There's people who are working 40 hours per week who are still eligible for welfare and food stamps. That is messed up. Minimum wage should go up. If you work 40 hours per week, you shouldn't need welfare to make ends meet

You are right. The federal min wage is $7.25 which is too low. Currently, SNAP requires less than $1,396 per month which is roughly $8.725 an hour but I don't think that is a great argument for a $15 min wage. That exceeds the poverty limit for a family of 5.

I swear I wasn't away that long. lolSomewhat agree with that first point- that inflation is separate from market processes -at least in the sense that inflation alone doesn't drive this process whereby we move towards greater wealth disparity.

I also agree that when prices increase not all businesses can absorb those higher prices or pass them on fully to customers. That includes the price of labor.

Notice though that if a business can not fully pass on the cost of higher labor prices to customers then whatever percentage they can't lump into their prices is a percentage that also can not drive higher cost of living which is how most people experience inflation.

You can reach equilibrium with higher wages just as well as you can with lower wages. The difference is the profit margins for business are likely to be lower.

So I can't fully agree with your second point. You say that inflation screws employers and labor and if the "screwing" was shared in some roughly equal manner that might be true.

But what our low minimum wage has allowed has been a situation where labor is forced to "eat the inflation" via flat wages in a rising price environment while employers [aka: capital] maintains and sometime even increases profit margins.





The bottom 90% vs. the top 10%:



Labor Wages vs. Corporate Profits:



Also hitting that "lower wages for the executives won't amount to squat for employees". Executive pay is a side issue vs. corporate profits.

I have real sympathy for small business while also believing that enforcement of laws against monopolies, cartels, and price fixing [aka: restoring some semblance of fair competition] will help them more than continuing to hold wages down via government subsidy.

Skipping ahead because this one is quick.

The Federal Poverty Level has been a BS metric for so long most government agencies don't use it to calculate benefits. Instead they commonly use "150% of FPL".

Way back in time the government decided that they would use something called the Thrifty Food Plan to determine if a person[s] had sufficient income.

The Thrifty Food Plan is a market basket of pre-determined foodstuffs. They take an average or estimate of the cost of that market basket and multiply it by 3 to set the Federal Poverty Level for a household.

This was done at a time when food made up a higher percentage of a family's expenses. If you saw my chart in the first post rent in Dallas on average takes over a third of a family's income and food in most states is around 10% of expenditure.

So if you used the Thrifty Food Plan and multiplied it by 10 you should in theory have something that looks like what was first envisioned.

Instead they continue to multiply by 3, but it is so far from reality agencies then increase that by 50%. Looks something like this, but varied by the Thrifty Food Plan amount for each family:https://www.ocpp.org/2000/01/01/how-we-measure-poverty/

Absolute bull****. This is a very outdated reputation with unions.

Ask all the non union electricians where I live how the 30/$hr is treating them and ask them if they’d like 50/$hr with a full vested pension and the best health benefits in the industry.

Unions don’t just steal your money either. Working dues for journeyman are 1% and 0.5% for apprentices.

Your monthly dues are only 50/$ month for apprentices and 80/$ month for journeyman.

That’s it. Now granted my IBEW hall isn’t the same as the rest. LA for ex is notorious for robbing you in dues and fees.

The hall in Philadelphia got raided by the fbi a few years ago too over embezzlement but not every union hall is like that.


Not having a union presence 100% hurts employees in a job market.

Unions don’t suppress wages, they set the industry standard wage for skilled labor.

Without the labor movement all the actual skilled trades that are critical to this country would all be making under the table wages or working homeless wages and living in on site camps.

You ever notice how utility and high voltage work is 100% unionized ? There’s a huge reason for that.

Line and distribution work can kill you in a split second if you make a mistake.

Who the **** would that for 30/$hr ? Especially somewhere like CA ?

Most people won’t even do inside electrical construction for 30/$hr much less utility work but give SDG&E all the power over their employees and they probably would pay that little.

You’re under the impression that working in a merit shop is better because you can negotiate your pay. You can’t. It’s the illusion of choice.

You can maybe get a 2/$hr more over the lousy dude but you’re still making much much less than you would in a trade union.

