Do you feel that the economy is starting to move back to normal again? Some articles out right now describes inflation and that there is a shortage of labor in the US. Where I live in the world there is a shortage of staff in the service and restaurant sector. Companies are desperate to hire!

There’s a shortage of sweatshop labor. I think there’s a boycott of sub-$15 jobs because $15 is the generally agreed upon minimum wage that Congress was supposed to mandate. Employers who can’t provide the value to justify the $15 wage should not be in business.

That leaves the problem of what to do with people who are so useless that they can’t provide $15/hr of value. In that case, it’s cheaper to not have them dragging down the business. Let the productive people do the work because it’s what they love doing and use UBI and social programs to keep the dead wood afloat.

You don’t expect your small children to pull their own weight or pay their own way. Under capitalism, if it weren’t for child labor laws, businesses would. They fought against child labor laws. Said it would bankrupt them. Well guess what. It didn’t. Same with UBI, same with a decent wage. They can make it work because that’s what business does.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/03/2021 08:08AM by babyloncansuckit.

Here in the eu, a future goal has been formulated by all the member states to transform the entire eu economy into a sustainable and circular economy. I have sent an email to the authority in my country that is responsible for their part of the issue and wondered how they see the future scenario, how society should look and function and so on.

I experience that the UBI could be a reasonable alternative together with a mixed economy that activates and educates people into civic members.

My personal opinion is that I want to see things like cabotage slave wages and trafficking gone completely from the EU.

Can't disagree with much of your take on things, babs.

But another layer I see is America's desperate need to have everything ---EVERYTHING-- cheap and easily affordable, drives much of the business model, and, also is driving the previously drumming out of the middle lass into speeds never seen before.

Americans have become their own worst enemy.

For me it isn't whether the economy is picking up, it is how the economy is morphing into something that may not be beneficial to the average person.

Like the movie title, we are at the point where, "Something's Got to Give." And it ain't going to be the 1% of the 1%.

Businesses need to pay the lower levels properly. Americans need to face the fact that their room rate and meal in a restaurant are going up and that $5.00 shirt at Walmart means someone is going hungry.

But, "We're all in this together," is the biggest lie ever told.

What happens though when people now making $15 an hour demand more because they do not see themselves as minimum wage workers? Do they get a boost to 20 or 25 dollars and hour? And then what happens when those making 20 and 25 now suddenly discover...and so on?

I just did the math... we are in for a lot of trouble.

Maybe that would be actual trickle down economics?

If somebody drops something, pick it up.

I pick it up and I put it down.

When people start to live like normal, things will return to normal.

It's about pivoting, adapting, flexibility, and HOPE. Increasing pay. Increasing costs. Increasing inflation. Deflation...

It's going to be a while.
Hold Your Horses.

Two articles in the chinese state news app CGTN describes there is a shortage of micro chips and it will be a real problem ahead. It will affect every sector in the world economy.

I think workers at the lower end of the wage scale are voting with their feet. I hope this is the start of wages that are more fair.

I agree


Just read an article where a restaurant owner bemoans people not wanting to work for $2.35 an hour plus tips. With tons of take out and limited seating tips are not close to what they were.

I recently left a job when I learned that because I was a first year employee I would not earn a commission nor a bonus. I would do the same work as a second year employee but at $9.00 an hour while they would average $35.00 an hour with commission and bonus. Darn right I walked out since they never explained this up front.

Another problem is daycare with school out. Way too expensive to afford at a job paying $10.00 an hour.

People will work if and when they can. When the world emerges from a pandemic, schools aren't opened, daycare isn't arranged, landlords want their money, and transportation and even clothing need to be organized. Those things will take weeks if not months to figure out.

That's why it is indescribably stupid of states to cut unemployment benefits prematurely. There is no surer way to lock eager workers out of the workforce than to render it impossible for them to join it. The evidence from states and countries that maintain a UBI or extensive employment subsidies is that it results in a greater workforce, not the opposite.

I earnestly, humbly, and gratefully applaud the ramping up of wages.

Because a growing economy keeps Social Security benefits for the nation's Sacred Elderly flowing, which helps keep the nation's public golf courses open.

Nope. Numbers are going to be crap for June Job creation all the way to the end of the year. Although their might be an uptick in the states that cancel the Federal unemployment subsidy giving additional $300/$400 for people to sit on their ass and watch netflix.

Overall, the jobs will stall. I see now hiring for all the jobs that pay $15 or less / hour. They can't find workers.

