Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 202

Thread: Washington to California: Drop dead

  1. #191
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Link? I already showed you show kicking out illegals would not solve the unemployment.
    No, you stated your conclusory assumption, at which point I explained its flaws.

    If you get rid of minimum wage, the only excuse for people not having a job is that they are either lazy or are holding out for a higher wage, and at that point you should call it voluntary unemployment. Involuntary unemployment is what we want there to be none of and minimum wage is pretty much the only hindrance to it being at 0.
    Even assuming this is all true, you're claiming that such a world would be an improvement over the society we have today. I don't know of anything that would support this assumption.

    This of course ignores the fact that it's hilariously absurd to assume that eliminating the minimum wage would eliminate all barriers to full employment.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  2. #192
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    No, you stated your conclusory assumption, at which point I explained its flaws.
    I told you the analogy wasn't perfect, but it did show that kicking out illegals will not bring about full employment.

    Even assuming this is all true, you're claiming that such a world would be an improvement over the society we have today. I don't know of anything that would support this assumption.
    Everyone would be producing instead of a group of people not able to be employed. It would be an improvement. The more production, the better off we all are.

    This of course ignores the fact that it's hilariously absurd to assume that eliminating the minimum wage would eliminate all barriers to full employment.
    I specifically made reference to voluntary and involuntary unemployment. Full employment is a vague term.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  3. #193
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    I told you the analogy wasn't perfect, but it did show that kicking out illegals will not bring about full employment.
    And I never said it would, so I'm not sure why that's what you were trying to disprove.

    Everyone would be producing instead of a group of people not able to be employed. It would be an improvement. The more production, the better off we all are.
    This assumes that everyone actually would be producing, and that the net production would be greater. I don't see anything to support either of those claims.

    I specifically made reference to voluntary and involuntary unemployment. Full employment is a vague term.
    And my point is that simply labeling all those who would not have work as being voluntarily unemployed doesn't really do much for the situation.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #194
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    And I never said it would, so I'm not sure why that's what you were trying to disprove.
    You found a problem with my argument. You couldn't possibly be arguing just for the sake of stirring up ****, would you?

    This assumes that everyone actually would be producing, and that the net production would be greater. I don't see anything to support either of those claims.
    So when people don't get as much money as they want, they'll take no money? If that doesn't make sense, then everyone will be producing (or finding a source of income somewhere).

    And my point is that simply labeling all those who would not have work as being voluntarily unemployed doesn't really do much for the situation.
    It does because eventually those that are holding out for higher wages will eventually relent and just take the highest wage that they are being offered.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  5. #195
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    You found a problem with my argument. You couldn't possibly be arguing just for the sake of stirring up ****, would you?
    No, I'm trying to debate politics. God forbid.

    So when people don't get as much money as they want, they'll take no money? If that doesn't make sense, then everyone will be producing (or finding a source of income somewhere).
    That's exactly what I'm saying, as it's exactly what happens in real life. When a lawyer or businessman is laid off from a $500k/year job, do they immediately take whatever job is available to them, regardless of pay? Of course not. They will spend weeks, months, or even years looking for a job with commensurate pay and responsibility. I know literally tens of people who have done this exact thing over the past few months and will probably be doing it for the near future. Every one of them has the skills necessary to get jobs making $10/hour somewhere, but it's a terrible career move and not something they can really consider.

    This effect is even more pronounced among lower income groups. While that businessman might eventually relent and take a job paying $75k as a middle manager somewhere, someone laid off from a job making $60k a year is not likely to rush to accept a job offer at $5/hr.

    In your hypothetical world where there is no minimum wage, the discrepancy would be even more pronounced. Many people would simply decide that a job offering them $3/hr is not worth it at any point whatsoever, and that their time would be better spent looking for a job closer to their previous $60k salary.

    It does because eventually those that are holding out for higher wages will eventually relent and just take the highest wage that they are being offered.
    In theory, after some undetermined amount of time, some may do this. That's a long way from what was being discussed.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #196
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    That's exactly what I'm saying, as it's exactly what happens in real life. When a lawyer or businessman is laid off from a $500k/year job, do they immediately take whatever job is available to them, regardless of pay? Of course not. They will spend weeks, months, or even years looking for a job with commensurate pay and responsibility. I know literally tens of people who have done this exact thing over the past few months and will probably be doing it for the near future. Every one of them has the skills necessary to get jobs making $10/hour somewhere, but it's a terrible career move and not something they can really consider.

    This effect is even more pronounced among lower income groups. While that businessman might eventually relent and take a job paying $75k as a middle manager somewhere, someone laid off from a job making $60k a year is not likely to rush to accept a job offer at $5/hr.

    In your hypothetical world where there is no minimum wage, the discrepancy would be even more pronounced. Many people would simply decide that a job offering them $3/hr is not worth it at any point whatsoever, and that their time would be better spent looking for a job closer to their previous $60k salary.

    In theory, after some undetermined amount of time, some may do this. That's a long way from what was being discussed.
    It has everything to do with what was just being discussed. Eventually people will take that lower paying job because it is better than nothing. You can't go on very long without some source of income.

    So the person who wants the job making $60,000 a year may eventually relent and take the job that pays $3 an hour since that is closer to his real worth. With minimum wage, that job wouldn't even be open to him and he would have to go to welfare.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  7. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    It won't be, but just shipping off illegals will not get you full employment. If you don't have full employment then there is some other problem, namely minimum wage.
    No.

    Not having "full employment" is not a problem.

    It's the normal state of affairs for a healthy capitalist society. Some people have left work voluntarily, some businesses are undergoing the downside of their cycles and letting people go, and the crude reality of life on earth is that there are some people no one wants working for them.

    However, the presence of invaders who can and are exploited by employers to take jobs at lower wages and less cost than others would in a free market place depress the job opportunities for legal residents and thereby further increase the burdens on public services as well as reducing the available tax base for the state to pay for those services.

    Invaders should be heaved out, and soon.

  8. #198
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Yes, those are the only two possibilities - illegals or minimum wage.
    How about no minimum wage and no invaders?

    That's a perfectly reasonable free market approach. I don't benefit from minimum wage, why should I have to pay higher product costs in support of it?

  9. #199
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by formerroadie View Post
    That relies on people's generosity, which is pretty poor (just read comments by conservatives on many a political forum about the poor). Frankly, government is the only entity large enough to do some of this work. While I support some charities, I don't expect that most people will give.

    As a trained minister (I'm not ordained, just trained), I can tell you this: 10% of the people sitting in conservative churches tithe. The people in those churches will tell you that the tithe is necessary but 90% of them don't give. I can't imagine how it would be different with the general populace.
    Just think how wonderful the churchworld would be if they had the same power to point machine guns in people's faces and COMMAND them to pay up or else, which is the power you insist your government have.

  10. #200
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Washington to California: Drop dead

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    I told you the analogy wasn't perfect, but it did show that kicking out illegals will not bring about full employment.
    Regardless.

    The reason "illegals" should be deported is the fact that they've broken the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Everyone would be producing instead of a group of people not able to be employed. It would be an improvement. The more production, the better off we all are.
    Production without the pre-requisite demand is worse than pointless, it merely fuels the next period of stagflation.

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    I specifically made reference to voluntary and involuntary unemployment. Full employment is a vague term.
    Full employment is fairly easy to define.

    Everyone that wants a job has one.

    Never has happened, never will happen. It's an absurd socialist utopian.

Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •