The Minimum Wage Trap

[JohnLarue]

True, it will not help with someone like you that are willfully uninformed.

You are making me laugh
Someone does not buy into your commie beliefs and you think they are uninformed?

You chose to disregard facts.

Which facts are these?


Obviously they differ from the obvious fact that Communism has been tried multiple times and each time it was a colossal failure which only burdened the populations with suffering and corrupt governments

Marx' theories were the basis for the post war policies in northern Europe, that were responsible for lifting prosperity, equality and quality of life.

No I believe the massive influx of US $ was the basis for any prosperity in post war Europe (Western Europe)
Marx's theories were applied in the Eastern half of Europe and that did not work out so well

 

[bver_hunter]

You're not suppose to live off the minimum wage, you suppose to survive. Minimum wage is for students and immigrants without skills. I oppose governments imposing wages on employers. The way to fix it is to keep the minimum wage low and to supplement it with social assistance. You cannot just keep increasing the labor costs in the private sector because it is very elastic and very efficient at adapting by streamlining, moving and automation. In the end, you end up with the same problem down the road.

There are lots of Canadians without any skills as well. You will be surprised that there are a lot of Immigrants employed on minimum wages although they have the skills. Sooner or later the Government needs to recognise the degrees of these immigrants especially those who graduate from highly respected Universities.

 

[danmand]

You are making me laugh
Someone does not buy into your commie beliefs and you think they are uninformed?
Which facts are these?
Obviously they differ from the obvious fact that Communism has been tried multiple times and each time it was a colossal failure which only burdened the populations with suffering and corrupt governments
No I believe the massive influx of US $ was the basis for any prosperity in post war Europe (Western Europe)
Marx's theories were applied in the Eastern half of Europe and that did not work out so well

The best advice I can give you is to refrain from posting until you have educated yourself.

 

[K Douglas]

True, it will not help with someone like you that are willfully uninformed. You chose to disregard facts.

Marx' theories were the basis for the post war policies in northern Europe, that were responsible for lifting prosperity, equality and quality of life.

No they weren't. Early social democracy rejected the tenets of Marxism and supported capitalism as the basis of economic development. That being said I don't think that the relative success of social democracy in the homogeneous Nordic countries, whose combined population of 26 million people is less than the state of Texas, can be replicated into larger more heterogeneous countries like the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, Brazil etc.

 

[danmand]

No they weren't. Early social democracy rejected the tenets of Marxism and supported capitalism as the basis of economic development. That being said I don't think that the relative success of social democracy in the homogeneous Nordic countries, whose combined population of 26 million people is less than the state of Texas, can be replicated into larger more heterogeneous countries like the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, Brazil etc.

It is impossible to have a conversation with people like you and LaRue, when you do not understand what Marxism, communism, social democracy etc means, not to mention a total lack of knowledge about Europe.

In the post war era, Scandinavia, Germany (west), France, the UK, Netherlands, and Belgium were guided in varying degrees by social democratic policies.

Obviously, social democracy is not going to be implemented in North America, because people do not want equality, social mobility, equal access to free education, universal health care, unemployment programs, welfare programs etc. etc. But it is not because it would not work. It is because people do not want it.

 

[JohnLarue]

The best advice I can give you is to refrain from posting until you have educated yourself.

Enlighten us comrade

 

[onthebottom]

I imagine you are in favour of forced sterilization of people on minimum wage..

Not at all, then again there are pretty effective strategies for managing when you have kids...

 

[onthebottom]

Great idea, tell the working poor they aren't allowed to have kids.
That'll really help fix the situation.

Why is it that you could live off retail wages here decades ago and you can't now?
Do you think that's better?

Why can you live off of those wages in some Euro countries but you can't in the States and can barely here?
Do you think that makes the US better?

You can't live off "retail" wages, never have been able to, here or there, or anywhere....

 

[Frankfooter]

You can't live off "retail" wages, never have been able to, here or there, or anywhere....

What are you, 10 years old?

You really have that little understanding of history, of changes to wages or working conditions around the world?

 

[Polaris]

Economics Is About People

That is totally wrong.

Economics is about efficiency.

The more efficiency, translates into more productivity, which means the better off you are.

 

[Polaris]

Economics Is About People

In the United States, seems that the unemployment rate for people with college/university degrees is around 3%, which means full employment.

The United States has full employment for people with higher education.

That's why the USA is the most powerful country in the world. It allocates resources the best way to make their country one of the best anywhere.

If a college graduate, such as from teachers college, can only find a job flipping burgers, then that is a problem for the country.

With low paying jobs, that is still a job, and people got a chance. One way of helping out the working poor is a tax cut. Alternatively, tax credits. Even more radical is direct deposit via income tax returns.

Europe has no answers. They're living in the past. Italy has seen zero economic growth for a decade now? Then the usual problem countries. The Germans, even with manipulation of the exchange rate via the ECU thingy, only manages 1% growth.

People in North America has seen the future, and it is not the old world. It is just not.

 

[K Douglas]

It is impossible to have a conversation with people like you and LaRue, when you do not understand what Marxism, communism, social democracy etc means, not to mention a total lack of knowledge about Europe.

In the post war era, Scandinavia, Germany (west), France, the UK, Netherlands, and Belgium were guided in varying degrees by social democratic policies.

Obviously, social democracy is not going to be implemented in North America, because people do not want equality, social mobility, equal access to free education, universal health care, unemployment programs, welfare programs etc. etc. But it is not because it would not work. It is because people do not want it.

