Re: Do you believe

Jerry Okamura wrote:
"George Z. Bush" <georgezbush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:n9_Wf.213$SL6.183@xxxxxxxxxxx
Jerry Okamura wrote:
"George Z. Bush" <georgezbush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8TWWf.34$EX5.18@xxxxxxxxxxx
Jerry Okamura wrote:
"Jay Smith" <jaylsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3s0m221f5pnertghj3vvegi6jufdmdpa30@xxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:44:16 GMT, Rita <nitany_98@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Then raise wages. Rita, the labor movement fought long and hard to
create a middle class by getting the 40 hour, 8 hour a day work week.
Why did this work? Because it effectively shrunk the labor pool
thereby raising wages so that a middle class flourished. Why are
people willing to give in to the downward wage pressure caused by
employers that import labor to undercut American wages? It's insane.
Every immigrant that takes a job for less than would have to be paid
if that immigrant workforce was not available puts more downward wage
pressure across the board.
Notice what happened to the computer industry when corporations used
the H1B visas to flood our country with foreign computer
professionals. Thousands of highly skilled American workers were let
go.
I sympathize with immigrant workers but I say take care of American
workers first or there won't be a middle class.

Raising wages is a ponzi scheme. If you raise the wage of one group
of
people, you will eventually raise the wages for everyone that make
more
money that the group you just increased the wages for. Think of it
this
way. Say you are the low guy in the totem pole. Making say $10 per
hour.
By law that minimum is raised to say $12 per hour. That means that
someone
who made between $11 to $12 per hour, now needs a raise because if
they
do
not get a raise, then they are making as much as that new minimum wage
worker is. And as you give that person who use to make $12 per hour a
raise, you have to raise the wages for everyone above that person, in
order
to maintain pariy. So, then that new minimu wage no logner is as
great
as
it was at the beginning and you have to start the whole process over
and
over again....until someday that minimum wage could be $100 per
hour....

Why should the worker accept the freezing of his wages without a
similar
freeze placed upon the profits of his employer? Are you espousing the
old
Roman Catholic adage of priests everywhere "do as I say....but don't do
as
I do"? Are the goose and the gander somehow different?

First of all I did not say that anyone would accept a freeeze in their
wages, I argued just the opposite, i.e. that wages up the chain would
all
increase.

Did you not also imply that such a development would be unacceptable, or
did I misinterpret your reference to a minimum wage that might reach $100
per hour?

Well, yes. At some point in the future, probably way out there in the
future, one could see where the minimum wage could reach $100 per hour.
All, you need to do it to find out what the first minimum wage level was,
and what it is today, to see that it is higher today then it was back when
the minimum wage was first dreamed up.

Are we back to defining what "is" is here? Your reference to those
lofty hourly wages that might be awaiting us down the road is as
impressive as the present cost of gasoline at about $2.50 per gallon is
to
someone who remembers buying it for $0.13 per gallon.

Not really, all you have to do is factor in inflation. Do you remember
how
much your first paycheck was? I remember my first real job, paid me $135
per week, which at the time I thought was an awful lot of money.

What does that have to do with anything? I got my first full time job as a
college graduate in the height of the recession in 1948 for $105 a month. I
knew that wasn't a lot of money, but I already had an education and I knew
that my low income level would inevitably change for the better. People
without an adequate education, with communications difficulties because of
language deficits, and coming out of a family situation and a culture that
never placed any appreciable value on education are the ones who inevitably
are mired in poverty and realistically have little chance of extracting
themselves from it. There's a huge difference between people like that and
people like yourself and myself; saying that education is the key to
affluence is lost on people like them.

And yet, we are as a people christians (and I used the small "c" advisedly);
most of us acknowledge that we are indeed our brothers' keepers and those of
us who are more fortunate have an obligation to help those who are less
fortunate.


Do you really have an understanding of what a minimum hourly wage is
supposed to do for society? I'm beginning to think that the point has
escaped you and you're looking at the effect it will have on the north
end
of the horse when the problem primarily exists on the south end. Whether
or not you're willing to accept it, it's my understanding that its
purpose
is to prevent lower economic rungs of our ladder from being permanently
mired in poverty.

The way out of this box, is to get an eduation. Up to high school, that
is
offered at virtually no cost to the child.

As I said, that's far easier said than done in the real world.


The upper rungs of that ladder are far better equipped to cope
with the economy without excessive concern than are the bottom rungs.

Well, that is pretty obvious. The upper rungs of the ladder for the most
part have an adequate level of education to have those good paying jobs.
Those at the lower rungs of the ladder for the most part do not have an
adequate level of education....


There are a lot more people hovering around those bottom rungs by far as
compared to those at the top and society has an obligation to serve all.
it's not a matter of "either or".....it has to be both. Failure to do so
may well result in its own eventual destruction.

Well, my position on that matter is to look at who works in a minimum wage
jobs (excluding teenagers), those who can only get a minimum wage job are
those who do not have an adequate level of education for the most part.
So,
the two it seems to me, i.e. the amount of money you can earn is dependent
to a large degree on the level of education you have obtained. For the
person who has those minimum wage jobs, they have only themselves to blame
by not taking full advantage of the educational opporutunities that were
provided them....

Well, perhaps my little homily about being a christian was lost on you.
Personally, I'm not into blaming society's victims for being victims.
Because you are equipped to protect and save yourself doesn't mean that
everyone is. The unfortunate still have to be looked out for.....AFAIAC,
that's a moral imperative, and I'm not even a practicing member of any
church.

George Z


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Memo to John Kerry
    ... Small increases in the minimum wage do not ... margins are too low to remain profitable with an increase in labor costs. ... the time was making the prior minimum wage. ... : have to raise families. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Way OT: Can any econ majors help me out here?
    ... > -- Real wage growth makes it way into ... > like raising the minimum wage from $5.15/hour to something people can ... that should theoretically squeeze illegals out of the US ... cost of a legal worker, under your plan, will have doubled. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Voice in my head
    ... you cannot legislate a living wage. ... the minimum wage at this moment is like an guitar that has "11". ... is attracting the Spirit of the Lord which has invested this tropical ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: WGA Strike 90%+ vote to strike
    ... but I wasn't talking about people who work at minimum wage. ... I'm not wild about government care. ... Asian countries are manipulating their currencies, dumping, engaging ...
    (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated)
  • Re: OT: Iran nukes are Clintons fault
    ... We've had increases in the minimum wage. ... ones where the old adage "if you laid all of the economists in the ... It is making China and India prosperous... ...
    (alt.vacation.las-vegas)