When a company lowballs you for a raise and you walk they just laugh at you because they know the next shop is gonna only offer 1-2/$hr more than what they’re paying you.

How about working an actual trade at a non union shop and speak from experience before trashing unions ?

The IBEW , UA , UAW , SMW , IW , etc all are barely holding the middle class together in this country.

Without them all of our critical skilled tradies would be paid so ****ty there wouldn’t be anyone in the trades at all.

When I worked non union I met two types of people :

1. Ones who had a grudge against the IBEW because they couldn’t get accepted into the apprenticeship program. If my ADD inattentive semi retarded ass can and you can’t theres something wrong with you , not the ibew.

2. Guys who planned on opening their own shop right after they journey out.

Some guys want to try for shop owner immediately without running work first , some want to be a foreman or Super/GF before trying that.

Being a business owner isn’t for everyone but the latter are guys who normally go the IBEW route then open their shop later on and the former open up one immediately after they get their journeyman and c-10 license.

Inb4 another retarded argument “ union employees are lazy”.

All the hall trash guys I’ve seen come and go from my little time working on this side of the fence proves the opposite.

If you’re not worth the money the contractor is paying you , your useless ass gets sent back to the hall normally within a day or two.

We’re slammed with work for the next 10 -15 years too but the contractors out of my hall don’t play around. You still have to be worth your pay level.

It's not about getting a raise from $10 to to $15, it's what are you going to do with the guys that actually spent money on education and certifications that were already only making around $15 an hour.

Do they get a 33% raise too!?

You can't raise the minimum wage like that w/out increasing everyone else's wages. Once everyone gets a wage increase, everything costs more, defeating the purpose.

So it’s ok for businesses to exercise monopsonist power in a labour market but it’s not ok for the labourers to organise to get some negotiating power of their own

Yeah the most uneducated should be forced to negotiate their own salary outcomes

LMAO labour market economics not even once

Also when was the last time you saw a skilled professional with an actual labour union? No I’m not talking about professional associations or colleges I mean actual unions

Unions exist for those who need them. Until they don’t because people are actually too dumb to organise.

In cuckmerica there’s probably people who think that a handful of corporations who employ vast numbers of people should BOTH and able to advertise their own wage offer in public but ALSO try to ban employees from discussing their wage with each other

LMAO

Meanwhile the maritime workers union in Australian would shut down the docks if they felt like it

Okay bro.

So you think every critical infrastructure skilled tradie should be working homeless ? A slave class ? We ***** now ?

Without being in the union that’s how little your gonna make.

I love the electrical trade but I’m not doing it for free. Should I be apprenticing for free now ?

The pay for skilled tradies that are critical are grossly stagnated.

Imagine saying you’re willing to work for a lot less with 0 benefits and being coerced into 60-70 hour work weeks because “hur dur union bad , union bad “

I’d sell butthole pics or shake my ass in hillcrest before trying to make a career out of non union.

Are you seriously comparing kangaroo dollars to USD mate?

tell me again how much you pay for a Toyota Yaris.

I thought so.

It must be different, because here we have teachers unions, which easily argues against his “non-educated“ comment.

Be careful what you wish for. Brandon gonna get them their $15/hr min wage but the catch is their $15 will only go half as far.

Coerced? So your employment there isn’t voluntary? How does the employer punish you if you leave? Does he shoot you?

What process do you use to determine what you get paid? If you aren’t using an economic process based on cost of production and what consumers are willing to pay, then guess what? Not only are you using the Union to coerce the employer for pay and employment (This is no longer a voluntary agreement), but you’re also exploiting the consumer. Turns out, now you’re the bad guy.

Based on your description of how you determine pay, it actually sounds like you’re in a cartel.

I know that this is a VERY common belief- that higher wages push inflation.

But there isn't good historical data to back it up.^^^
Please go and read the article where the author goes through the wage increases and any inflation that was seen after said wage increase.

https://discomfiting.medium.com/debu...n-c0db32f579f8

But if that isn't enough to persuade you that wages are not that big a driver of prices then here is an article about the present:

Yes, it is specific to manufacturing. If I dig up one that is more general for the present day vs. historical I'll try to add it.

https://realeconomy.rsmus.com/chart-...ush-inflation/

Re: Do the people at higher wages get a raise to?

