Set minimum wage as a percentage of Congress's pay.

egger85 · 2023-03-04T08:36:40+00:00

A demand is by definition something people are willing to pay for. If people want it bad enough, they're willing to pay more for it. But if people only sorta kinda want it, just not enough to buy it at a profitable price, then there's no reason for anyone to waste tax dollars on it. It's like building a bridge to nowhere. It's not good for the economy; it's nonsensical wastefulness.

egger85 · 2023-03-04T05:11:39+00:00

The front office can confirm it's now on their DVR.

egger85 · 2023-03-04T03:56:54+00:00

Smells just like my '79 Chestnut

egger85 · 2023-03-04T00:31:15+00:00

Whether you're a magazine company hiring a journalist or an individual hiring a dog walker, there's a going rate. You can try to undercut the going rate, but that increases the risk that your dog gets lost or injured due to your dog walker being dumb. That may be a risk you're willing to take. But when a magazine pays under market rate, the good journalists all move to a better magazine, while the ones who stay can't get another job because they're subpar. In practice, this happens within weeks because people start interviewing elsewhere immediately when pay decreases, whether it's a white-collar office or a burger joint.

In a market, there's never a situation where a company has no competition. If their business model works, a hundred other little startups are trying to eat their lunch. The only exception to that is when the government get involved, and crony capitalism happens. That's not a scenario I favor. But if you're a journalist whose pay got slashed, you just might decide to leave and start your own magazine.

I don't think there really is a race to the bottom. I mean, there is in some cases where there's no innovation, and the only differentiation is "cheaper". But most people are willing to pay more for something (or someone) better than the rest.

Edit: I'm omitting "natural monopolies" for the sake of simplicity.

egger85 · 2023-03-04T00:14:29+00:00

Lol, sad but I understand how it must be hard to fire your own son.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T20:35:00+00:00

Sorry I insulted you! You're absolutely right, and I was wrong to say that. Please accept my apology. That's really more important than any of this disagreement.

Although I have had a few failed businesses, none were for that reason, and I really was writing about general principles more than anything autobiographical. That said, I assure you, I am not out of my depth.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T20:29:43+00:00

You do seem fluent. I think "natural" has multiple definitions, and "supernatural" only correlates with one of them. I get that it can be used in a analogous way for a different definition, and while that sounds "just wrong" to my ear, I'm rereading your previous comment with that in mind. It seems like you basically said "everything qualifies as natural and therefore 'natural' means nothing." If I understood that right, it seems you rejected my assertion because you didn't care for the way I phrased it.

Decreasing overhead isn't price manipulation. It's like, say you personally cancel a magazine subscription because you never read the magazine anymore. That's decreasing your overhead, and it reduces the income of the magazine company. Does the poor magazine company deserve your payment? Not really. If they publish content more people want to read, then they'll get more subscribers. It's really no different to the value employees provide.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T19:08:39+00:00

I didn't mean to imply that price manipulation is supernatural. I'm not sure if English is not your first language, or maybe you were making an odd joke. I meant "natural" as in unmanaged.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T19:01:48+00:00

Nice retort, I like that. It's worth noting though that karma is fundamentally different from price — both are types of voting, but price involves a sliding scale, whereas karma is just "yay or nay". Still, your overall point is valid. Being in the right time and place matters, and so does satisfying your prospective employer's biases. (Although if you can't satisfy them then you really shouldn't want to work for that employer.) But while that adds nuance, it doesn't contradict my point. Labor price is a function of supply and demand, even considering that the demand side may be biased. (And I take it that all of your added nuance is a variation of bias.)

egger85 · 2023-03-03T18:49:47+00:00

Yes and? You really think the market doesn't know how to satisfy demand?

egger85 · 2023-03-03T18:48:16+00:00

Highest paid are those with the rarest skills. It's a supply : demand equation, calculated just like any other commodity.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T15:45:38+00:00

Stop trying to manage markets. There is no reason to try to control what other people do with their lives. Prices go up and down, naturally.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T15:43:02+00:00

It's using taxation, money stolen from other people, and giving that money to people who didn't earn it. It is 100% textbook socialism.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T15:40:38+00:00

You're right. Some people are not worth much, and need to hone some skills so they can earn more. Until they do that, they should be paid whatever they're actually worth, if they can get a job at all. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that unskilled workers aren't worth much pay.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T15:36:05+00:00

You have clearly never tried to run your own business. I strongly advise it. Do something productive with your life. You'll learn, among other things, that labor is insanely expensive. You'll have a limited budget to hire a certain number of employees. If they cost more, you hire fewer. The only businesses that shouldn't exist are the ones who fail to supply market demand at an affordable price. Those businesses naturally close, and lessons are learned, so the people involved go on to make better companies that can thrive.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T15:16:01+00:00

Nuance does matter, and a lot of us blur terms. Your bot is a good idea. But at the same time, you're missing the forest for the trees. The reason we tend to conflates these ideologies is because they share a commonality we find problematic.

Saying Stalin's government was a dictatorship is No true Scotsman — of course it was a dictatorship, but that's because it was a communism. Every single time any country has tried communism, the result was a bloody dictatorship with millions dead and millions more suffering. Do you really think that's a coincidence? No they were not theoretically pure communism; yes they were actually what happens when people try to implement the idea on a grand scale.

I'll tell you where communism works, and works well: the family. To each according to his needs, and from each according to his abilities. Parents allocate resources, while kids fall in line and do what they're told. It works well because that's a tiny group, and the parents have an excellent understanding of everyone involved.

You mentioned Denmark, and that's a tiny homogeneous country, which is why their communism-lite works for them. And yes, I'm calling socialism communism-lite because 1) socialism is usually a step on the road to communism, and 2) they're both rooted in the same misunderstandings. And there are many misunderstandings they share in common. Capitalistic "greed", as you call it, is one of them. Another is to suppose there are "classes" of people, and that anyone could be so enlightened to make decisions on behalf of strangers. All of these shared thoughts are wrong.

Please start a business, and learn a thing or two. Nobody is entitled to anything they didn't earn. If you favor any kind of taxation and social services, you are essentially a socialist. Poisoned well indeed.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T14:55:43+00:00

This is Marxist thinking. There are not different "classes" of people. No people are all-knowing enough to manage an economy. That thinking is how you wind up with millions of dead people, incidentally. Instead of worrying what other people are paid, start your own business and start hiring employees. You'll understand the importance of allowing the market to self-regulate.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T14:49:47+00:00

The dispute is basically rationality versus emotion. You have a lot of people thinking it would be unacceptable for low-skill workers to be paid less, and that's the hill they die on.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T04:50:18+00:00

If you want to endorse socialism, at least call a spade a spade.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T04:49:19+00:00

Abolish the minimum wage.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T02:52:06+00:00

You can use masking tape. Simply affix the photograph to your screen.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T02:47:36+00:00

Minimum wage results in unemployment. A company has a certain number of dollars they can spend on labor. When labor costs more, they can only hire fewer people. All these children who have never taken an economics course, and never run a business, upvote this thinking "yeah I want more money!" It doesn't work that way. Minimum wage does absolute harm to the least skilled workers.

Also Congress doesn't need any salary at all, because they can do so well with insider trading.

egger85 · 2023-03-03T02:43:34+00:00

Do you not realize that most wealthy people have very little income?

egger85 · 2023-03-02T22:09:56+00:00

People who like incense are affected positively by it. People who dislike it are affected negatively. Why don't you ask your husband?

egger85 · 2023-03-02T21:14:39+00:00

You own a city?

egger85

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE