|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
posted February 19, 2013 05:48 PM |
|
|
Honestly, I believe minimum wage is crap. What I fear most is that exploiting poor suckers that just graduated from uni is pretty much only restricted by minimal wage and nothing else. Most employers in Poland already think a student should work for free, just for the experience.
when 25yo people are treated like children and are expected to work for free (or near-free) "because they can still rely on their mommy and daddy", I kinda hope minimal wage will never go away 
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 05:55 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 17:56, 19 Feb 2013.
|
That's actually the problem with most welfare systems - the compensation for unemployment can outweigh the minimum compensation that you'll get if you get employed. Getting paid for having essentially limitless free time is always preferable to getting paid (even if the payment is somewhat better) for dedicating X hours per day to somebody else's interests. That's not always related to laziness either - if neither payment can sustain you on its own, why would you waste time, energy and probably nerves (all of which can be considered resources, strictly speaking) to work for somebody who doesn't even agree to pay you enough to cover your basic needs, when you can spend the same time for, say, improving some of your skills or simply looking for a better job? It's not a tough choice for most people. And yes, some of them are lazy.
In the end, the minimum wage has to actually be above the existence minimum to server any practical purpose and the compensations for unemployment - if there are any - should be much lower or limited in another way (for example - through a strict division of the people who actively seek employment and those who pretend to do so + the respective regulations).
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 06:08 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 18:26, 19 Feb 2013.
|
So what's to be preferred:
1. No minimum wage but wellfare on existence minimum?
(this one might be nescessary to avoid extreme social issues, even without low minimum wages there will still be people in long-term periods of unemployment)
or
2. Minimum wage above existence minimum and very limited/no wellfare?
(this one fits me more ideologically, since tax is theft)
or
3. Other alternative.
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 06:37 PM |
|
Edited by fauch at 18:47, 19 Feb 2013.
|
mytical : that's why they sell to rich countries. they say capitalism will make poverty disappears, but it is false, capitalism requires poor enough people to be exploited, and others rich enough to buy stuffs.
are those swedish wages real? it's like twice as much as in france (the sweden isn't in the european union? because it looks like they are failing in their plan to ruin your country)
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 06:46 PM |
|
|
Preferable is letting people work (which may mean sacrifice time in a practical sense) for welfare, make welfare able to cover the minimum living costs and save the minimum wages, because that
way "welfare" becomes a wage.
This means on one hand, that no one will get money for doing nothing and just having free time, while on the other no one will have to work below minimum wage either.
It would seem, Xerox, that if tax is theft you drive on stolen roads and learn in stolen schools.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 07:00 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 19:07, 19 Feb 2013.
|
Fauch: Sweden is a very supportive member of the EU. But we don't have the euro, even though it would benefit our export industry right now.
Wages are real and imo, too high. On top of those wages every employed person gets to make a tax cut which equals a 13th monthly salary.
JJ: Is there any non-moral point in forcing people to work for their wellfare? Thing with tax is that it goes to A LOT of more stuff than just roads, healthcare and school. Cut public expediture and start replacing stupid taxes such as the one on employment with enviromental- and narcotics taxes.
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 07:13 PM |
|
|
and how does that work when there isn't enough work for everyone?
an unconditionnal income high enough for living ( in france it could even be much higher) would probably work. they did a test in a city and people didn't work less.
btw, when you ask people about unconditionnal income, most of them say they wouldn't stop working, but they also think the majority of people would become totally idle.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 07:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
JJ: Is there any non-moral point in forcing people to work for their wellfare? Thing with tax is that it goes to A LOT of more stuff than just roads, healthcare and school. Cut public expediture and start replacing stupid taxes such as the one on employment with enviromental- and narcotics taxes.
Of course. Why WOULD the government hand out alms? If people do not want to work, well, tough luck. I mean, you don't go to Volvo trucks and ask them to give you money, right?
So the government/state does not give out any alms/welfare anymore, but instead creates minimum wage jobs for those who don't find regular employment. They are not forcing anyone to work, they just don't hand out anything for free anymore.
The thing with taxes is, that you aren't the one deciding which tax is ok and which is not. Cutting public expenditures is fine, but as far as I know, everyone is on deficit spending anyway. Narcotics taxes are extraordinary high in Sweden anyway (and in Germany as well, albeit not that high). Environmental taxes are in effect anyway. You have to consider, that these taxes are a big disadvantage looking at the Asian competetion who obviously don't have that kind of taxes and club on the environment mercilessly.
So as long as the world isn't acting together in this, things are difficult, to say the least.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 07:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
2. Minimum wage above existence minimum and very limited/no wellfare?
Welfare is supposed to fix some of the flaws of the current economic model and in essence is just a cheap crap that both backfires in way too many cases and serves as an excuse not to enforce more radical structural reforms. But it's certainly better than the homo homini lupus est society that the most liberal economists love to preach. The thing is - no welfare is supposed to pour money, which are ultimately taken from the working population, into the pockets of people who don't want to work. Respectively, no welfare should purposefully create an environment where a person is motivated not to work or not motivated to work. That said, helping the unemployed people certainly makes sense because the unemployment just can't be rooted out of the current economic system - however helping the unemployed people remain unemployed is a nonsense. And if the numbers that you give are true, an unemployed person in Sweden has a higher monthly income than a highly paid employed person in Bulgaria, with university degree, certificates and whatnot. You're really outdoing yourselves. 