The infrastructure push won't do much and California still won't be able to finish a train line or build a bridge or update an airport to be really modern.

Food prices already purchased at a 70%+ inflated rate for futures. Fuel prices bound to go up as well during the summer months even though people are driving less.

Keep your AMC stock purchased at $10 -- $12 dollars and hold. I think it will reach $100 soon enough.

I'm seeing a lot of conclusions here but no analysis let alone evidence. Can you flesh this out?


-------------------------------------------------------
> Numbers are going to be crap for June Job
> creation all the way to the end of the year.

Why? What is the basis for your prediction?


-------------
> Although their might be an uptick in the states
> that cancel the Federal unemployment subsidy
> giving additional $300/$400 for people to sit on
> their ass and watch netflix.

There are well-documented reasons for the stickiness of labor and wages, none of which are contained in this prognostication. Can you provide evidence that the elimination of the subsidies will cause those states' employment rolls to expand instead of contracting as the loss of income causes consumption and state GDP to fall?


---------------
> Overall, the jobs will stall. I see now hiring for
> all the jobs that pay $15 or less / hour. They
> can't find workers.

That makes no sense at all. In a free market, wages will rise to equilibrate the supply and demand for labor. Why in this instance will that fundamental law of capitalism fail?


---------------

> The infrastructure push won't do much and
> California still won't be able to finish a train
> line or build a bridge or update an airport to be
> really modern.

Why will the infrastructure push fail? And why would infrastructure be a bad idea? How do you distinguish such a situation from the very positive effects evidenced in the New Deal or the Eisenhower infrastructure programs?


-------------
> Food prices already purchased at a 70%+ inflated
> rate for futures.

70+%? What are you talking about? What foods, as opposed to commodities, are traded in futures markets? And once that's sorted out, what is the evidentiary basis for your predictions?


---------------
> Fuel prices bound to go up as
> well during the summer months even though people
> are driving less.

How on earth does that happen? The biggest source of demand will decrease because people drive less but the price of oil rises? I must be missing the connection here because as it stands your logic is bizarre. All other things equal, less car mileage means lower petroleum prices.


---------------
> Keep your AMC stock purchased at $10 -- $12
> dollars and hold. I think it will reach $100 soon
> enough.

Seriously? You are a stock picker now?

The regime doesn't know what to do to make policies that assist with creating environments to grow jobs.

Human behavior is the predictor. $300 a week isn't enough to rationalize not having to get out there and work.

Some folks that get $300 + $400 fed will go out and work under the table for cash paying jobs and of course not declare the income allowing them to collect.

Cut the subsidy and maybe jobs will increase.

An infrastructure bill that does nothing to complete the keystone pipeline is a failure. The project was cancelled in January and since then fuel price has increased.

Min wage fast food jobs I think will decrease as automated menus will take out the front desk order taker job. It takes 3 Mcdonald franchises to be profitable now. Not one.


Inflation will be terrible on many good including food.


Look up stuff yourself as you seem to be the exmo fact checker.

I asked you several questions about your statements. You didn't answer a single one. In fact, you couldn't engage with them at all.

Why? That's obvious.

Yes I did.


Fuel prices have gone up since Jan 2021 each week.
Supposedly less people are driving and working from home. There should be a decrease on fuel yet prices rise. The regime policiesexpectations.
Reasons. Keystone pipeline project cancelled. Cyber attacks and Governors shutting down infrastructure pipelines for a period if time. Affected Eastern and central states.
Cyberattacks will continue and won't be the last time.

Released numbers for May 2021 again failed to meet economist expectations. June 2021 report in July won't meet expectations either.


"The U.S. economy added more than 550,000 jobs during the month of May, the Labor Department said in its monthly report Friday — marking the second straight month the figure did not meet expectations."

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2021/06/04/may-jobs-report-labor-department/9651622806204/

As far unemployment subsidy from federal you can Google or watch youtube for proof. Lots if stories about business owners that can't hire folks. They get it that unemployed can make just as much per week not working so why bust their hump waking up early. Google it.
Compact the problem restaurant work doesn't pay much anyway and not all schools are full-time. Which requires a least one parent not to work at all.

There you go. Now go read some news sites.

"watch youtube for proof"

Hahahahahahaha...ahem...oh...you were serious?

Did you see his post in the other thread where he warned that he and his fellow Trumpians want us dead and will get their wishes fulfilled in "round 2 and 3?"

Phazer is as evil as he is stupid.

Phazer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes I did.

No, you didn't.


