Job creation from a 1%er

[webbie]

I don't think the "no TV" types of argument hold much weight anymore. You can go to the most impoverished places in the world and they have TV and stoves and other "luxuries".
In terms of big money it would be wiser to argue the "need car, insurance and health insurance" at minimum to live and work angle....and I think most of us know this is near impossible on $8 an hour.

There are obviously differences in costs throughout the country..especially in housing. But it's not really so in cars, gas, health care and basic foodstuffs.

Poverty guidelines for a family of 4 are about 30K per year. If that is "before tax" money, that would be $15 an hour or so. Keep in mind that even at poverty levels they would qualify for a lot of public assistance.

I guess from where I sit an immediate increase to about $10 would be a start - then we can argue over it more in the long run. Maybe it should be $12 or $15 in NYC or such places, but that should be done at the state and local levels. I'd support $12 in MA, but wouldn't want to force it elsewhere (we are a high wage state - we can afford it - and costs are high here to live).

 

[stoveguy2esw]

I agree it should be indexed to something - but it's not and we can watch while the next battle goes on. Although a majority of Americans think it should be raised, they are not the "right" Americans, meaning they are not the big corps, think tanks, etc.....just folks like maybe you and I.

Most of us are not going to vote...or not vote - based on a promise to raise some other poor suckers wages...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/160913/back-raising-minimum-wage.aspx
"Most Democrats and independents, and half of Republicans, favor increase to $9"

I dunno web. im with ya on the concept, but I still think just tying the wage to the poverty level is simply admitting defeat and continuing the cycle. FWIW im one of those republicans that does favor raising it , but not for the same effects that most think we would get from it.

think of it this way, you should identify with this line of thought and probably agree with it

say you raise the wage, this puts more money in the hands of the folks who have less of it now , they spend it, where do you think its going to eventually end up? same place it is now, in the hands of the wealthy, with the added baggage of raising the cost of living in the process. so what happens , you raise it again, and the cycle continues

as I said above im not against raising taxes on the rich, though I think the current "definition" is a bit off. 250K? heck there are hundreds that make that a month, buffet probably makes that much in a week without lifting a finger. I like changing the cap gains tax to make it more of a scaled tax as well. what I disagree with is the mindset that businesses are there simply for the benefit of the employed. if I started a business im not doing it to make more people "middle class" im doing it to make money, if I do make someone "middle class" in the process that's great, but its not the reason im going to put myself in hock for millions for. taxes aren't necessarily for the "redistribution of wealth, though they will tend to do this , they are for the purpose of keeping wealth moving in and of itself. money does noting unless its exchanged. moving it from the poor to the rich perpetually seems the only game in town but directly taking it and handing it out is counterproductive. taking it and spending it indirectly on things like education makes more sense. to simplify "give a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man to fish he eats every day" we spend too much "handing out fish" as I also said above , I applaud POTUS for his efforts in the "technology centers' idea for the thought, but im not sure its all the way thought out. its deeper than just throwing money at it. aside from the education part, more work needs to be done in bringing a level playing field to manufacturing domestically versus manufacturing abroad. if a country can make a product then ship it half way around the world and undersell what we make in out own back yard we're gonna continue to slide. we have to find a way to slow the loss of manufacturing jobs to the rest of the world who are able to undercut us on price point at every turn. let them sell to the rest of the world, we can make any product here that anyone can make elsewhere at just as high if not a higher quality, we simply cannot do it cheaper than they can at this point.

 

[stoveguy2esw]

(we are a high wage state - we can afford it - and costs are high here to live).

this is key. what you guys have for a cost of living is much higher than in other states. why do you think that is?

 

[Ehouse]

this is key. what you guys have for a cost of living is much higher than in other states. why do you think that is?

.....and, a related question I think is where was the "sweet spot" in the last hundred years and is it possible to approximate that balance again?

 

[webbie]

I don't think that when the poor spend a few more bucks on things that it all ends up in the hands of the wealthy! In fact, I think these issues are complex - much ends up in the hands of folks like me who THEN become wealthier (that is, they shop at my stove shop, etc.)....

Higher incomes, in general, mean less in societal and family problems. Not a panacea, but income does correlate with happiness up to a certain level. Adults who make a decent living feel better about themselves, their families, their society, etc.
More money for education. Some folks may be able to take their kids out of bad schools and send them to the local parochial school, etc.

Hopelessness and substance abuse and domestic violence could do down...

Yeah, I know it sounds utopian, but reality is that these things do correlate. Here are some charts....not telling you to buy them at face value - look up the stuff for yourselves.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/06/maps-of-the-south-bad-place_n_4855191.html

No one can doubt we have major problems here in the good ole USA. At the same time, much of it is self-inflicted. My doc does a lot of volunteer service in Haiti and he says virtually all the people he deals with are very happy. So we need more than money to create happiness....but, maybe in our case, it will at least curtail a bit of hopelessness.

We set the bar high here. We told generations that, if you work hard, the streets were paved with gold. We never told them that they would have to work 2 or 3 jobs and even still barely survive. Either we lied....or, we have allowed the income inequality to get too large...or we are spending it all on the wrong stuff. Probably a little of all three and more.....

But, as an "executive", the past doesn't matter much to me. I like to take a "let's fix it now...this is what is" type of outlook.

When I was the Boss at the shop, I had an employee come to me and say "Craig, I like working here and want to stay. Problem is, I don't want to work those crazy hours you have on nights and weekends and I want to have a home life. Tell you what...if you want me, I want to go home at 5 and work 40 hours a week".

I kept the guy. He wanted a job AND a life. Good for him.
I think that's what most Americans want...and too many don't have it.

 

[Ehouse]

A major problem is that a raise in the minimum wage as a solution to our economic problems is being pushed as an unfunded mandate for the merchant class. they don't have the money to fund it. Even the dollar stores around here are going belly up.

 

[webbie]

A major problem is that a raise in the minimum wage as a solution to our economic problems is being pushed as an unfunded mandate for the merchant class. they don't have the money to fund it. Even the dollar stores around here are going belly up.

Yeah, it's horrible. I went into one today and (seriously) everything is 1.09 plus tax......

What a travesty!


PS. I can't believe what they sell for 1.09.
Thanks, China!

(Got a heck of a back scratcher for $1.09 - even has a shoehorn on the opposite end)

 

[stoveguy2esw]

.....and, a related question I think is where was the "sweet spot" in the last hundred years and is it possible to approximate that balance again?

I think the "sweet spot" is tied to the job demographic. when we have more productive types of jobs available to the "career oriented" job seekers the less attractive lower paying jobs will revert back to the workers I mentioned above , the high schoolers and older folks looking to pad their retirement.

 

[fossil]

You can go to the most impoverished places in the world and they have TV and stoves and other "luxuries".

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/03/25/more-people-have-cell-phones-than-toilets-u-n-study-shows/

 

[Ashful]

I think a federal minimum wage is a flawed concept. $15/hr in a rural part of Iowa likely buys a different lifestyle than $15/hr in Newport, RI. Allow the states to do what they were designed to do. Allow the populace to vote with their feet.

 

[woodgeek]

Fun conversation, but why is everyone saying $15? I thought the proposal was for $10.10, and to index it to inflation going forward (for the first time).

 

[Ehouse]

Yeah, it's horrible. I went into one today and (seriously) everything is 1.09 plus tax......

What a travesty!


PS. I can't believe what they sell for 1.09.
Thanks, China!

(Got a heck of a back scratcher for $1.09 - even has a shoehorn on the opposite end)

Yankee Dollar is liquidating at 69 cents per item with many twofers at the moment. My recycled plastic bag contained reading glasses (bought 10 pair), drill mounted paint stirrers (5-10 bucks at the hardware store), various duct, masking, and packaging tapes (twofers), couple of tennis hats, (tres fasionable'), 2 pair of great Chinese boot socks (probably army surplus), a bag of neoprene gloves for boat varnishing, and various cans of sardines (yum!), pasta, and other food stuffs.

