Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 12:49:54 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Would killing the minimum wage help?
Yes
Maybe
No

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Would killing the minimum wage help?  (Read 8498 times)
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 03:38:19 AM
 #121



I'm sure that you have no concept of just how many ways this is wrong.

Explain. What's wrong at least being able to live on what you work for?

I can't explain it to you, because you would first have to understand why it's not a realistic expectation that the United States or Europe has either the right or the ability to compel the people of other nations to accept our concept of a 'living wage' or anything else.  You are a self-admitted socialist; which, by definition, requires the use of force (or credible threats of force) upon those who dissent in order to achieve the common goals of socialism to any effective degree.  There is no such thing as a voluntary state, but a voluntary socialist state is impossible by it's own definitions.

I don't think realistically that we can get China to have a living wage through our foreign policy (although tariffs could put more weight), but I believe at the very least our could at least stick up for what is right. I think it's despicable that we are appeasing China by ignoring Tibet's calls for independence.

Believe me when I say "been there, said that" on right-libertarianism. I even did door-to-door campaigning for a Libertarian Party Senator once. I'd say I understand economics pretty well, I took a microeconomics course. In the end I just feel that the hierachy and conditions capitalism itself creates is unjust.

The idea of a completely voluntary society, especially based in capitalism, is also unrealistic. When you create a system of haves and have-nots, the economy is not very voluntary. Besides, everything that has led us to capitalism was itself even less voluntary. Feudalism, slavery, etc. very non-voluntary systems have created permanent distinctions between people.

Thomas Paine is thought of as a hero of right-libertarianism (he is still one of my favorite writers), but you should read one of his more forgotten works Agrarian Justice, which discusses the fairness of the property system and proposed the forerunner to a social security system. Basically, land used to belong to everyone before civilization developed, it is only through force that it has gotten in the hands of some (creating wealth, but also poverty.) What is voluntary about that?

So I accept your criticism (though I never claimed it to be voluntary) that all forms of socialism, including the form I proposed on a different thread (despite it also maintaining a large amount of private property), require force. I reject the notion that this has or will ever be avoided though. Isn't force required to maintain private property too?

Don't use BIPS!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
AllYourBase
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 03:43:36 AM
 #122

Would unemployment go down? Absolutely.

Should we get rid of it? Hell no.

You should be able to live when you work and are contributing to society.

Screw you.  I should get to decide the terms and conditions under which I will work, not you.  Take your fairy tale bullshit somewhere else.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 03:46:08 AM
 #123

Isn't force required to maintain private property too?

So, you don't understand the difference between the force a mugger uses to take your wallet and the force that you use to keep him from taking it? Force is force? There's no difference?
Anonymous
Guest

July 24, 2011, 03:59:34 AM
 #124

Doesn't it require force to prevent people from raping you in the street?

Honestly, this should be considered a symptom of dementia. Is it now considered violent and immoral to defend your own person?
indio007
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:04:49 AM
 #125

Doesn't it require force to prevent people from raping you in the street?

Honestly, this should be considered a symptom of dementia. Is it now considered violent and immoral to defend your own person?


Actually it's a legal and moral duty to defend yourself.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:19:01 AM
 #126

Doesn't it require force to prevent people from raping you in the street?

No, all you have to do is hold up a book of government laws. It repels criminals like the Bible repels vampires.
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:22:13 AM
 #127

Screw you.  I should get to decide the terms and conditions under which I will work, not you.  Take your fairy tale bullshit somewhere else.

Sorry for taking away your freedom to work for next nothing in a sweatshop factory, just like those workers in China and India "decided" on the terms of their wages. Forgive me <3

Don't use BIPS!
Anonymous
Guest

July 24, 2011, 04:26:06 AM
 #128

Screw you.  I should get to decide the terms and conditions under which I will work, not you.  Take your fairy tale bullshit somewhere else.

Sorry for taking away your freedom to work for next nothing in a sweatshop factory, just like those workers in China and India "decided" on the terms of their wages. Forgive me <3
They actually like their sweatshop jobs because it gives them a first step on a ladder of future careers. In this country, you can't even build experience because of the lack of entry-level jobs. There are a lack of auto mechanics because there are no longer service station attendants that used to work below minimum wage. The majority of technicians started at that job -- now it's gone.

You want to hurt these people more than anything. You will hurt them more if you mandate a minimum wage.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:28:38 AM
 #129

Sorry for taking away your freedom to work for next nothing in a sweatshop factory, just like those workers in China and India "decided" on the terms of their wages.

Everyone has the option to not work. So, if someone is working in a sweatshop rather than not working it all, they must prefer that. You're essentially saying, "Who cares what you want? I know what's better for you than you do."
indio007
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:31:47 AM
 #130

Screw you.  I should get to decide the terms and conditions under which I will work, not you.  Take your fairy tale bullshit somewhere else.

Sorry for taking away your freedom to work for next nothing in a sweatshop factory, just like those workers in China and India "decided" on the terms of their wages. Forgive me <3

uhmmm.... no one is forced to be an "employee". Likewise no one as a right to be an employee either.

Being an employee is subservience and a unique trick of government. People should be working for themselves through voluntary partnership not Master/slave-Guardian/Ward relationships.
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:35:50 AM
 #131

Isn't force required to maintain private property too?