------------
> Fuel prices have gone up since Jan 2021 each week.
>
> Supposedly less people are driving and working
> from home. There should be a decrease on fuel yet
> prices rise.

You see? Anyone with any intelligence would see that contradiction and realize his explanation makes no sense at all.


>The regime policiesexpectations.

Ah yes, Phazer doesn't understand it so it must be a conspiracy.


----------------

> Reasons. Keystone pipeline project cancelled.
> Cyber attacks and Governors shutting down
> infrastructure pipelines for a period if time.
> Affected Eastern and central states.
> Cyberattacks will continue and won't be the last
> time.

Okay, let's think that through. First, there have been no cyber attacks on US oil infrastructure, so we can disregard that as the ravings of someone drowning in the shallow end.

Otherwise, you assert that the reasons for rising prices are all domestic, all within the United States. But if that were true you would only see the change in oil prices within the US. How very strange, then, to see oil prices on the world market behaving the same as within the United States. That alone indicates that you are wrong.

Maybe this would be an appropriate time to blame the regime conspiracy again.



---------------
> Released numbers for May 2021 again failed to meet
> economist expectations. June 2021 report in July
> won't meet expectations either.

Okay, here you start to rewrite your own history. You initially predicted that the jobs numbers for June would be "crap."

But this morning the new data came out and were not "crap," so you shift your argument to saying "below expectations.

> "The U.S. economy added more than 550,000 jobs
> during the month of May, the Labor Department said
> in its monthly report Friday — marking the
> second straight month the figure did not meet
> expectations."

The real number is 559,000 and that is lower than the 650,000 expected. But is it "crap?" is it a bad performance? I ask because the highest job growth registered during the Trump era was 350,000--barely over half of what the present "regime" has produced.


-------------------
> As far unemployment subsidy from federal you can
> Google or watch youtube for proof. Lots if stories
> about business owners that can't hire folks. They
> get it that unemployed can make just as much per
> week not working so why bust their hump waking up
> early. Google it.

Anecdotes: in your words, "stories" on Youtube. That's not proof; it's not even data. It's individual "stories" with no logic or analysis binding it together in a coherent whole.


-----------------
> Compact the problem restaurant work doesn't pay
> much anyway and not all schools are full-time.
> Which requires a least one parent not to work at
> all.

This is remarkable. You don't even realize you just contradicted your main argument by explaining why poor and middle class families cannot survive on a single income with wages as low as they have fallen.


-----------------
> There you go. Now go read some news sites.

Haha.

Have you been following gamestop/AMC? Short squeezes...

If not then move along.

Okay, so you do consider yourself a professional stock picker. I'm sure you are very successful.

Covid checks + extended unemployment benefits + more lucrative unemployment ($300/wk in some places) = fewer people returning to jobs or applying for works.

I heard of a fast-food franchise which had a sign, "Please be patient. We're working as fast as we can with only a few workers." This is an excellent time for somebody to get a leg up on a career, or ask for a promotion. But why work for $15/hour when you can live at home and collect $10-12, or maybe more?

Edit: https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2021/05/DEM-COMMIES-9.jpg?w=479&ssl=1

On a literary note, the operative phrase seems to be "Now Hiring," and no longer "Help Wanted."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/03/2021 10:59PM by caffiend.

Maybe someone should have thought about what would happen to low end jobs when they scared so many willing immigrants away.

Or maybe someone needs to figure out that people who have kids at home (who are still unvaccinated) might have no other choice but to stay home to take care of them. (Hint: this is why it would help to address childcare in infrastructure.)

People are not as lazy as some people want to believe. When your child care costs twice as much as you make at a burger joint, what do you expect? Employers need to quit bitching and pay more instead of worrying about stock buybacks and increasing profits. Few have done anything in 10 years to deserve loyal labor and it is coming back to bite them.

I don't know where you live, but people are not going to be able to pay rent, car payment and feed a family on unemployment (let alone basic medical costs). Maybe you, the financial genius that you are, can explain to them how easy it is.

Nor did I expect to. That was when I was young and "learning the ropes." At that point in my life, I usually lived with my family. But I had the minimum amount of good sense not to get into marriage, fatherhood, car payments, etc. I was far from ready for "real life."

However, I did get into alcohol--big time. At a certain point, my parents gave me the boot, and I met hard reality. After drifting through a number of dead-end jobs (at or near minimum wage) and living in crummy furnished rooms, I'd had enough, entered recovery and put a life together.

Minimum wage is not, nor should it be, sufficient to live on. It should be a starting point, by which a person gains experience, gets an appropriate education or training, learns to handle personal finances, and develops character and a work ethic. At a certain point, a person should say, "Those were tough years. Glad they're behind me!"

https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/70s-show-want-recurring-stimulus-called-job-dumbass.jpg?w=500&ssl=1

Last thought: as an employer, whom would you hire, a $15/hr North American (+payroll taxes and benefits) or a Central American for $8.50/hr and no taxes or benefits?

+1

Well, there it is. Two men who used public assistance to get their lives straightened out denying it to others--and adding an ethnic complexion to the question as well.

But no one should draw any conclusions from those facts, right? Because that would be wrong.

I first went to the VA for alcohol counseling, which got me underway, then AA. Once I had traction with the 12-Step recovery program, I discontinued the VA program. Some government assistance is necessary. Even AZSteve has said that those who cannot provide for themselves need to be cared for (my phrasing, not his).

And 10 years ago I went through a perfect storm of catastrophic marriage crisis, financial (real estate) setbacks, and loss of paycheck. At that time, I took advantage of my unemployment benefits, plus foodstamps and related programs. Over six to twelve months, each crisis was resolved, and my family and I were back on our feet (marriage restored).

My point is that even Caffiend, stubborn old individualist that he is, needed help and took it. The problem is that safety net programs for many are life-long hammocks. I have been in many a housing project, and can attest to their being very comfortable standards of living for people who can, but do not, provide for themselves. We, the tax payers, provide for them.

One thing I learned during my brief sojourn into poverty was that qualifying for foodstamps ("S.N.A.P.") qualifies you for lots of other free or discounted programs and benefits. I got a half-price transit pass, cheap membership to the YMCA, entry into museums and children's programs, the zoo, a list of and access to food pantries I never knew about, and much, much more.

You can live very well if you're poor.

https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2021/06/Screen-Shot-2021-06-02-at-1.50.30-PM.png?w=1206&ssl=1

Unfortunately, they did not credit the source or identify the locale this graph describes.

The thread is a potpourri of interesting graphs and memes, for example, this one:

https://i1.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2021/06/Screen-Shot-2021-05-27-at-10.07.37-AM.png?w=1240&ssl=1

Incidentally, I have a tenant household of Indian students. Great tenants, but their parties are LOUD! "Bollywood in Boston," I call them.

Here's the entire thread, worth a few minutes of your time, titled "The Geek In Pictures--Keynsian Crimewave Edition." You'll laugh, you'll chuckle...you're groan:


https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/06/the-geek-in-pictures-keynesian-crime-wave-edition.php

Yeah, as I just did below, I ask you for real sources. Jokes, memes, and graphs without sources don't count.

I couldn't source the "Which Factors Are Slowing the Economy In Your Area?" bar graph. There's abundant anecdotal evidence that with fattened unemployment benefits, workers are staying home. Bread and circuses (Netflix), you know.

But a "Search Google For Image" check on the ethno-demographic income graph located it in this article, which credits the US Census Bureau:

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/appellate-court-strikes-down-racial

The lead graph on Federal debt vs. revenue is sourced the Congressional Budget Office. We're all Modern Monetary Theorists now, I suppose. I'm waiting for the day when they tell us, "This deficit is sustainable because the Federal INTEREST payment is only "X"-percent of the GDP." Most of the Powerline graphs are credited. Laugh, chuckle, or groan--your choice!

Anecdote is not data. And when a person derives virtually all his news from the a unitary set of politically biased sources, those anecdotes are even less useful.

As I have said to and about azsteve before, I am glad you were able to use public assistance to get back on your feet. But that's really besides the point.

You assert that "minimum wage should not be enough to live on." You clearly haven't been following the evolution of labor markets over the last 40 years. I ask you, as I vainly did Phazer, what the implications of technological disintermediation of labor are for American living standards and for a functioning democracy.

I secondly ask you to support your assertion that the disjunction in today's labor market is caused primarily by welfare subsidies. I realize it makes a sort of intuitive sense given your politics, but can you provide something more substantial?

Like any insurance, you pay in to the system, you end up temporarily unable to work, so you use that system that you paid in to, to get back on your feet. Then you go back to work as quickly as is possible. There is no shame in that.

The whole key is that you paid-in to the system. Forty quarters of paying-in is the exact minimum. You have an entitlement under current circumstances. Also the key is that it is temporary. No one should ever strive to just collect government benefits for as long as they can because they can. If you're from somewhere outside of the system and have not paid in to the system, then there is nothing to collect on. There is no coverage, no safety net. I don't know Lot's Wife where you get the notion that that we don't want others to have access to the same safety net that we have access to. I paid premiums for well over ten years before collecting. I have paid much more in premiums since that time.

