump ship for? The longer we hold out on hiring people, the sooner we can scrap minimum wage and drive down wages to near zero. I look forward to make you dumb shit socialists suck my dick for almost nothing.

>>3469084
>Yes, it's true that businesses are always trying to lower their costs, relatively speaking. But normally that doesn't occur at the expense of employment. A business that lowers its costs and prices creates savings for consumers, who spend the money elsewhere, creating new jobs in other industries. The minimum wage does not have this effect because it isn't accompanied by an increase in productivity. It is a net loss for the population, not a net gain.

*looks at chart* Now how the fuck do you "measure" productivity? Nice propaganda chart you got there.

Well yeah I agree with you. Short of the people doing labor for less, everyone else in society gets more bang for their buck at their expense.

>It's also true that businesses need low skilled labour. But the point is that the minimum wage will lead employers to get other people to do that labour more than they otherwise would.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

>>3468123
there are jobs with less competition than others.
jobs that anyone can do, jobs that are perfect for unqualified have lots of competition. That means if you want more, you can be replaced with one that wants less without any risk to the employer.

In exchange, I as an engineer, ask more. If they decide to fire me, they lose my current work, they lose someone who was "in" in what was happening (weeks to months of adaptation) , and they risk contracting someone who is not that good as me.

And it would be even worse if I was actually irreplaceable, some programmers write poorly documented obfuscated code just so they employers must eat dirt when they fire them.

>>3469336

>Never mind that there's already someone doing the job and no openings, we'll hire someone anyway!

Ever heard of layoffs and firing? When people are overpaid and you can get labor for less? Tell me one business that wouldn't want less costs?

>>3469084
>Maybe, but that's not their only incentive. Their main incentive is to match pay with productivity to keep workers from being bid away.

I worked several low skilled jobs in my past including working at a movie theater. There are plenty of jobs that don't increase profits despite workers being very productive including custodial staff. I got paid minimum wage ($6.50) and I'm 100% positive if they could get away with paying me less or hiring someone else, they would've. I'm sorry, but when it comes to low skill work that anyone can do, businesses will not give two shits.

>I would be happy if all regulations were repealed. I don't have a real preference for one over the other. And of course, I don't consider it "slavery" to make the standard of living of some people at least marginally better than it would have been otherwise.

I just don't see it as the proper solution to fix the problem when there's a million other things we could be doing first.

>>3469340
in most states you're required to be 16. in some, 18.

given there's six years in the teens, and two thirds of that are unemployed due to the law, that makes it a pretty shitty graph.

>>3469374
>Ever heard of layoffs and firing?
>I didn't mention it before but I'll mention it now because it helps my position! It's totaly not changing things after the fact, nope!

>>3469356
Have you ever worked ANYWHERE? Most of retail runs off a skeleton crew model due to minimum wage. Don't you think companies would LIKE to have better customer service and hence better sales if they could afford it?

I was thinking of offering to work a day for anyone without charge by putting an ad in the paper. for no reason other than being bored out of my mind.


thoughts?

>>3469356
>If they can profit with their current number of employees, why would they hire new people without minimum wage?

Because there are tasks that could be delegated to unskilled people but currently aren't because paying the worker costs more than the benefit on him completing said task.

I have a question: How do you increase demand when workers are paid shit?

Face it, minimum wage exists to protect corporations and workers from short sighted business practices. It benefits all parties.

>>3469395
Speaking from working for radio shack.tandy corp, no. they could not give less shits if they tried. They don't want customer service, they want to sell shit.
credit cards, contract phones, and batteries. it's not for the consumer, it's not for the employee, it's for the bottom line.

>>3469395
I've never worked because I'm not a plebian. My dad owns a large company and I'm tired of shit heads demanding that we give them jobs when we have no incentive to. We are making shit loads of dosh and there is zero reason to expand our work force, even if we could pay them next to nothing.

>>3469376
>labour pool

Not everyone that is in an age group that can work actually wants to or can work.

The labour participation rate in America is 63% so the unemployment rate is 37%?

That's a really shitty way of "trying" to refute the data in this graph.

>>3469404
>How do you increase demand when workers are paid shit?

Demand is a social construct.

>>3469436
> I'm not a plebian.
>I live off daddy's money

confirmed for plebian and useless leech.

>>3469442
Then what will they pay with? Their welfare cheques? How will the government fund that? With what tax revenue? Certainly not tax revenues from businesses, because taxing businesses destroys economies.

File: 1338770809506.jpg-(8 KB, 249x258, 1315918997167.jpg)

>>3469376
>mfw liberals don't even know the definition of unemployed

Unemployment (or joblessness), as defined by the International Labour Organization, occurs when people are without jobs and they have actively sought work within the past four weeks.

Therefore if you aren't seeking a fucking job, like the teens than are under the working age, you are not considered un-em-fuckingployed.

Liberal retardation never ceases to amaze me.

>>3469392

Oh look at person ignorant of how the world works. Is there some kind of law that forces the employer to keep an employee? Almost all states are covered by employ-at-will doctrine, just like an employee can quit whenever they want.

>>3469437
>trying to rebuke my refutation using the TOTAL umemployment when we're talking about teens only
>using 2012 numbers on a 2010 graph
do you even read?

>>3469436
LOL your parody is so funny and insightful.
Again faggots do you have any argument that isn't an appeal to emotion or a variance of the childish Marxist dialectic?

>>3469461
Stay jealous you worthless pinko. My father earned every cent of his money, and by extension so did I. Don't you have some ineffective protest to be at?

>>3469470
>Their welfare cheques?
Yes. They get several thousand per month on food stamps, welfare checks, and royalties from the communist manefesto. You can actualy live better as an unemployed homeless person than as a working person.

File: 1338770927992.jpg-(74 KB, 1218x929, minimum wage.jpg)

Coupled with an increase in demand for labour increase the overall rate of employment in an economy, along with wage rate, (whereas a demand increase alone would lower the wage rate). Higher wage rate sorta = better standard of living and increased cosumption.
in the long run good for economy.

>>3469404
Lowering of the minimum wage would allow more people to get jobs, these people then be able to spend the money spent from said jobs, and that would increase demand.

Understand, champ?

>>3469471
>>mfw liberals don't even know the definition of unemployed
>unemployed
>not having employment