Sigh. I think it is you that doesn't understand the difference between social democracy and Marxist socialism. You're trying to equate the two. My goodness you are daft.

And the last I checked Canada was part of North America. Are you really saying we don't have universal health care, public education, welfare and unemployment insurance? The US also has all those programs except their universal health care system is not universal - it's limited to elderly and poor.

I will say you are somewhat correct in that the European system of social democracy is not going to be implemented here because the majority of people don't want it. But there are other reasons it won't be.
1. It's not congruent with our traditional belief systems and culture. One that supports and values economic liberty, individualism, freedom of religion and thought as the basis for societal progression.
2. It's not sustainable. Many European countries are on the brink of collapse - Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal. Others are on a collision course of inevitable disaster - France, Germany even the UK to some extent.
3. The US is too big to control from a centralized system. There are 50 states with their own levels of government. In Canada we also have a decentralized system, albeit to a lesser extent. Social democracy is not practical under our decentralized model.

 

[onthebottom]

What are you, 10 years old?

You really have that little understanding of history, of changes to wages or working conditions around the world?

Nope and nope, working retail and fast food has always sucked and never been a path to supporting a family.

 

[canada-man]

In the United States, seems that the unemployment rate for people with college/university degrees is around 3%, which means full employment.

more than 7% of US college graduates unemployed and nearly 15% underemployed

http://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/why-cant-college-graduates-find-jobs-43495/

If a college graduate, such as from teachers college, can only find a job flipping burgers, then that is a problem for the country.

could it be that there are more teachers graduating that the availability of teacher jobs?

 

[danmand]

Sigh. I think it is you that doesn't understand the difference between social democracy and Marxist socialism. You're trying to equate the two. My goodness you are daft.

What kind of gratuitous nonsense is that?

And the last I checked Canada was part of North America. Are you really saying we don't have universal health care, public education, welfare and unemployment insurance? The US also has all those programs except their universal health care system is not universal - it's limited to elderly and poor.

I will say you are somewhat correct in that the European system of social democracy is not going to be implemented here because the majority of people don't want it. But there are other reasons it won't be.
1. It's not congruent with our traditional belief systems and culture. One that supports and values economic liberty, individualism, freedom of religion and thought as the basis for societal progression.
2. It's not sustainable. Many European countries are on the brink of collapse - Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal. Others are on a collision course of inevitable disaster - France, Germany even the UK to some extent.
3. The US is too big to control from a centralized system. There are 50 states with their own levels of government. In Canada we also have a decentralized system, albeit to a lesser extent. Social democracy is not practical under our decentralized model.

Your statement is based upon ideology, not facts. Canada does not have equal access to free education, unemployment program, adequate welfare etc. etc. As a result it has poor social mobility and equality. Social Democratic policies address all these issues, and contrary to your statement is based upon economic liberty, individualism, freedom of religion and thought. It has also shown itself to be more than sustainable, actually extremely successful. None of the countries I listed above are on a collision course of inevitable disaster.

I repeat, that social democratic policies , although being extremely successful, will not be implemented in North America, because people do not want equality, social mobility, and welfare for all. In a democracy, that is a valid choice.

I should add that I personally don't really care that much. I have been able to secure the best education money can buy for my children, and will be able to do the same for my grandchildren. I need nothing from Canada, and have never asked for anything. I just find it implausible that people like you insist on maintaining an outdated and less effective version of society, when the evidence is clear that a better version exists. For you, Henry Ford would have been a communist.

 

[JohnLarue]

Your statement is based upon ideology, not facts.

Pot calling the kettle black

Canada does not have equal access to free education, unemployment program, adequate welfare etc. etc.

Well gee what are all my tax dollars being spent on then?
Oh yes, lining the pockets of the public sector union parasites

As a result it has poor social mobility and equality.

Really all those newfies who made thousands in Fort Mac might disagree

Social Democratic policies address all these issues,

Not by a long shot & most defiantly these policies are not economically sustainable
Ontario has the highest debt to GDP level in the world for a non-sovereign borrower

and contrary to your statement is based upon economic liberty, individualism, freedom of religion and thought.

IS based upon unattainable utopian dreams

It has also shown itself to be more than sustainable, actually extremely successful. None of the countries I listed above are on a collision course of inevitable disaster.

Europe is a financial basketcase. They have borrowed to the limit and now can not generate any growth

I repeat, that social democratic policies , although being extremely successful,

they are not successful, the bill always comes due

will not be implemented in North America, because people do not want equality, social mobility, and welfare for all. In a democracy, that is a valid choice.

It will not be implemented in North America because the Nanny State is not the American dream

I should add that I personally don't really care that much. I have been able to secure the best education money can buy for my children, and will be able to do the same for my grandchildren. I need nothing from Canada, and have never asked for anything.

Are you a public sector employee?

I just find it implausible that people like you insist on maintaining an outdated and less effective version of society, when the evidence is clear that a better version exists.

In your twisted and biased mind perhaps

For you, Henry Ford would have been a communist.

No Henry was not a commie, however you seem to fit the bill

 

[Polaris]

more than 7% of US college graduates unemployed and nearly 15% underemployed

http://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/why-cant-college-graduates-find-jobs-43495/

Although I do not dispute that the link provided published on the net a figure for unemployment among university graduates in America, it would be good where they got the source for that number.

The number I used was from a Bloomberg article about the recent unemployment report in the USA, and it seems that education pays off the USA.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...u-s-might-run-out-of-college-educated-workers