Any job that anyone can quickly learn to do well has much less value in the market than a job that requires extensive training and knowledge. That's just due to supply and demand, the markets. Not everyone can design rockets that go in to space. Not everyone can do brain surgery. Not everyone can pilot a 747. We need people who can do these things well. That takes several years of self-sacrifice and training before any reward for the sacrifice even starts. So we pay these people more, a lot more. On the other end of the scale are the jobs that anyone can do well with no training nor experience, their first day or first week on the job. We don't want people to be happy with these jobs. We want people to do these jobs just long enough to learn that this isn't where they want to be for the rest of their lives, and then move on to better opportunities after mastering the lessons of these kinds of first jobs. Working at McDonald's is not a real career for most people. Call it what you will. It's just not a real career. After you learn to do well at McDonald's as I did as a teen-ager, you move on. I could still go back forty-years later and do that job well if I chose to. Showing up on time. Doing what your Supervisor asks you to do. Finding transportation to work, these are lessons that most teen-agers need to learn. By the time you're an adult, you should already have learned those lessons. Anyone can learn how to flip hamburgers and to do it well. These are lessons for teen-agers. Unless you move in to management, you'll quickly become over qualified and should move on to a real career. No one should ever attempt to raise a family on their McDonald's crew-person wages. It's terribly irresponsible and short-sighted. Unless you're mentally disabled, there is too much other real need in the economy to stay in the preschool of the business world. The economy should not pay a McDonald's crew person anymore than the market demands they be paid. They need to learn the lessons of a first job and move on so that others can follow behind them to learn the same lessons. Anyone too lazy to aspire to EARN more than these kinds of jobs pay, deserves to get paid next to nothing for as long as they refuse to learn this lesson. If everyone works lower-end jobs, we'll have no Doctors, no technology, no wealth to pay people a minimum wage with.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2021 11:28AM by azsteve.

I wasn't talking about that. In the past you have told us that you fell on hard times and survived on welfare until you pulling your life together again.

I bear you no ill will for that. Conversely, I find your frequent assertions that others are abusing a system that is very likely less generous now than it was when you were on the dole.

Older people working at minimum wage jobs are at fault because they did not develop skillets overtime that would keep them employed all through out their career and allow variation.
Bottom line they don't have the high paying skills employees want to pay for.

The old guys working well paid jobs grinded it out and made their work contributions something of value.

They screwed up and didn't made lemonade at life's challenges.

This reminds me of the joke about a few Walmart greeters who resented that one of their co-workers always came to work late every day. Finally, the Supervisor approached the late employee and and asked if during his career, "didn't others mind you being late all of the time". The employee responded "I was in the military. No one minded then that I was often late back then". "Well, what did they say when you came in late?", asked the Supervisor. "No one minded at all. All they said was "good morning General".

Phazer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Older people working at minimum wage jobs are at
> fault because they did not develop skillets
> overtime that would keep them employed all through
> out their career and allow variation.

"Skillets overtime?"

I don't think that anyone who writes like you should be criticizing others for want of marketable skills.


---------------
> Bottom line they don't have the high paying skills
> employees want to pay for.

Your targets are not alone.


--------------
> The old guys working well paid jobs grinded it out
> and made their work contributions something of
> value.

"Grinded?"


-------------------
> They screwed up and didn't made lemonade at life's
> challenges.

"Didn't made?" "Made at life's challenges?"


------------------
You are hardly an advertisement for gaining the skills necessary to succeed in today's workplace.

My school district offered teachers the same mediocre wage for summer school (that they've paid for the past 20 years or more,) and for the first time ever, teachers said, "Nah, I don't think so." The district had to raise the wage by a minimum of 50% (the rest is still under negotiation.)

I think some workers are looking at wages, looking at what they have to give up in return, and are not seeing the payoff. I know of younger people who are working in the gig economy, or who are going back to school for a more lucrative/in-demand field.

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/
> 2021/05/DEM-COMMIES-9.jpg?w=479&ssl=1

Awesome. A supporter of Trump, who gave the bulk of an unfunded $2 trillion to rich people in order to garner their political support, now whines about poor people getting $300 a month. The logic here is every bit as compelling as when you said the Capital Insurrection comprised BLM and Antifa activists.

Do you not get dizzy spinning so fast?

In a properly functioning economy, there will be a nexus where businesses will be capable of offering wages at a rate that is worth working for, for just enough workers to satisfy the business owner's needs for labor. The same concept applies to both parties, workers and employers. The competition for jobs will drive wages down to the point that just enough people will be willing or able to accept the limited number of jobs that exist in the economy at the available competitive wage. I think that anyone who is out of work now that wants to work, should consider this concept, rather than to just focus on a number that they think they are inherantly worth getting paid. You always get paid based on what the job is worth as long as you can do that job satisfactoraly, not what you think you're worth. There is often a big difference between the two. If the job doesn't pay enough, then you can always find something better, even if you need to become self-emoloyed to do it. You have to find the right opportunity that matches your abilities to real market demands. Ultimately, you have to find a way to add value to the economy that is equal to what you receive in return. Those who really can't work should be taken care of. The rest of us should work and pay taxes and feed our families.

I think that right now we're seeing the effects of a Universal Basic Income in the United States. The unemployment rate is so high now and too many people don't want to work, even though there are plenty of jobs available in the market, if those who are unemployed would only choose to accept the available jobs. They don't want to work because the unemployment compensation is very high right now. What will happen if we give them all a pay raise and guarantee to them that their new-found free income will last in perpetuity, for as long as they live? Would that increase the employment rate or lower the unemployment rate?

My regular yard guy offered to cut some very tall trees in my back yard for $2,700.00. Someone knocked on my door and offered to cut them for $500.00. Should I feel bad that I took the lower price? The guy who got the job wouldn't be in business if it wasn't worth it to him. He did the job in less than a day and hauled off a trailer load of branches to the dump as a part of that price. There is nothing wrong with a low price. This guy made a profit that he saw as fair and from a payment amount that I thought was fair to pay him. If we force businesses to pay wages that are more than they can afford to pay, then everyone who wants to work will be self-employed. Everyone else will eventually go hungry after the public money runs out.

I am not sure why "a day's work for a day's wages" is a controversial topic these days. If inflation and free money from the government drive down the spending power of my income too far, I'll just quit my job too. Why doesn't every last one of us (that's 100% of the US population) just live indefinitely on UBI? Obviously that won't work.

First, was the $500 guy an illegal immigrant? The large disparity in quotes suggests that. I'd give the American/legal immigrant the job.

Some of my conservative positions have apparently confused people on this Board, thinking I'm extreme in favoring a minimalist government role. ("What, don't you want your meat inspected? Roads paved?" etc.) That's not me: I do believe in a reasonable regulatory apparatus.

I state that because I wonder if the $500 bidder was properly insured and licensed. Had there been an accident, you might have been liable in a major way. Was that truck licensed, inspected, and insured? Did he hire illegal immigrants to do the climbing?

I'm involved in (for me) a rather large property rehab, and am getting acquainted with local professionals. I've told them, when I sign or put down money, I'll want copies of licenses, insurance, and other relevant papers.

Yep I thought it was about illegal too. Zero overhead. No insurance ir business license. No workman's comp or business expenses.

I'm glad the job worked out but if it didn't well that would be bad.

If the guy had a crew I would bet money all were collecting unemployment and working thus cash job not claiming the money as to not stop the bennies.

Steve, where is this UBI that you say is causing so much trouble in the US? Because if you can't show it to us, we will conclude that you are spinning this out of whole cloth.

In addition, given your understanding of labor markets, can you explain the effects of technological disintermediation on equilibrium employment and wage levels? Because you tend to ignore those variables in your analysis--which makes no sense.

Right?

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why doesn't every last one of us
> (that's 100% of the US population) just live
> indefinitely on UBI? Obviously that won't work.

So Milton Friedman was what--stupid? Uninformed about economics? Too liberal?

Surely the word "obviously" doesn't suffice as a reason to reject the analysis of the greatest right-wing economist of the 20th century.

Stimulus checks aside, haven't seen much of anything trickling down lately. Have you?


Over the years we have watched the giant corporations buy each other, combine, and form Mega Corporations. Don't know what is bigger than "Mega" but whatever that is will be here soon.

This morning in the NYT which I haven't read yet, the headline was how the mega corporations have already found ways to circumvent the new climate regulations. As they have found ways to circumvent everything. Climate responsibility is not lucrative and neither are decent wages.

You think anything is going to turn around? This discussion is useless. The train has left the station. And anyone who thinks they didn't buy a ticket is nuts. Enough Americans will put up with anything and expect someone else to make their lives better. The ones that don't just aren't effective enough. A win here and there, but only enough for a few hiccups.

