Members banned from this thread: FUCK THE POLICE, Cancel 2016.11, midcan5, evince, christiefan915, ZappasGuitar, Phantasmal, Rune, Legion Troll, ZoomZoom, Konono, Leonthecat and Buckly J. Ewer


Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 55 of 55

Thread: How is that $15/hour minimum wage working out Seattle?

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    116
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Dear CFM:

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    First, you tell me what you call social inequality.
    Wait a minute -- are you seriously suggesting that even apart from native skills/abilities, Capitalism creates no create social inequality?

    IMT

  2. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    102,621
    Thanks
    7,801
    Thanked 29,190 Times in 23,267 Posts
    Groans
    2,597
    Groaned 2,304 Times in 2,194 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celticguy View Post
    And I bet your Internet penis is two feet long.
    he keeps it in a jar.....

  3. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,666
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMT View Post
    Dear CFM:



    Wait a minute -- are you seriously suggesting that even apart from native skills/abilities, Capitalism creates no create social inequality?

    IMT
    I asked for you to tell me what you call social inequality. Apparently, you're too stupid to do that.

  4. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    116
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Dear CFM:

    What you're asking departs from Prof. Gordon's work, around which my points were referenced. My intent was to discuss G-Force' contention of a permanent stage of expanded social inequality, poverty, etc. My interest is not with those issues so much as the much greater question that this is a permanent stage from which there is no exit, a fact which can only more and more disconnect civic discourse [i.e. politics] from social life.

    But if you simply must shift the focus of discussion, we could start with property as a means of asserting public power.

    IMT

  5. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    116
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Dear CFM:

    I intended no offense in post 40. My premise/conclusion question was an attempt to get at the way you think about this.

    When I speak about social inequality, I'm referring the Capitalist system by which private ownership and social production stand in contradiction of each other. The capitalist owns the means of production and distribution and therefore controls all the decisions about when, how, where, in what way, by whom and on what terms they are used. Workers who use raw materials and actually produce goods have no control over any of these things. The social inequality of private ownership and social production is the very basis of the Capitalist mode of production. That's why I was taken back by your request for a definition of social inequality. I assumed that would be understood because that is what the capitalist system is.

    IMT
    Last edited by IMT; 02-25-2016 at 09:25 PM. Reason: Word substitution

  6. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    30,990
    Thanks
    11,761
    Thanked 10,682 Times in 7,208 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 783 Times in 730 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMT View Post
    Dear CFM:



    That's very forthright!

    Of course as competing companies reduce laborers' pay to $2/day, it becomes necessary to slash wages yet again just to remain competitive. Two dollars an hour today, one dollar an hour tomorrow, then one dollar a day, and so forth.

    How does one build a first world economy on that basis? You don't! Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon rightly notes that the US has entered a stage of permanent economic stagnation, expanding social inequality and poverty.

    Moreover, there is absolutely nothing Paul Krugman can do to stop it!

    Marxists have long said that workers cannot be paid a living wage under Capitalism; but it isn't every day you meet Capitalist exponents who cede Marx' point. Again, thank-you for your forthrightness.

    IMT
    Why doesn't Google do that? Or Aldi? Costco?
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  7. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    116
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Dear Dear Vepr 12:

    Quote Originally Posted by Vepr 12 View Post
    Why doesn't Google do that? Or Aldi? Costco?
    Great question! I would say that market conditions have not required it ... yet. Mind, the auto industry has seen draconian wage-cuts. This is where Prof. Gordon's work matters. If as he says the US has entered a new stage of permanent economic stagnation plus expanding social inequality and poverty under Capitalism, then the question is not 'whether' but 'when' equally brutal wage cuts will be seen across the spectrum.

    Capitalism can allow some concessions [wage increases, work-place safety, additional benefits] so long as the economy is expanding at a rate which [in addition to those concessions] also affords an acceptable level of profit. But when the economy is contracting, market conditions [i.e., turning a profit] necessitates the removal of those concessions. Hence, the social antagonism of labor negotiations. Workers recoil at contract offers, and corporations reply that they have no choice but to make cuts in order to remain profitable. This is doubly so when other companies produce an equivalent product of equal value. I find it deeply ironic and mildly humorous/amusing that these conditions under market Capitalism can be discussed only by employing good, orthodox, Marxian analysis.

    IMT

  8. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    30,990
    Thanks
    11,761
    Thanked 10,682 Times in 7,208 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 783 Times in 730 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMT View Post
    Dear Dear Vepr 12:



    Great question! I would say that market conditions have not required it ... yet. Mind, the auto industry has seen draconian wage-cuts. This is where Prof. Gordon's work matters. If as he says the US has entered a new stage of permanent economic stagnation plus expanding social inequality and poverty under Capitalism, then the question is not 'whether' but 'when' equally brutal wage cuts will be seen across the spectrum.

    Capitalism can allow some concessions [wage increases, work-place safety, additional benefits] so long as the economy is expanding at a rate which [in addition to those concessions] also affords an acceptable level of profit. But when the economy is contracting, market conditions [i.e., turning a profit] necessitates the removal of those concessions. Hence, the social antagonism of labor negotiations. Workers recoil at contract offers, and corporations reply that they have no choice but to make cuts in order to remain profitable. This is doubly so when other companies produce an equivalent product of equal value. I find it deeply ironic and mildly humorous/amusing that these conditions under market Capitalism can be discussed only by employing good, orthodox, Marxian analysis.

    IMT
    No it hasn't. Auto workers have seen job loss due to automation, but those who remain employed enjoy a very healthy salary/hourly wage and some of the best benefits of any industry.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  9. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,666
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMT View Post
    Dear CFM:

    I intended no offense in post 40. My premise/conclusion question was an attempt to get at the way you think about this.

    When I speak about social inequality, I'm referring the Capitalist system by which private ownership and social production stand in contradiction of each other. The capitalist owns the means of production and distribution and therefore controls all the decisions about when, how, where, in what way, by whom and on what terms they are used. Workers who use raw materials and actually produce goods have no control over any of these things. The social inequality of private ownership and social production is the very basis of the Capitalist mode of production. That's why I was taken back by your request for a definition of social inequality. I assumed that would be understood because that is what the capitalist system is.

    IMT
    I have no problem with the capitalists owning the means of production and controlling the decisions. Those that own the means of production should get to decide those things. Are you saying that the workers who provide nothing but labor for which they are compensated should make the decisions about how the money invested by the owners gets spent? The workers use those raw materials and produce things for which their labor is paid by the owner. If they don't think it's enough, they have the opportunity in a capitalist society to offer competition and do the same thing.

  10. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,634
    Thanks
    17,467
    Thanked 5,105 Times in 3,823 Posts
    Groans
    19,214
    Groaned 3,543 Times in 3,270 Posts

    Default

    I am by no means anti capitalis!
    And to say changing our system to make it better is communist is juvenile.
    Thomas Piketty is right, the return on capital is greater than economic growth.
    I.e. The rich get richer, and inequality is only going to get worse.
    The rich don't spend nearly the percent of their income as the middle class thus creating an ever increasing demand problem.

Similar Threads

  1. Buffett: I'd love to see minimum wage at $15 an hour!
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 155
    Last Post: 05-25-2018, 06:53 AM
  2. Robert Reich: 7 Reasons Why the Minimum Wage Should Be Raised to $15 an Hour!
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 151
    Last Post: 06-11-2016, 07:05 AM
  3. Seattle Announces $15 Minimum Wage, Highest In The U.S.!!!
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 05-03-2014, 02:04 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-03-2014, 07:37 AM
  5. 40 hour minimum wage job not enough for 2 bedroom apartment
    By Phantasmal in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 181
    Last Post: 06-01-2012, 09:06 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

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