Yer stuck in a first world value system Web!

 

[Retired Guy]

Honestly I don't think taxing the 1% more will hurt jobs much, if at all. They create jobs, but so does many in the middle class on their way to becoming the 1%. I do find it very wrong to basically steal a larger percentage of their money, just because it hurts them less. It's even more wrong to do so just because you think it's unfair that they make that much.

At the same time, it's wrong to force employers to pay low skilled workers more than they are worth. In no reality is a high school student worth $15/hour to take orders at a window and punch those in on a screen. And just because another person doing the exact same job is 40 with 3 kids at home, doesn't mean he/she deserves a higher pay because chances are either their intelligence level or work ethic is the reason they are doing a high schooler's job. Force McDonald's hand, and I guarantee you they'll pay their skilled workers (engineers) to figure out a way to automate the process, and some more smart people (marketing) a way to spin it so we are happy about interacting with a computer vs a person. Give it 5 years and it'll probably be way more accurate then a person too.

I just don't see why some people don't see that artificially creating higher wages is a really bad thing.

Depending on how much the tax is, the 1% will create the jobs elsewhere, business friendly state or third world country. Watch what happens in NYC if taxes on the 1% skyrocket as the new mayor promised during the campaign.

 

[Grisu]

The idea behind the minimum wage is to reverse the trend of a falling wage share compared to total income (GDP). Here are two links to show how dramatic that trend has become in the last 10 years:
http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/trends/2012/0212/01gropro.cfm
http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/commentary/2012/2012-13.cfm

That means the return on capital has been much higher than the return on labor or to put it in lay language: It has been more profitable to lend your money out than to work. That trend is not sustainable in the long run as in the end we all want the products of labor for which we need workers who produce those. Increasing the wage share by raising the minimum wage is an attempt to fix that but IMHO a rather blunt and insufficient tool. To balance out income distribution again we will need to reduce capital gains and increase total wages in relation to GDP.

Here is a (longer) article how a wage-led growth strategy may be much better in the long-run:
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/pu...travail/documents/publication/wcms_192507.pdf

 

[Seasoned Oak]

My niece moved to panama and now runs her own (and also others) web sites trying to get folks to move there.

Panama is the opposite of socialist. In fact, the natives are largely poor and suppressed and people from all over the world ($$$) have taken over for centuries...due to the location. Not much crime. Cheap. Beaches. Close by.....her blog (geared toward younger would-be ex-pats)....

http://www.permanentlypanama.com/
(don't blame me for her partying ways! She was raised in Florida!).

Thats a great site. Theres one independent girl. For those of us who enjoy traveling abroad we can relate to her reasons for doing it. I wish her the best. Iv spent a month in costa rica which should be similar to panama. Interesting place.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Can we please stop with the 'poor people are just lazy' stereotype? .

Your right,most of the poor people i know are not lazy. But by the same token most of the lazy people i know are poor.(By american standards) And will remain poor,(and lazy)as long as their every need is being met by others. I was born dirt poor.Back then you only had one choice,get movin cuz it was all up to you. The biggest poverty driver in america today IMO is poor trade policies that decimated low skilled MFG.Thats where most of the poor and middle class used to work. If we are forced to compete with slave labor countries then will eventually live like them with vast numbers of poor and jobless.

 

[vinny11950]

Your right,most of the poor people i know are not lazy. But by the same token most of the lazy people i know are poor.(By american standards) And will remain poor,(and lazy)as long as their every need is being met by others. I was born dirt poor.Back then you only had one choice,get movin cuz it was all up to you. The biggest poverty driver in america today IMO is poor trade policies that decimated low skilled MFG.Thats where most of the poor and middle class used to work. If we are forced to compete with slave labor countries then will eventually live like them with vast numbers of poor and jobless.

AMEN!