So, you don't understand the difference between the force a mugger uses to take your wallet and the force that you use to keep him from taking it? Force is force? There's no difference?

Yes, that statement was really broad. I was not thinking of personal mugging and raping in that statement, I was talking about the state that protects the capitalist system and the non-voluntary forces that established private property. There is a distinction of protecting your person and personal belongings and protecting the establishment. That statement was a failed conclusion to my point: 100% voluntary society cannot be accomplished. Something has to give. Just like rights, there can't be the right to murder someone and the right to not be murdered mutually existing. You must uphold the rights that are most fair. (I have a feeling this is going to be a criticized analogy too Tongue but it's really not that important because this is about some claim I never made and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.)

Don't use BIPS!
Anonymous
Guest

July 24, 2011, 04:38:58 AM
 #132

What is most fair? Could it not be giving everyone a unilateral right to their labor, property and person?
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:43:13 AM
 #133

Screw you.  I should get to decide the terms and conditions under which I will work, not you.  Take your fairy tale bullshit somewhere else.

Sorry for taking away your freedom to work for next nothing in a sweatshop factory, just like those workers in China and India "decided" on the terms of their wages. Forgive me <3

uhmmm.... no one is forced to be an "employee". Likewise no one as a right to be an employee either.

Being an employee is subservience and a unique trick of government. People should be working for themselves through voluntary partnership not Master/slave-Guardian/Ward relationships.


Well I don't advocate for capitalist enterprise either, I think we would be much better off with co-operative corporations. I still think that as long as the "employee" system is alive you should at least be able to live on what you make. Situations with or without minimum wages have flaws for workers as we have both pointed out to each other, yet in both situations management is basically in the same fine condition.

Don't use BIPS!
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 24, 2011, 04:44:38 AM
 #134

What is most fair? Could it not be giving everyone a unilateral right to their labor, property and person?

Ninja'd.

+1.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 04:45:25 AM
 #135

That statement was a failed conclusion to my point: 100% voluntary society cannot be accomplished. Something has to give. Just like rights, there can't be the right to murder someone and the right to not be murdered mutually existing.

That's why we have to make a distinction between the initiation of force vs. the response of force. A completely voluntary society means that no person may initiate force, nothing more. By denying you the right to murder me, I'm not initiating force, I'm responding with it, to your attempts to murder me.

There is a distinction of protecting your person and personal belongings and protecting the establishment.

What is "the establishment"? If I own a business and build it up from zero empolyees to 10,000 employees at what point does my business, offices, equipment, etc suddenly become "the establishment". All of my property is my personal belongings.
AllYourBase
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138


View Profile
July 24, 2011, 05:03:34 AM
 #136

Screw you.  I should get to decide the terms and conditions under which I will work, not you.  Take your fairy tale bullshit somewhere else.

Sorry for taking away your freedom to work for next nothing in a sweatshop factory, just like those workers in China and India "decided" on the terms of their wages. Forgive me <3

If I choose to take a summer internship or apprenticeship making 2USD/hr, far less than what you'd consider a "living wage" I'm sure, who are you to stand in my way and deny me that opportunity? On a side not, have you been to China?
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 06:56:35 AM
 #137

What is most fair? Could it not be giving everyone a unilateral right to their labor, property and person?

I have said that the most fair system are mostly competitive markets with co-operatives. If you want a principle statement, I'd say that it's most fair when people as a society value every single human being's life, say/power in a democratic system, liberty, personal property, and economic status.

Don't use BIPS!
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 07:11:18 AM
 #138

If I choose to take a summer internship or apprenticeship making 2USD/hr, far less than what you'd consider a "living wage" I'm sure, who are you to stand in my way and deny me that opportunity? On a side not, have you been to China?

Internships are a different story. I am not an expert on minimum wage law, but I do not think that internships are included in the law, and if they are they shouldn't be. This isn't about me telling you personally what I think is best for you...this is about trying to protect the living status of working families. I think ideally (in the capitalist system) that the minimum wage should just be a legally backed guarantee. I don't think it should be a crime to want to be underpaid/exploited, but that's not usually the problem. There are also problems of stores such as Wal-Mart forcing their employees to do unpaid overtime even though the rest of the time they are being paid minimum wage. This not about me or anyone else concerned about exploitation being a control freak, this is about fighting a legitimate problem of impoverished living conditions here and especially abroad.

I have not been to China.

Don't use BIPS!
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 24, 2011, 07:33:05 AM
 #139

There are also problems of stores such as Wal-Mart forcing their employees to do unpaid overtime even though the rest of the time they are being paid minimum wage.

Know what the problem there is?

No Unions. Walmart will fire anyone who even breathes the word 'union'. In this economy, that gives them a lot of pull.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
grantbdev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 07:54:18 AM
 #140

There are also problems of stores such as Wal-Mart forcing their employees to do unpaid overtime even though the rest of the time they are being paid minimum wage.

Know what the problem there is?

No Unions. Walmart will fire anyone who even breathes the word 'union'. In this economy, that gives them a lot of pull.

Unions can help, but ultimately they are not as productive to workers as co-operatives are. Anti-union behavior should also be illegal, and it's even worse in places like Columbia and China. I know that Coca-Cola used to hire paramilitaries to murder union workers in their bottling plants in Columbia.

Don't use BIPS!
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!