Thread: I detest unions, here is a good example why:

Originally Posted by Fovezer

Originally Posted by BruceBloodMaster

The Annenberg Fact Check ?? Thats not a Bias organization is it ............. More Left than Pelosi !

Yeah, the organization founded by a Republican is sooo far left.

Originally Posted by Oni-scout

I generally stay out of these but I have a hard time getting over the fact that you are arguing that only monetary compensation should be included in the calculation.

The total compensation plan is averaged into that value because... guess what... those benefits that the number is derived from, yeah... they don't have to pay for them out of pocket because they are provided with them.

It is still an expense incurred for employing those employees, so I believe we are going to use the $75 on a per hour basis for every employee.

But that's not how it is being using. Flame said those workers were getting paid $75/hr. That is flat-out false, and there are no two-ways about it. It is also wrong to compare the total cost per hour of all employees, including retirees, in a union shop to the average pay per hour in a non-union shop. It is dishonest, and you know it.

Do not put words in my mouth. Re-read my post it says $75 manufacturing hour. I never said pay rate, I said the manufacturing cost is $75 per hour. I am well aware they do not make $75 an hour, I am aware that insurance, retirement, and other costs are in that amount. Read my post its not edited. Your always so quick and smart, but you have an agenda and thats all you can see.

Originally Posted by jmw_man

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

The thing is, is that since there's always unemployment I would figure that the employer would have the upper hand here. They could say that I'll pay you $2.00 per hour. You could refuse but since there's more of you than of them, you'll lose everytime. How you like them odds? It's kinda why it's that way in China.

And that's the problem, the fact that someone will always settle for less.

Welcome to Wal Mart! :9

Flame, do you work for the F.D.?

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by Highstakes72

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Context and easy comparisons to what?

And if it's supposed to be universally accepted, why should the government decide that. Shouldn't that be between the employer and employee as they are the ones, not the government, who are affected by this?

This is part of that accepted limited role of the fed. The minimum gives the fed a single degree of freedom to counteract something like inflation at the lowest wage level of the economy.

But won't the employers take that into consideration when they set the wage? Why do we need the government to decide that?

Nope. The fed prints the money directly affecting inflation so thus they should have something to support a minum wage (primary cost driver) It is not within the realm of control of the private sector. Commercial enterprises are only concerned with wages as it affects and relates to thier business plans and cost models. Wages are part of the product.

Originally Posted by Highstakes72

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by Highstakes72

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Context and easy comparisons to what?

And if it's supposed to be universally accepted, why should the government decide that. Shouldn't that be between the employer and employee as they are the ones, not the government, who are affected by this?

This is part of that accepted limited role of the fed. The minimum gives the fed a single degree of freedom to counteract something like inflation at the lowest wage level of the economy.

But won't the employers take that into consideration when they set the wage? Why do we need the government to decide that?

Nope. The fed prints the money directly affecting inflation so thus they should have something to support a minum wage (primary cost driver) It is not within the realm of control of the private sector. Commercial enterprises are only concerned with wages as it affects and relates to thier business plans and cost models. Wages are part of the product.

So, since as you contend, that the minimum wage is there for monetary reasons, why not just set it at $1.00? What could easier from a 'primary cost driver' point of view?

I lifted this form Wikipedia from the page on minimum wage. I just curious as to why your view on it is so much different than on Wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage

"Background

Minimum wages were first proposed as a way to control the proliferation of sweat shops in manufacturing industries. The sweat shops employed large numbers of women and young workers, paying them what were considered to be substandard wages. The sweatshop owners were thought to have unfair bargaining power over their workers, and a minimum wage was proposed as a means to make them pay "fairly." Over time, the focus changed to helping people, especially families, become more self sufficient. Today, minimum wage laws cover workers in most low-paid fields of employment.[3]

The minimum wage has a strong social appeal, rooted in concern about the ability of markets to provide income equity for the least able members of the work force. An obvious solution to this concern is to redefine the wage structure politically to achieve a socially preferable distribution of income. Thus, minimum wage laws have usually been judged against the criterion of reducing poverty.[4]

Although the goals of the minimum wage are widely accepted as proper, there is great disagreement as to whether the minimum wage is effective in attaining its goals. From the time of their introduction, minimum wage laws have been highly controversial politically, and have received much less support from economists than from the general public. Despite decades of experience and economic research, debates about the costs and benefits of minimum wages continue even today.[3]

The classic exposition of the minimum wage's shortcomings in reducing poverty was provided by George Stigler in 1946:

* Employment may fall more than in proportion to the wage increase, thereby reducing overall earnings;
* As uncovered sectors of the economy absorb workers released from the covered sectors, the decrease in wages in the uncovered sectors may exceed the increase in wages in the covered ones;
* The impact of the minimum wage on family income distribution may be negative unless the fewer but better jobs are allocated to members of needy families rather than to, for example, teenagers from families not in poverty;
* The legal restriction that employers cannot pay less than a legislated wage is equivalent to the legal restriction that workers cannot work at all in the protected sector unless they can find employers willing to hire them at that wage.[4]

Direct empirical studies indicate that anti-poverty effects in the U.S. would be quite modest, even if there were no unemployment effects. Very few low-wage workers come from families in poverty. Those primarily affected by minimum wage laws are teenagers and low-skilled adult females who work part time, and any wage rate effects on their income is strictly proportional to the hours of work they are offered. So, if market outcomes for low-skilled families are to be supplemented in a socially satisfactory way, factors other than wage rates must also be considered. Employment opportunities and the factors that limit labor market participation must be considered as well.[4] Economist Thomas Sowell has also argued that regardless of custom or law, the real minimum wage is always zero, and zero is what some people would receive if they fail to find jobs when they try to enter the workforce, or they lose the jobs they already have.[5]"

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Flame, do you work for the F.D.?

Volunteer
Why?

Originally Posted by flame

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Flame, do you work for the F.D.?

Volunteer
Why?

I saw the avatar and sig and was just curious.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by jmw_man

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

The thing is, is that since there's always unemployment I would figure that the employer would have the upper hand here. They could say that I'll pay you $2.00 per hour. You could refuse but since there's more of you than of them, you'll lose everytime. How you like them odds? It's kinda why it's that way in China.

And that's the problem, the fact that someone will always settle for less.

Welcome to Wal Mart! :9

What do you mean?

"So, since as you contend, that the minimum wage is there for monetary reasons, why not just set it at $1.00? What could easier from a 'primary cost driver' point of view?"

You are attempting to connect it to business again...Primary cost's are simply that. In a business context some of them such as minimum wage are immutable. (and not a factor in the majority of industrial sectors) My view of the wage comes more from it as a available tool for controlling inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflati...ling_inflation) than anything else. I sense you see it more as a social support program? If so, i have no issue with it there but as many would state their would be better means of unskilled labor wage/earning support. Although there is interesting reading abound on the subject...I really enjoy seeing the polar flips of opinions regarding its implementation which seem to vary by the year...and the weather.

Originally Posted by Highstakes72

"So, since as you contend, that the minimum wage is there for monetary reasons, why not just set it at $1.00? What could easier from a 'primary cost driver' point of view?"

You are attempting to connect it to business again...Primary cost's are simply that. In a business context some of them such as minimum wage are immutable. (and not a factor in the majority of industrial sectors) My view of the wage comes more from it as a available tool for controlling inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflati...ling_inflation) than anything else. I sense you see it more as a social support program? If so, i have no issue with it there but as many would state their would be better means of unskilled labor wage/earning support. Although there is interesting reading abound on the subject...I really enjoy seeing the polar flips of opinions regarding its implementation which seem to vary by the year...and the weather.

So if it's a tool for controlling inflation, why does it not keep pace with inflation?