TRoaches Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) The problem with this is not everyone can just "not" take up a job offer. Even jobs of above average wages there is only about 1 job available for every 5 people looking and this has been this way for over a decade...If you scrutinize this ""1 job available for every 5 people" number just a little bit then it becomes an indicator of how insanely illogical our federally managed economy has become. Pretend that "the economy" in question is a tribe with an adult population of around 100. There is one lucky fool who is monarch by birth. He has the luxury of lounging around the island all day and being waited on by his servant. He is "the 1%". There are twenty people, 1/5 of the population, who do ALL of the work. They are the "workforce", meaning that they hold the one job per five people that exists according to your claim. That leaves 79 people who, according to your claim, cannot find a job. Try as they may, they simply have not been able to find anything worth doing on the entire island. They searched and searched but came up empty. They are already being fed, clothed, housed, and entertained by the 20% who were somehow able to find a job. Their basic needs are being met so they see no reason to contribute to anything industrius or cultural to the tribe. I find this terribly hard to believe, in this tribe analogy or in the real world. Just imagine for a minute that 79 people are standing around complaining about how underemployed they are while the other 20 work all day in the fields growing the food for the whole village, building and repairing huts, tending the hogs and goats, crafting tools, digging ditches, chopping wood, catching fish, and so on. They are also scientists and engineers, constantly improving upon the designs and methods that they use every day through experimentation. They even dedicate much of their time to the education of apprentices to take their place when they die. In their spare time they create art and music that the entire village enjoys. Why is only one person in five contributing to this economy? Edited January 28, 2014 by TRoaches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colourwheel Posted January 28, 2014 Author Share Posted January 28, 2014 The problem with this is not everyone can just "not" take up a job offer. Even jobs of above average wages there is only about 1 job available for every 5 people looking and this has been this way for over a decade... Why is only one person in five contributing to this economy? You are assuming that 1 out of every 5 people is "unemployed" which is not the case at all... "1 job available for every 5 people looking" .... This does not mean for every 1 person there is 4 people who are unemployed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kvnchrist Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 It would seem to me that by doing things the way you suggest it would place an undue burden on the economy without any benefit to it . Just placing more money in the hands of others doesn't guarentee anything other than the money being in their hands. It doesn't guarantee that anyone would use the income to access better education. It would be more feasible to lower or remove the price of education offered and let the public decide wither they want to make the personal choice to better themselves. We need partisipation in the work force to support those who can't support themselves. This is a conscious effort deligated to everybody. Those that can work need to do so, so that those who can't can have a bumper zone against becoming destitute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRoaches Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) "1 job available for every 5 people looking" .... This does not mean for every 1 person there is 4 people who are unemployed...Then all you are saying is "one in five people are dissatisfied with their current job". Raising the minimum wage will have no effect on this at all. A job pays minimum wage for only one reason...it is an undesirable. I held my fair share of minimum or near-minimum wage jobs and the low pay is not necessarily the worst thing about them. They are bottom-tier jobs involving bottom-tier work for bottom-tier pay. Nobody wants them, so the demand for such jobs is very, very low and generally limited to people who need something to get by between other better jobs, want to supplement their income from their full time jobs, are students who cannot dedicate their full time to a job, people who simply have no other options and need to start somewhere (completely unskilled workers, parolees, teenagers, etc). These jobs are important to all of these groups, and all you do by increasing the minimum wage is force the boss to scratch one or more names from the bottom of the payroll sheet, increase prices, or both. Edited January 28, 2014 by TRoaches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colourwheel Posted January 28, 2014 Author Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) It would seem to me that by doing things the way you suggest it would place an undue burden on the economy without any benefit to it . Just placing more money in the hands of others doesn't guarentee anything other than the money being in their hands. It doesn't guarantee that anyone would use the income to access better education. It would be more feasible to lower or remove the price of education offered and let the public decide wither they want to make the personal choice to better themselves. You are correct there wouldn't be any guarantee that people would use the money to pursue a higher education. But it's not like these people would be hoarding this money either by putting it in offshore accounts or not spending money at all... most likely this extra money they would have would put billions back into the economy yearly. Some would use the extra money to pursue a higher education though... Reducing the cost of education where as anyone can afford it, I would think would only degrade the system and lower the cost of teachers and educational employees and the resources needed. Socializing education all together would probably work better if the goal is to give everyone equal opportunity... @TRoaches Do you believe anyone who works full time shouldn't be living in poverty? Edited January 28, 2014 by colourwheel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRoaches Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 @TRoaches do you believe anyone who works full time shouldn't be living in poverty?The definition of "living in poverty" that the census uses is determined by ratio of income to consumer prices. If you increase minimum wage you increase income for a few people while either increasing prices for everyone or employing fewer people. Those are the only two ways to account for the increased individual payrolls. The money has to come from somewhere. If the prices are increased along with the income you have not reduced poverty. If fewer people are employed you have not reduced poverty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colourwheel Posted January 28, 2014 Author Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) If you increase minimum wage you increase income for a few people while either increasing prices for everyone or employing fewer people. Those are the only two ways to account for the increased individual payrolls. The money has to come from somewhere. If the prices are increased along with the income you have not reduced poverty. If fewer people are employed you have not reduced poverty. All I have to say is I disagree... There is absolutely no credible evidence or study that suggest what you are saying is true.... Edited January 28, 2014 by colourwheel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRoaches Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) Try studying a balance sheet and familiarizing yourself with what it means. There two columns on the right side, one for income and another for expenses. Using a calculator you start at the top and work your way down, pressing the + button before entering the numbers from the income column and the - button before entering the ones from the expense column. When you get to the bottom you press the = button. If the number displayed is negative everyone is fired and the business closes. If it is a positive number, but smaller than it was last month then the business will be closing soon if you don't put change some things on the sheet. You can either increase income or decrease expenses. Increasing income is easier said than done, and decreasing expenses is easier done than said. The fastest way to decrease your expenses is to look around and figure out who is contributing the least to the company and sending them home with their things. A study is not necessary to understand the effect of lawfully mandating increased expense columns for companies. Edited January 28, 2014 by TRoaches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colourwheel Posted January 28, 2014 Author Share Posted January 28, 2014 @Troaches Economic study is a bit more complex than your simplistic analogy. You have to take into account money being put back into the economy, you have to put into account other jobs being created due to economic growth, etc... Your study isn't even remotely credible, I am sorry to say.... :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRoaches Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Economic study is a bit more complex than your simplistic analogy. You have to take into account money being put back into the economy, you have to put into account other jobs being created due to economic growth, etc...Money does not leave and re-enter the economy. There is no mechanism of economics that can be accurately described as money going "back into" the economy. Money that is "put into" the economy but is not taken from somewhere else is called inflation, which is a much bigger problem with regards to poverty and overall positive economic mobility than the minimum wage. Jobs are eliminated, not created, by increased expenses. Your study isn't even remotely credible, I am sorry to say.... It is not a study, or the result of a study. It is the common sense reality of business, particularly the type of small business and entrepreneurship that truly drives the economy in a positive direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts