The truth about minimum wage and income inequality

[deprave]

and who decides what you're worth?

you may feel you deserve $2,000,000 a year, but if nobody else agrees, well, then you will either take what they offer, or have nothing.

if no prospective employer is willing to offer you $2mill, will you rabble and attempt to "collectivize" his operation so you can get what you "deserve"?

employees create NOTHING, they serve. and in that service they will either create surplus value or they will become unemployed.

if i build a kiln and hire you to dig clay so i can make pots, even if you are the best clay digger in the history of ceramics, if i don't want your clay then i don't have to pay you shit.

if the clay in your clay-pit is bad, or you cannot provide enough, or you want too much for your clay, i will find another source, and you can try to sell mud, or build your own kiln and learn to make pots.

but then you will have no time to dig clay, so you'll have to hire a clay-digger. but how much to pay him?

and that's why your "Philosophy" fails.

fairness is subjective, but the definition of anarchy is VERY MUCH NOT. what you keep describing is Marxist Socialism (just a poorly articulated version), and if you read the Communist Manifesto you would possibly see this fact like everybody else does.

good post.

Take this claydigger example, I go out and dig clay with a cheap shovel. I can only dig so much clay, lets say I can dig $20,000 a year worth of clay. If someone comes along who has a $300,000 clay digging machine which will let me dig $500,000 dollars worth of clay in a year, offers me a job for $130,000 dollars a year digging clay with his machine. If I was socialist I would say something like "Well why does he get to keep $70,000?!? I should get all that because I am digging all the clay!"...Well no because its the value of your labor which is $20,000 by yourself, your making +$110,000 dollars to dig clay for someone else. Your SUPPOSED to be able to save that extra money and get yourself a clay machine. The problem is you can't do that if its not a free market and with minimum wage the value of your labor is decreased to whatever the fuck minimum wage happens to be or whatever the fuck the other clay tycoons are paying their minions.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

I think the perfect libertarian socialist society could be done in my lifetime. All we need is to perfect cloning and climate change will do the rest.

 

[Winter Woman]

You are the selfish one by taking from others the things that they have worked hard for and sacrificed for. Man up and get a real job or pertinent education.

 

[GOD HERE]

and who decides what you're worth?

you may feel you deserve $2,000,000 a year, but if nobody else agrees, well, then you will either take what they offer, or have nothing.

if no prospective employer is willing to offer you $2mill, will you rabble and attempt to "collectivize" his operation so you can get what you "deserve"?

employees create NOTHING, they serve. and in that service they will either create surplus value or they will become unemployed.

if i build a kiln and hire you to dig clay so i can make pots, even if you are the best clay digger in the history of ceramics, if i don't want your clay then i don't have to pay you shit.

if the clay in your clay-pit is bad, or you cannot provide enough, or you want too much for your clay, i will find another source, and you can try to sell mud, or build your own kiln and learn to make pots.

but then you will have no time to dig clay, so you'll have to hire a clay-digger. but how much to pay him?

and that's why your "Philosophy" fails.

fairness is subjective, but the definition of anarchy is VERY MUCH NOT. what you keep describing is Marxist Socialism (just a poorly articulated version), and if you read the Communist Manifesto you would possibly see this fact like everybody else does.

Maybe you didn't read what I wrote: 'The value of what you produce". In capitalism you may work for $8 an hour, yet produce $70 worth of value. Yet whoever is overseeing your labor is taking the product/value of your labor since they own the company. It doesn't matter whether or not they earned it, they take it anyways. It doesn't matter if it's protected by the government, it's still theft. I'm referring to the organization of the company and the actual value of labor, not what someone "feels" they should earn.

A lot of times I hear right wingers talking about how no one would have any drive to work in socialism. Isn't allowing employees to own the value of their labor the most effective form of motivation? If you produce more, you make more. This is an area where socialism and certain forms of capitalism overlap.

 

[Winter Woman]

if i get caught speeding with my dog in the car, should my dog also get a speeding ticket?

Why yes your wife should get the ticket.

 

[GOD HERE]

You are the selfish one by taking from others the things that they have worked hard for and sacrificed for. Man up and get a real job or pertinent education.