Now lets all save up and go to Disney World. I've been behind the scenes. The Disney Parks are the front for what is certainly not the happiest place on earth. As our client though, thirty five years ago, they were. Lately they have actually leaned on our small company for discounts. This is a different world now and Cher clued us in: You can't turn back time.

Mormons aren't the only one with a front. It's all showbiz kids.

Last night I was discussing the distribution of wealth in various countries with a friend. I told her that historically the ratio of the wealth held by the richest 20% to the lowest 20% of a population varied from country to country.

Until a few years ago that ratio was steady for the US around 14-15, which made the US an outlier among rich countries. In Japan and some other rich Asian countries the ratio was 4-7; and in Western Europe it was about 6-8. So the United States was closer to Mexico, Brazil, and other economically and politically mismanaged countries, where the ratio is 20-25.

But just to be sure, I looked up the current data. After QE and Trump's tax cuts the ratio of the top quintile to the bottom in the US is now running NORTH OF 40! In other words, the United States is among the worst of the Third World countries.

The degree to which Americans fail to understand that fact and its implications is deeply disturbing.

The notion that minimum wage jobs are intended to be stepping stones toward a self-sufficient future is a compelling story. Really, we all have to start somewhere, right?

Unfortunately, though, it myopically discounts the reality that there exists in humanity a vast diversity of capability and circumstance. For some people, it's not a stepping stone, it's the only step they're able to take.

If a job requires a human to do it, shouldn't the pay be enough to allow that human to live?

I wonder if the economics of plantation type slavery would even be feasible today... after all, the cost to a slave owner incorporated the cost of maintaining a life... Now, he'd be financially better off freeing them all, re-hiring at minimum wage, and allowing government support to make up the difference. Minimum wage is just another form of corporate welfare.

So, there's a virtue that you low minimum wage advocates can use, but probably wouldn't want to in polite company... it discourages slavery, because it's cheaper!

What about communism?

Everybody gets to eat free slim jims and drink free diet soda everyday?

Anything I can add here is just from my experience only. No graphs, no data, no links…just real life experience.

As a former small business owner, it is painfully obvious that many (or any) here on this thread have ever owned a business. It is just as obvious that those in the real world who are clamoring the most for an increase in minimum wage have never owned a business.

I’ll date myself here, as a teenager, my first minimum wage job was at $1.75/hour. That wasn’t much, even back then. Certainly not a “living wage”, and I had no expectations that it should have been. I was a kid living at home and going to high school. It was an entry level job, part-time, that allowed me to have a few bucks in my pocket that I saved towards buying my own car. Back then that was the goal of many of my friends, but then again, we used to actually leave the house and didn’t have video game consoles to pour our hard earned cash into. A year later, I had my car.

I kept my eyes open for other higher paying jobs with more hours and within a few years I had saved enough for college and to get married. Now, I realize that the cost of attending college is outrageous, but, at least at the JC’s in my area, it is not that outrageous to get a start. The JC’s in my area also offer some GREAT two-year programs that upon completion would set someone up in a decent paying profession.

The small business I part-owned/operated had 5-7 full-time employees and around 40-50 part-timers. All of my part-timers were paid minimum wage, none of them used the job as their primary source of income. These jobs were used for additional income to what they earned elsewhere, something extra for retired folks, first job for teens, etc.

In my “real world”, whenever there was an increase in minimum wage, I cut workers, I cut hours, and I increased prices. Areas where I once had maybe 10-12 workers were reduced to 8. And because their pay had increased, I expected increased production to compensate for the void left by having less workers. I certainly wasn’t going to absorb the increase, I passed it along and it cost my workers and customers.

My business practices were not unique. But you can only go so far increasing prices and cutting workers/services until the customer quits coming and the business becomes less viable. Increasing minimum wage, (especially drastically) is stupid. It is a tax on ALL OF US, even the minimum wage earner!! A minimum wage increase is followed by an increase in goods and services, the cost is passed along. A minimum wage increase is only effective if costs remain the same and are not passed on to the consumer. But that doesn’t happen, so any increase is eaten up by increased costs. Don’t believe me, go to your favorite restaurant and check the prices out. All of my favorite places have increased their prices $2 - $3 per dish. You can always tell when a minimum wage increase is coming…new menus are printed. Grocery store prices rising? Fast food prices rising? Home improvement store prices rising? This has been my observation.

If I were a politician, I think I would propose something along the lines of a tiered minimum wage. More based on need than just a flat “here-you-go-$15/hour minimum wage (when my kids were teenagers living at home they didn’t need to be earning a “living wage”). Maybe something like teens who live at home earning at the bottom of the tier ($7.50/hour), the next tier would be a little more for single adults (more for college students), and higher tiered minimum wage for head of household folks. Of course there would need to be regulation so that businesses wouldn’t hire only the low tiered teenage kids. Just a thought.

If I were still a small business owner, with today’s requirements, increased wages, increased taxes…I don’t know how they do it. I wouldn’t have been able to stay afloat. Then again, I have seen a lot of boarded up businesses lately.

I have many acquaintances who due to the pandemic have been laid off from their jobs. They have made so much off of unemployment payments that they have no interest in seeking employment until they have exhausted all that the government is handing out. Some make MORE in unemployment benefits than they made at their jobs!! WTF!!! How does this happen!! Nobody should EVER make as much (let alone more!!) through unemployment than what they made at the job they lost. Again…WTF!!!

I thought I saw someone mention trickle-down and it’s ineffectiveness?? Well, in my corner of the world Amazon recently opened a distribution center (hiring hundreds) and now have plans to open another 2-3 centers within 30 miles of my house. My own personal experience with trickle-down was when I sold another business. I was looking at buying a home and two cars with the profit I would make. You know…trickle-down. Well, when my Capitol Gains tax bill of $160,000 came due, there went my house and two car buying spree. Because of course the government can spend my tax dollars much more effectively than I can. And Biden wants to up the Capitol Gains tax?? Way to go Joe!!!!!!!!!!

Lastly, concerning minimum wage earners. I'm an old school dinosaur...I still write checks and pay in cash. Surprisingly, by doing so, none of my bank accounts has ever been hacked. Imagine that. Anyway, whenever I pay cash for something, I will wait until my cashier has rung me up and the register display tells them how much change I should receive back. Before my change is handed to me, I will reach into my pocket and pull out additional change to hand to the cashier so that the change I receive back will be rounded up to dollars (instead of coin). The look of horror on the face of the cashier is priceless. Not only are they totally clueless on what to do, it is evident that if it is an amount different than what it says on the register display, a meltdown is coming. Usually a supervisor is called and often they are at a loss as well. More often than not I'll just take the change the register display has told them to dispense. I'll follow that up with, "I bet you are excited to get a minimum wage pay raise?" That is always met with an enthusiastic "Yes!!". I walk away shaking my head thinking, "Raise minimum wage to $15/hour. Can't even make change. Fucking brilliant."

Satirical TLDR: "My cotton farm wouldn't be economically feasible without slaves."

Historical human exploitations have been eliminated and we still have cotton farms. Current exploitations can be eliminated, too, without the world falling apart.

Yes...and humans have been eliminated from picking cotton as well. All done by machines. Stew on that a while.

The increased profitability that results from the replacement of human labor with machines is an important enabler in being able to reduce human exploitation. Stew on that for a while.

Thanks for making my case. It is also an important enabler in replacing the human worker...exploited or not.

And just exactly where in the U.S. is all of this "human exploitation" occurring?

>>Anyway, whenever I pay cash for something, I will wait until my cashier has rung me up and the register display tells them how much change I should receive back. Before my change is handed to me, I will reach into my pocket and pull out additional change to hand to the cashier so that the change I receive back will be rounded up to dollars (instead of coin).

This is a jerk move. Yes, a cashier should be able to do the math. As someone who has actually TAUGHT MATH, I am more than happy to help a cashier who is struggling, or a deli worker who doesn't know that one-third of a pound will come out to approximately .33 on their scale.

What you are not taking into account is that the cashier may be at the end of their shift, brutally tired, and not thinking straight. They may be distracted by any number of things. They may be nervous about handling money, especially if they may be held responsible for a shortfall in their register (I was very nervous handling money for quite a long time when I first worked a register, despite being quite good at math.) They may have always struggled with math. They may have been dealing with jerks LIKE YOURSELF all stinking day and are exhausted from that.

Plus, they have not applied to be a rocket scientist for NASA. They are working a low-wage job at their local store.

Did you think you would get any sympathy for treating low-wage workers like crap?

Min wage has fallen in real terms since your teenage years. While I don't know what specific year/s you're referring to, if you were earning $1.75/hr in 1970, that's equivalent to appx $12/hr now.

$15/hr now is equivalent to $2.18/hr in 1970. So not much of a step-up from what you were likely earning back then.