Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
danielost

raising minimum wage does not reduce poverty

279 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

spacecowboy342

That is an element of Marxist doctrine -- raise a generation of kids without materialist elements and they will behave like good socialists. It is a bit overly optimistic perhaps?

Perhaps but I think a better job could be done in teaching values like compassion and in teaching the value of logic and critical thinking to prevent ideologues from gaining undue influence. And I'm not saying all materialism is wrong but the idea that the end justifies the means could be discouraged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacecowboy342

thats assuming everything is a learned process. ..that humans can be trained to live greed free..... I think that is assuming a lot.

All cultures have not been based on greed. I would suggest that uncontrolled greed is a learned behavior and perhaps we could just refrain from teaching that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

Perhaps but I think a better job could be done in teaching values like compassion and in teaching the value of logic and critical thinking to prevent ideologues from gaining undue influence. And I'm not saying all materialism is wrong but the idea that the end justifies the means could be discouraged.

I absolutely agree. It is just that we need to remember that we are evolved beings and natural selection had a lot to do with why we are the way we are. That does not mean that nurture has no role to play -- we evolved a certain flexibility too as part of our survival.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

I am inclined to think that both greed and generous impulses are evolved behaviors so we are to at least a large extent born with each, in varying degrees.

This is why the free market capitalists system works best! It harnesses the best of both and results in a growth of human evolution.

Edited by acidhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacecowboy342

I absolutely agree. It is just that we need to remember that we are evolved beings and natural selection had a lot to do with why we are the way we are. That does not mean that nurture has no role to play -- we evolved a certain flexibility too as part of our survival.

I agree with that but I think some of our bioblogical imperatives must be overcome if we are to survive as a species

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacecowboy342

This is why the free market capitalists system works best! It harnesses the best of both and the results in a growth of human evolution.

Another unproven assertion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

Another unproven assertion.

What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

This is why the free market capitalists system works best! It harnesses the best of both and results in a growth of human evolution.

That is a rather outrageous assertion, considering some of the problems and excesses of market capitalism. I think we need to break from these silly ideologies and adopt a pragmatic approach mixing government and private on an ongoing basis constantly striving for what works best.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

That is a rather outrageous assertion, considering some of the problems and excesses of market capitalism. I think we need to break from these silly ideologies and adopt a pragmatic approach mixing government and private on an ongoing basis constantly striving for what works best.

The lat few decades has been replacing what works with what sounds best! gov is the problem... more gov is not a solution!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

youre giving into greed by asking for more gov interference

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

The lat few decades has been replacing what works with what sounds best! gov is the problem... more gov is not a solution!

More unfounded, and unsupportable rhetoric.

The fact that your Gov is a god all mighty **** up isn't proof of a general rule. Mixed economies do consistently better on almost all social indictors.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

Comuisim is supposed to be doing away with government. Those nations canno do away with government due to greed. The greedy will buy up farm land or housing, or the greedy in the government who want more power.

Frank said it himself. Vietnam's government controls every concept of a persons life as they can. Including changing taxes on demand. Europe has the same right.

Here in the states, we have those who are so greedy that they are willing ti 1 demand government steal money from the rich. This dispite knowing that to do so hurts the poor. 2 tell someone they have to much money. Who do these people think they are, to tell anyone they have to much of anyhing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

More unfounded, and unsupportable rhetoric.

The fact that your Gov is a god all mighty **** up isn't proof of a general rule. Mixed economies do consistently better on almost all social indictors.

Br Cornelius

Which social indcater tells us it is doing good s your government goes bankrupt. Who will your government be able to help when they go bankrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacecowboy342

Which social indcater tells us it is doing good s your government goes bankrupt. Who will your government be able to help when they go bankrupt.

And to keep it from going bankrupt the solution is cutting taxes to the rich?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

Which social indcater tells us it is doing good s your government goes bankrupt. Who will your government be able to help when they go bankrupt.

Look at Denmark and Germany to see what I am getting at here.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

More unfounded, and unsupportable rhetoric.

The fact that your Gov is a god all mighty **** up isn't proof of a general rule. Mixed economies do consistently better on almost all social indictors.

Br Cornelius

Well it isn't for US. You get your government involved all you want. We'd rather see what we can do without them and learn our own lessons. You big government folks really think you're going to flip us one day and suddenly we are going to realize government is the solution. It might appear we are heading that way but there is a lack of critical thinking and informed decisions to thank for that. So the less we think for ourselves the more we need government. I don't think so. Call me a dinosaur but there are still a great many of US who believe in America's founding principles of limited government.