That depends. How desirable is the job and the wages paid? What is the competition like?

If a job really sucks and people working that job now can leave and do an easier/more fun job then I would expect that the pay for that job will have to be increased to keep positions filled. Working a garbage truck comes to mind. If I can do an easy job that is less demanding, smelly, loud, cold/hot/etc. for the same money then why wouldn't I?

If a job is fairly pleasant, has good social standing, provides some personal satisfaction, and has plenty of qualified workers willing to continue doing that job for the same pay as before then employers probably won't raise the pay much. I think working in a library would be a pretty nice job. Maybe staff for a private school, a museum, a well run charity, etc. won't care enough about seeking higher pay to leave.

^^^as an aside it’s not just pay

It’s also safe working conditions

Getting them into legislation

Then enforcing them

I don’t have a horse in the race because until COVID and remote working became a thing i worked in an office

There’s a reason most trades are seriously undermanned , because most non union pay is so little no young people are entering the trades

Yes when I worked non union the foreman and PMs/Supers would try to scare us with termination if we didn’t work 60+ hr work weeks when the company needs you to

“(Company name) is gonna start looking at who’s staying and being a team player and who’s not , lay offs will be coming to those soon” lmao

Like seriously dude shut the **** up , the company couldn’t afford to lay anyone off due to how undermanned they are and how much they where swimming in work

We had 4:30 start times on most jobs and stayed 10+ hours a day


No ones forcing anyone to pay union rates , contractors can either sign on with the the IBEW as signatory contractor and hire from a much more skilled and better trained labor pool or they can be non union and get 50% **** workers , 30 % decent and 20% good or excellent workers off the street or from a non union **** school like the ABC

There’s no law saying a shop can’t be non union idiot lmao

Also as a business owner remember you’re forced to pay the prevailing wage rate on public works and government projects

This is a big reason why good union shops win PLAs all the time

Govt bases and the city would rather pay prevailing wage for the best electricians and apprentices they can get than hire non union shops where a lot of the workers probably didn’t have the best quality training

LMAO @this thread

McDonalds: we’re offering $12 an hour. Take it or leave it.

Americucks: don’t like it find a better job elsewhere!

Unions: we’re prepared to offer you skilled labour for $30 an hour. Take it or leave it.

Also Americucks: ZOMG sOcIaLiSm!!!!1!1

Most miscers hate unions because they want good labor for illegal Mexican rates

Maybe they should open up their business in ***** , I hear there’s no mandated minimum pay for tradies there and you can even force them into onsite camps where they’re practically slaves

Win win man

Think about all the profit they’ll rake in from paying the equivalent of 50c/hr

It will easily be in the trillions

Cliffs version.And you still seem to feel that labor shouldn't be allowed to fight for their interests on an equal footing with capital.

*But thanks for chat. I think we talk across each other at times, but maybe we will make some progress in at least understanding each other's positions.*

Very long article at this link from someone who has been in trucking for 40 years. Highlights how the trucking companies are "working together without provably working together" to exploit truck drivers by setting up compensation in such a way that drivers do a lot of unpaid work.

https://www.smart-trucking.com/truck-driver-shortage/

^^^tacit collusion

“Industry standard” wage is a price fix

Which is apparently only acceptable when large corporations do it

Lmao at Cuckmericans

Wage should be what the employee and employer agree on

Minimum wage should be zero

Pretty cool concept

And since the corporation negotiates on behalf of its shareholders

You have no problem with the union negotiating on behalf of its members right?

Retort to what?

There are no actual arguments being put forward in this thread just a bunch of idiots who flunked out of first year econ and/or don’t understand how monetary policy or labour market economics works

With each post they make, It becomes more and more clear just how little each of these individuals know. Their lack of knowledge actually makes them more confident. When every sentence is a talking point based on a fallacy, I just can’t keep up.

Too exhausting and time consuming without any hope of making progress in the discussion. Instead, we are going to destroy capitalism blaming the wrong people and using the wrong solutions.