Yeah I'm sure the CEO and shareholders of walmart work their asses off every day. I'm not advocating taking from the middle class and you know that. Wealth redistribution is a necessity for capitalism to work, otherwise the middle class disappears and you have a small group of extremely wealthy individuals who own everything, and a growing number of poor workers who own little. We're seeing this happen in the US right now, and it's been progressing for the last 35 years since this idiotic form capitalism started catching on. You guys on the right don't understand that wealth in capitalism is inevitably consolidated, and businesses become monopolies as they expand which is one (of many) reasons taxes and anti trust laws exist. They also exist to pay for roads, bridges, infrastructure, defense, etc. Hell, a couple years ago in 2006 Citi group and Goldmansachs started calling American society "the emerging plutocracy". Talk about hearing it from the horses mouth.

 

[Winter Woman]

Yeah I'm sure the CEO and shareholders of walmart work their asses off every day. I'm not advocating taking from the middle class and you know that. Wealth redistribution is a necessity for capitalism to work, otherwise the middle class disappears and you have a small group of extremely wealthy individuals who own everything, and a growing number of poor workers who own little. We're seeing this happen in the US right now, and it's been progressing for the last 35 years since this idiotic form capitalism started catching on. You guys on the right don't understand that wealth in capitalism is inevitably consolidated, and businesses become monopolies as they expand which is one (of many) reasons taxes and anti trust laws exist. They also exist to pay for roads, bridges, infrastructure, defense, etc. Hell, a couple years ago in 2006 Citi group and Goldmansachs started calling American society "the emerging plutocracy". Talk about hearing it from the horses mouth.

Shareholders are you and I. Where do you think our retirement accounts invest? They invest in the stock market. I do agree that some C-level employees are over compensated, but the shareholders are not the ones making the big bucks here.

Entrepreneurs and companies that are wholly owned by individuals or families owe you nothing and they owe their employees a safe place to work and to be paid according to each by their abilities and by what they negotiate with their employers.

 

[Dr Kynes]

good post.

Take this claydigger example, I go out and dig clay with a cheap shovel. I can only dig so much clay, lets say I can dig $20,000 a year worth of clay. If someone comes along who has a $300,000 clay digging machine which will let me dig $500,000 dollars worth of clay in a year, offers me a job for $130,000 dollars a year digging clay with his machine. If I was socialist I would say something like "Well why does he get to keep $70,000?!? I should get all that because I am digging all the clay!"...Well no because its the value of your labor which is $20,000 by yourself, your making +$110,000 dollars to dig clay for someone else. Your SUPPOSED to be able to save that extra money and get yourself a clay machine. The problem is you can't do that if its not a free market and with minimum wage the value of your labor is decreased to whatever the fuck minimum wage happens to be or whatever the fuck the other clay tycoons are paying their minions.

you could however, build your own kiln and start making pots yourself with your Off Time, and use that as the basis for a capitalist enterprise of your own....

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Maybe you didn't read what I wrote: 'The value of what you produce". In capitalism you may work for $8 an hour, yet produce $70 worth of value. Yet whoever is overseeing your labor is taking the product/value of your labor since they own the company. It doesn't matter whether or not they earned it, they take it anyways. It doesn't matter if it's protected by the government, it's still theft. I'm referring to the organization of the company and the actual value of labor, not what someone "feels" they should earn.

A lot of times I hear right wingers talking about how no one would have any drive to work in socialism. Isn't allowing employees to own the value of their labor the most effective form of motivation? If you produce more, you make more. This is an area where socialism and certain forms of capitalism overlap.

You're a bafoon. You don't get to decide what you're worth based upon the value of goods or services you were contracted for.

The end result of what I contracted you for doesn't belong to you.

What you and your lovers try to explain is called profit sharing in the real world, capitalism. But I have no obligation to profit share with you. If enough demand it as part of their contact, I either give you a profit share or you find another contract.

 

[Doer]

You can get the local pottery coo-pt to host a car wash. You never start with nothing. You have your Standing.

Even if you have to disappear and come back with a new town and new name.....I "know" someone who did that.

In a world full of jerks the trusty man is gold. That's your starting Capital. It does help if you know a few jokes and can hold a few drinks. I started in sales. That's recommended for getting good at getting people, happily involved, with parting with their money.

Good stuff, Dr. Kynes. (I should have known) I mean working two jobs, pulling all nighters, being on call, that's not new to me.

 

[GOD HERE]

You're a bafoon. You don't get to decide what you're worth based upon the value of goods or services you were contacted for.

The end result of what I contacted you for doesn't belong to you.

What you and your lovers try to explain is called profit sharing in the real world, capitalism. But I have no obligation to profit share with you. If enough demand it as part of their contact, I either give you a profit share or you find another contract.

So the nutty racist rabbit who is usually spewing some ridiculous conspiracy theory is calling me a buffoon for pointing out the obvious. Obviously the main point went right over your troubled head again. Once you lose the tin hat you might have a little more credibility.

 

[Doer]

Maybe you didn't read what I wrote: 'The value of what you produce". In capitalism you may work for $8 an hour, yet produce $70 worth of value. Yet whoever is overseeing your labor is taking the product/value of your labor since they own the company. It doesn't matter whether or not they earned it, they take it anyways. It doesn't matter if it's protected by the government, it's still theft. I'm referring to the organization of the company and the actual value of labor, not what someone "feels" they should earn.

A lot of times I hear right wingers talking about how no one would have any drive to work in socialism. Isn't allowing employees to own the value of their labor the most effective form of motivation? If you produce more, you make more. This is an area where socialism and certain forms of capitalism overlap.

You just have not hit the books. If you knew how much it cost to produce a $70 product....but that is why it's an amateur view. You could take a little bit of finance and you could see that one $8 worker cannot produce a $70 product, for 1 boss.

You could start to understand what, the means of production, even is. It's not a slogan. Read a balance sheet, quarterly and see what I mean.

If you only had me and you cranking out product, maybe?...since you count your labor as free. We crank out 1 widget (tm) in an hour. I make $8....no...big tax commitments. I need a bunch of those hours, so I won't work, just here and there when you want. You have a commitment to keep me going, my family, my new kid. And your daughter's sweet 16, etc.

Just us 2.

WOW! Profit....no. $8 plus the $phones, the $lights, $ the motorcars and $toilet paper and every other $single luxury.

Hmmm, that is $74 dollars, just for that hour. <sigh> Let's make another one, quickly!

Damn. The phone rings. (we want that)

We have a saying in the software business.

2 guys can "start a company", code a Product but as soon as the phone rings, the code staff is half. One is now Marketing, or Procurement, or Service, etc....no more coding.

As my VPs are still fond of jabbing me with, Oh, well, you just don't understand the supply chain....(yeah. but neither do they)

At some point this is Art and Risk and Paychecks. All the paychecks.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Maybe you didn't read what I wrote: 'The value of what you produce". In capitalism you may work for $8 an hour, yet produce $70 worth of value. Yet whoever is overseeing your labor is taking the product/value of your labor since they own the company. It doesn't matter whether or not they earned it, they take it anyways. It doesn't matter if it's protected by the government, it's still theft. I'm referring to the organization of the company and the actual value of labor, not what someone "feels" they should earn.

A lot of times I hear right wingers talking about how no one would have any drive to work in socialism. Isn't allowing employees to own the value of their labor the most effective form of motivation? If you produce more, you make more. This is an area where socialism and certain forms of capitalism overlap.

so, the clay digger,, being "essential" to my pottery business since i cannot make pots without clay, deserves 100% of my earnings?

the essence of capitalism (and all market economies, even the marxist ones) is that what's mine is mine, and what's yours is yours.

until you accept this simple idea you cannot have any form of economic action, and thus no division of labour, and thus, no society outside primitive hunter/gatherer tribes.

if what's mine is mine, and what's yours is yours, then i cannot demand your stuff, i can only trade some of mine for some of yours, and we must agree on the exchange or it is theft.

if you demand more for your clay than i am willing to pay i can pay somebody who is less demanding to dig clay, and you can sell your clay to another potter who is willing to pay what you demand.
if it comes down to it, i can even dig clay myself, but if you lack the skill to make pots you cannot dragoon me into operating your potters wheel, and if you have no kiln you cannot simply take mine.

socialism argues otherwise, that if all you know how to do is dig clay, then I, as a person with greater means, have an obligation to ensure you do as well as I, and if you want to use my kiln, i have no right to stop you.

or as Bwana Obama put it:

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Doc,

You were right about these fools being hopeless. I tell them their bitching "talking points" already exist in capitalism. But that's tin foil hat talk!

There have been experiments where I offer you $50 in free money, but I get $950. All you have to do is accept. Even if you got to keep the $50, it's unfair I get $950. So the libertarian socialist will keep things fair and we all get nothing!

I'm no fool, I'm also not greedy. I'll happily accept $50 if the alternative is nothing.

That's why they're communist anarchists. The man gets all $1,000!

 

[Doer]

$1000s are your new Benjimins' if you play your cards right, in the 10,000 days of your Standing start.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Doc,

You were right about these fools being hopeless. I tell them their bitching "talking points" already exist in capitalism. But that's tin foil hat talk!

There have been experiments where I offer you $50 in free money, but I get $950. All you have to do is accept. Even if you got to keep the $50, it's unfair I get $950. So the libertarian socialist will keep things fair and we all get nothing!

I'm no fool, I'm also not greedy. I'll happily accept $50 if the alternative is nothing.

That's why they're communist anarchists. The man gets all $1,000!

why are you conceding the premise, there is no such thing as "anarcho-______ism" since anarchy is an ABSOLUTE, and cannot have a modifier without becoming something other than anarchy.

communism is a utopian dream, and as a fantasy it can have any form the dreamer wishes, but it is NEVER anarchy, since order is always there, either through a voluntary social compact, everybody agreeing with the dreamer's views, and everybody agreeing to share everything equally. all of these are ORDER, and though order has degrees, and graduations, anarchy does not. anarchy is CHAOS. chaos presumes a complete lack of order, not a little order, but ZERO order.

 

[Doer]

Wait, even anarcho-Arco Station? Yeah....even that.

 

[abandonconflict]

cannot have a modifier without becoming something other than anarchy

I agree with this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_without_adjectives

Rudolf Rocker started as an anarchosyndicalist but later abandoned that as he became more extremely antipropertarian. The adjectives of anarchy in my opinion describe only ownership of capital (resources).

 

[Winter Woman]

Maybe you didn't read what I wrote: 'The value of what you produce". In capitalism you may work for $8 an hour, yet produce $70 worth of value. Yet whoever is overseeing your labor is taking the product/value of your labor since they own the company. It doesn't matter whether or not they earned it, they take it anyways. It doesn't matter if it's protected by the government, it's still theft. I'm referring to the organization of the company and the actual value of labor, not what someone "feels" they should earn.

A lot of times I hear right wingers talking about how no one would have any drive to work in socialism. Isn't allowing employees to own the value of their labor the most effective form of motivation? If you produce more, you make more. This is an area where socialism and certain forms of capitalism overlap.

I think what I have experienced and seen is that employees don't think about the cost of the building, the utilities, the other half of social security (that I feel belongs to the employee since the employer is paying out on their behalf) worker's comp rates, vehicles, insurance, product rejects, returned product, shipping, product testing, signing on the dotted line for the loans to make is all happen, paying for those loans, city permits, licenses from the city and state, bookkeeper, office help, lawn service, window cleaning, snow plow, replacement of aging machines, buying new products to keep up with the other businesses. I know that I have left out a ton of other examples that all go into the cost.

Employees generally only see that they made $8.00 an hour while making a product and they see the company get $70 dollars for that product that they make. The profit margin for most business owners are small in comparison to their gross numbers.

Employees don't take on the risk of owning a business or the late hours. Do you think that business owners leave their worries and work at 5 pm? No, it is with them always.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Doc,

The problem is our concept of government is this entity which only exists in books. We act like government is this sugar daddy pimp and we're the exploited whores.

I think government would be better if it were a private business and had accountability. What we have now is the Hale Bopp comet cult.

The governments all agree, if you pay enough redemption value, spent nuclear rod fee, tv pre-recycling fee with a drop off fee once you turn in tv, and whatever other socialist program for our own good.

We have no name for a government that doesn't do what it currently do which differs from what I want.

If everyone considers government what we currently have in the world, consider me an anarchist. But my solution isn't anarchy, but neither theirs.