Can you honestly say to your self that the worlds most major issues are caused by civilians and not government? I doubt it. Government is the source of all our problems and they're the jagged rusty gate stuck between US and mostly simple solutions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

And to keep it from going bankrupt the solution is cutting taxes to the rich?

Has taxing them really been much of a help anyways? We give a trillion in taxes and they'll budget for two and and spend three. It is our government who needs to take responsibility, not the rich.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

Has taxing them really been much of a help anyways? We give a trillion in taxes and they'll budget for two and and spend three. It is our government who needs to take responsibility, not the rich.

Yea I think the problem is institutional. Politicians buy votes by offering benefits to people but of course don't want to tax them 'cause that loses votes, so they borrow the money. Some national debt can be a good thing -- is in fact a good thing as Alexander Hamilton so well pointed out -- but there are limits.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Yea I think the problem is institutional. Politicians buy votes by offering benefits to people but of course don't want to tax them 'cause that loses votes, so they borrow the money. Some national debt can be a good thing -- is in fact a good thing as Alexander Hamilton so well pointed out -- but there are limits.

Limits you can objectively calculate by doing what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

Limits you can objectively calculate by doing what?

Oh I would say by watching the inflation rate. The problem with that of course is that it lags so that one can have too much debt long before inflation reflects it, but it still is a sure symptom of too much debt.

Countries like the States can get away with proportionally far more debt than smaller countries, and of course a country like Argentina can always just devalue so long as they are careful to keep their own currency and never to borrow in dollars or some similar international currency. A devaluation is hard on the standard of living but the Argentine regime seems to be getting away with it over and over. Bankers appear to have short memories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/12/d-c-mayor-vetoes-so-called-living-wage-bill-aimed-at-wal-mart/

D.C. MAYOR VETOES SO-CALLED ‘LIVING WAGE’ BILL AIMED AT WALMART

“If I were to sign this bill into law, it would do nothing but hinder our ability to create jobs, drive away retailers, and set us back on the path to prosperity for all,” Gray said in a letter to the D.C. city council.

Washington, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray announced his decision to veto the so-called “living wage” bill aimed at Walmart. (Getty Images)

The bill, which would only have applied to stores operating in spaces of 75,000 or more feet, called for Walmart and other “big-box” retailers to pay their employees a “living wage” of at least $12.50 an hour.

___________________

Gray outlined what he believes are the bill’s many flaws:

1. “The bill is not a true living-wage bill, because it would raise the minimum wage only for a small fraction of the District’s workforce.”

2. “The bill is a job-killer, because nearly every large retailer now considering opening a store in the District has indicated that they will not come here or expand here if this bill becomes law.”

3. “The bill would affect far more retailers than many supporters think.”

4. “Even if the bill did somehow end up creating a small number of higher-paying jobs, it does nothing to ensure that those jobs would actually be filled by District residents.”

5. “This bill does nothing to help underserved parts of the District.”

6. “The bill will not modestly delay economic development in underserved District neighborhoods long deprived of jobs and retail amenities; it will kill economic development in these communities for a generation.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

Yea I think the problem is institutional. Politicians buy votes by offering benefits to people but of course don't want to tax them 'cause that loses votes, so they borrow the money. Some national debt can be a good thing -- is in fact a good thing as Alexander Hamilton so well pointed out -- but there are limits.

I believe when hamilton said that the federal governmennt had no income. We don't have that problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacecowboy342

Well it isn't for US. You get your government involved all you want. We'd rather see what we can do without them and learn our own lessons. You big government folks really think you're going to flip us one day and suddenly we are going to realize government is the solution. It might appear we are heading that way but there is a lack of critical thinking and informed decisions to thank for that. So the less we think for ourselves the more we need government. I don't think so. Call me a dinosaur but there are still a great many of US who believe in America's founding principles of limited government.

Can you honestly say to your self that the worlds most major issues are caused by civilians and not government? I doubt it. Government is the source of all our problems and they're the jagged rusty gate stuck between US and mostly simple solutions.

We have been trying it your way since Ronald Ray-gun in 1980 and things just keep getting worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

I believe when hamilton said that the federal governmennt had no income. We don't have that problem.

That is not relevant; his arguments apply regardless. Besides, his argument was made to oppose those who wanted to default on the debt, not because there was no income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2

We have been trying it your way since Ronald Ray-gun in 1980 and things just keep getting worse

Trying it our way? lol you really believe that? We in no way have been trying it "Our" way. If anything we have been increasing government and spending every year. And adding new taxes. How is that our way?

In the 80's we had a short burst of something that was sort of "our" way. And we had a economic boom because of it.

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.