Think about this.

You want private business to increase wages to cover for governments mis-handling of the economy. So that private business will be forced to increase its costs to simply cover for the inflation caused by the government, only to increase the cost of its items to cover the costs of the increased wages thus causing more inflation, and the cycle repeats itself and actually gets worse because it compounds.

The real problem is government, and peoples entitlement. People feel they need to live in their own place, have kids, cell phones, new cars, dinner outings, flat screens, designer cloths etc etc. Everyone wants to live the instthot lifestyle but put in little effort

Workers need to take it upon themselves to increase their value.

People who are using a backwards ideology won’t be convinced. Their brain has been wired to think in a way that is completely opposite of free market thinkers. You can give facts, examples, stories detailing the truth etc, but instead of listening, researching/studying the facts, they just talk at you. The replies are never rebuttals, they are random talking points that avoid the arguments you make.

Many of these individuals are socialists in their ideals and don’t even realize it. Taking the power away from the consumer and business owner and putting the power all in the hands of labor is a Marxist ideal, but we see it so frequently. On top of that, people like Katya wants to use government to fix all of the economic issues with ideas that have been proven to lead to bad outcomes.

Former truck driver. There has been a shortage for a long time. Compensation has only gotten worse. What they are doing instead is just dangling carrots and if anything taking advantage of the fact that most of their drivers are financially retarded. Call a trucking company, they will send you to school and get you your CDL and will then put you through training and even pay you in this time. Then you are contracted for a year. If you quit, or even get fired, you'll have to pay back a lot of money. During that year they will get their money's worth. What's more is they get credits on their taxes from the government. Then they will try to get you into some lease programs where it sounds good, but you put your credit and a lot of responsiblity on your shoulders, and the only real way to make more you have to hustle which means you stay out, almost no home time, taking every load, running the North East.

From what I see is a lot of these companies are just doing sign on bonuses.

So if these options weren’t given, what opportunities would individuals be left with? What are the alternatives? Paying for their own schooling, then attempt to get hired with no experience? How likely is that? So a company gives you an opportunity that would not have been there otherwise, would be out of a job if they didn’t, but you’re busting on the employer for giving you a chance at a career? One year labor to pay them back is a horrible agreement? What’s the value of CDL school plus on the job experience?

I’m always puzzled by these arguments. If the opportunity wouldn’t be there, you’d be out of a job permanently. They offer you something to get you started, and yet you complain. A agreement is something that benefits you both. You both value that agreement in a manner that reflects your best interest. Don’t like it? Try to find a job without the opportunities being offered. I think you’re undervaluing having a job vs no job at all. You’re not even considering the fact that the alternative is being homeless? Perhaps we have under appreciated the free market because we expect more from others than we expect from ourselves. This stems from materialism. We DEMAND a luxurious life from our employers.

This is why people travel from all over the world to be here. The free market economy offers more opportunities than any other economic System ever created. But yet, we have become unappreciative of the system. The central government makes us believe that the system is bad and they can do better. Progressives have been spoiled to believe that other systems are better, or we can fix this through government. The more state involvement we get, the less employers create and offer opportunities. In other words, we are moving backwards because Life has become too easy and we have the time to complain. Those new to the capitalist structure come here and are overwhelmed by the vast opportunities offered. But people who have been living here their entire life, families for generations, don’t understand just how good having all these opportunities really are

I'm just stating my obersvations and I'm not saying it's bad exactly. In my opinion, it's a great opportunity for someone looking to be able to make a living. However for those who are already in the field, if they think things are going to get a lot better, chances are it won't.

I’m no economist, but what are your thoughts on this quote?

“Unfortunately, the real minimum wage is always zero, regardless of the laws, and that is the wage that many workers receive in the wake of the creation or escalation of a government-mandated minimum wage, because they lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force. Making it illegal to pay less than a given amount does not make a worker’s productivity worth that amount—and, if it is not, that worker is unlikely to be employed.”

— Thomas Sowell

It’s a much more compelling argument to me because it strays from demonizing business owners or low skilled workers, and leaves the emotions out of the equation.