 

[Ashful]

The idea behind the minimum wage is to reverse the trend of a falling wage share compared to total income (GDP). Here are two links to show how dramatic that trend has become in the last 10 years:
http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/trends/2012/0212/01gropro.cfm
http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/commentary/2012/2012-13.cfm

I'm a reasonably smart engineer, which is why I always have trouble with the funny math financial analysts prefer, so let me ask this... could this graph be affected by the fact that, due to automation and better design, less actual labor is required to produce a given product?

Your right,most of the poor people i know are not lazy. But by the same token most of the lazy people i know are poor.

Amen.

 

[webbie]

Fun conversation, but why is everyone saying $15? I thought the proposal was for $10.10, and to index it to inflation going forward (for the first time).

That's easy. Many naysayers can only make their point by gross exaggeration. It's much easier than addressing the subject at hand, such as my original question of why I got paid so much in rural TN in the early 70's...and, somehow, the country didn't fall apart.

Any other questions??

 

[webbie]

Most of the lazy people I know are NOT poor.

Rather, they have made money by "crook" (insurance settlements which are sometimes suspect), been born with a silver spoon or stole one from their folks and family, etc.
Or, they simply went into a white color or similar job and stayed the course....not making waves often raises you up far (in certain settings). Sometimes, the one left standing is the one who gets the job.

On the other hand, I don't know many ambitious, smart and hardworking people who are very poor. But these generalizations probably don't mean much....anecdotal stuff.

Like blogging and web sites....if everyone did it (was hard working, ambitious and smart and had access to capital), then there would be very few left to serve those masters and help them attain their goals. So society will always be stratified to some degree based on "luck" and "karma"....of where, when and how you were born and your environment, etc.

 

[Grisu]

I'm a reasonably smart engineer, which is why I always have trouble with the funny math financial analysts prefer, so let me ask this... could this graph be affected by the fact that, due to automation and better design, less actual labor is required to produce a given product?

Great question. As far as I know the literature, the role of technological change in the wage share reduction is at most minor. Some literature:
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/pu...travail/documents/publication/wcms_202352.pdf
http://www.epi.org/publication/technology-inequality-dont-blame-the-robots/

Since robots don't buy products we will always need consumers who create demand and therefore need an income. Since we believe it's best that people work for their income we will need to create other jobs and pay sufficient wages to buy the output we produce. So far, we compensated for the declining wage share by increased borrowing which kept GDP growing. As that is not happening anymore since 2008, GDP growth is anemic to say the least. The proper response would be for the people who have the capital (aka savings) to spend it again which would create jobs and increase total wages. Instead they try to lend it out which bids up financial asset prices (bonds, stocks etc.) but does not provide jobs.

 

[ironpony]

I'm a reasonably smart engineer, which is why I always have trouble with the funny math financial analysts prefer, so let me ask this... could this graph be affected by the fact that, due to automation and better design, less actual labor is required to produce a given product?


Amen.

you drive a train? woo woo

 

[razerface]

Fun conversation, but why is everyone saying $15? I thought the proposal was for $10.10, and to index it to inflation going forward (for the first time).

That's easy. Many naysayers can only make their point by gross exaggeration. It's much easier than addressing the subject at hand, such as my original question of why I got paid so much in rural TN in the early 70's...and, somehow, the country didn't fall apart.

Any other questions??

No,,,the OP begreen had put in a movie where the guy who was giving a speech was advocating 15 hr min wage in his state. It is the original purpose of this thread,,,read post #1

 

[webbie]

Founder, CEO....google, Bell Labs, Sun and many more...has something to say about all this:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/07/go...ity-will-be-number-one-issue-for-democracies/

He sorta mentions what I did. Not everyone can hold a science and tech job. Those who can't will lose out.

Interesting read, anyway....

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Like blogging and web sites....if everyone did it (was hard working, ambitious and smart and had access to capital), then there would be very few left to serve those masters and help them attain their goals. .

Quite true. I make a living from those who cant manage their money well enough to finance a home through a bank the traditional way and do it through me at higher rates. Even though many of these people earn a higher annual salary than i do. No shortage of customers, but still a win win and mutually beneficial.