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 08:07 PM |
|
|
You may not realize this, but the anti-minimum wage arguments ITT make people sound like the economics equivalents of creationists. Unfortunately, saying nonsense about economics is socially acceptable.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 08:14 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 20:40, 19 Feb 2013.
|
|
Funny, I'd give exactly the same description to your arguments.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 08:18 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 20:29, 19 Feb 2013.
|
Quote:
If people do not want to work, well, tough luck.
But I think this is a kind of moral. A very reasonable one, but a moral. The question is, does it serve a purpose outside of the moral "People should work for their wellfare checks"? And say these people get low-wage jobs in the public sector, such as cleaning, wouldn't that risk competing with actual private businesses? Here these kinds of businesses have exploded in numbers due to them being kind of subsidised.
Quote:
you aren't the one deciding which tax is ok and which is not.
Well, this is the big problem with taxes. There are things that 99.99% of the population would agree needs to be tax-funded, such as roads. Therefor, some tax is okay. The problem comes when politicans start spending on unnescessary stuff that more than a few people disagree with. It's acceptable for the local authorities to forcefully take your money and spend them on planting flowers in a park on the other side of the city you live in, yet few people would accept their neighbour using their wallet to buy new flowers for the garden.
I think that taxing bad stuff such as polluting our common atmosphere is a lot more acceptable than taxing employment or income. Of course you have to do this in a way which won't damn your country to poverty.
I completely agree that there needs to be more global cooperation on global issues such as the enviroment. Solving global issues globally is not much more than basic logic.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 08:26 PM |
|
|
This is to Doomforge. I noticed mvass didn't clear up a few misunderstanding between you two and decided to do so.
Quote:
For many jobs, employers don't want to offer wages that low because they don't want suspicious and untrustworthy people working for them.
America only.
So, are you saying that in Poland, employers don't care if someone they hire steals from them? Somehow, I doubt it.
How's stealing related to the company having a bad image because of paying low wage?
The point is that you don't want untrusty people who are willing to work for that money since it is likely they will steal from you.
Quote:
Also, there is something off about the disproportionate concern for people making minimum wage. Why do they matter more than employers and people who are currently unemployed because of the minimum wage? Why are low-productivity workers the master race?
This is not really related to the topic, as we're talking about the benefits (or cons) of minimum wage, and not the ethics of caring for poor instead of caring for rich. But, since you brought that up: why would I want to care for five-digit-per-month sales manager in his armani suit which you consider homo superior? As a guy that earns 200$ per month, I don't think I really care if he can afford a new Ferrari or not.
Point was that no one is homo superior, not you making 200 not the guy making 200000 and not the guy that is currently jobless. You also neatly passed the jobless guy completely.
And then a question for everyone. IF you think no one will work for 200 what do you think is the problem for someone offering a job for 200?
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 08:41 PM |
|
|
Quote:
IF you think no one will work for 200 what do you think is the problem for someone offering a job for 200?
You'll have to be more specific.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 08:47 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
If people do not want to work, well, tough luck.
But I think this is a kind of moral. A very reasonable one, but a moral.
No, it's not a moral, it's a DEAL. Which is because: Quote:
The question is, does it serve a purpose outside of the moral "People should work for their wellfare checks"? And say these people get low-wage jobs in the public sector, such as cleaning, wouldn't that risk competing with actual private businesses? Here these kinds of businesses have exploded in numbers due to them being kind of subsidised.
... there are a lot of UNPROFITABLE jobs, that is, things that SHOULD be done, but are not making any profits and therefore ARE not done, because there is no money. An example is the health system which is notorio usly understaffed. However, there is a lot of very basic work that can be done by everyone by just being there, watching, relieving and so on.
The second point is, that currently welfare IS seen as an alm and welfare recipients are viewed as inferior people. If they'd do eomething for the money, that would change.
Quote:
Quote:
you aren't the one deciding which tax is ok and which is not.
Well, this is the big problem with taxes. There are things that 99.99% of the population would agree needs to be tax-funded, such as roads. Therefor, some tax is okay. The problem comes when politicans start spending on unnescessary stuff that more than a few people disagree with. It's acceptable for the local authorities to forcefully take your money and spend them on planting flowers in a park on the other side of the city you live in, yet few people would accept their neighbour using their wallet to buy new flowers for the garden.
Taxes should finance more than just the smallest common denominator.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 09:04 PM |
|
|
|
Tax should only be invested in things that are socioeconomically beneficial.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 09:09 PM |
|
|
|
Before I put you into the Mvass Club - define "socioeconomically beneficial".
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 09:12 PM |
|
|
Mvass..don't know where you get your information, but often the Chinese workers are seen as having a harder work ethic then most in the USA. They are as productive, if not more so, per hour then the people working elsewhere. Which is why a lot of companies moved their production to such places (China and India)..because they could get cheaper labor with people just as productive or more productive as the person in America.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 09:16 PM |
|
|
Chinese workers don't give a damn about work ethic, which firstly means quality, not time spent. All they know is that they will lose job if 1 minute wasted. There are no syndicates in China, no free welfare and without job you are just dead man.
About their work quality vs US, HERE is someone's experience related about.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 19, 2013 09:26 PM |
|
|
Mvass was talking about productivity as in your efficiency of production, not in the common use of the word.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
