A quick word on blocking ads
It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
cool_nameAlso as an aside, is a game of Texas holdem rigged if one player gets better hands through luck?
Bill.NyeTo quote Peter Kropotkin, Anarchism is "the no-government system of socialism." [Anarchism, p. 46] In other words, "the abolition of exploitation and oppression of man by man, that is the abolition of private property [i.e. capitalism] and government." [Errico Malatesta, Towards Anarchism,", p. 75]
cobra_commanderYou, sir, are grounding your thought structure on foolery. Have you considered walking around with a plotted plant to help give back the oxygen you are steeling?
cobra_commanderWho would enforce a minimum wage in the absence of government. What would the minimum wage consist of in the absence of personal property?
Bill.NyeAn international worker's union.
cobra_commanderLOL, that is a good one.
Bill.NyeWhy are you asking abstract questions divorced from reality if you don't want answers in the same category?
Bill.NyeAn international worker's union.
cobra_commanderLOL... I've already decided your answers are little more than a mediocre comedy routine.
cobra_commanderLOL... I've already decided your answers are little more than a mediocre comedy routine.
.MASSHOLE.Wait, so you expect a world that currently has vastly different standards of living to cooperate and agree on a wage that is equal among all workers worldwide?
Bill.NyeNot in my lifetime.
Bill.NyeThat is a really convenient moral code for people who happen to be at the top of the socioeconomic hierarchy to internalize.
It's also a dumb analogy that is trying to distract from simply talking about the actual issue. We aren't talking about finding a $20 on the sidewalk, this is real people's livelihoods and if you've ever had to try to work your way through college (which is already a distraction because not everyone needs to go to college. Our economy would not function without people doing manual labour and service industry jobs) in the current economy you might have a slightly different view.
Bill.NyeI don't play poker. I'm not interested in playing poker. I resent the fact that in order to live in america we need to use gambling analogies to justify the morality of our socioeconomic system. Gambling is a zero sum game, it's a very bad model for an economy.
Granite_StateNot in anyone's lifetime because that simply will never happen.
Also, Anarchy...lol.
cool_nameconvenient or not do you think it is right for your friends to forcefully take something from you just because you got it through luck.
cool_nameAlso is someone being born hard-working vs lazy any different than someone being born rich vs poor. Both are attributes one gets through luck.
cool_nameI wasnt using it to justify the morality, i asked a simple question is poker rigged because luck is involved. No of course not, therefore how can life be rigged simply because some of life's outcomes relies on luck
milk_manWho do you want to run the economy? The government?
Bill.NyeAn international worker's union.
Bill.NyeSure, you don't? I mean if you just luckily had a big bag of sandwiches and you had 9 friends who were starving and you decided not to share would they be morally justified in taking it from you? Even if they had to use force?
Well, depends on if you ask the one or the nine I guess.
Bill.NyeExactly, so let's build a society that puts more value on being born working hard than it does on being born rich, which is what we have now.
Bill.NyeBecause life isn't poker, I don't want to play your game, and there are a lot of other people who don't want to either. This isn't an abstract discussion like you're trying to make it.
cool_nameShould the man share the sandwiches yes, does he have to no.
cool_namewake up and open your eyes, our society does value working hard more than being born rich.
cool_nameagain i never compared life to poker, i asked is poker rigged?
Bill.NyeHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!! Do you believe that because Shaun Hannity told you?
Wiki is where I go when I don't know where to start, so here's some wikipedia:
"The correlation between parents' income and their children's income in the United States is estimated between .4 and .6. If there was perfect economic mobility and being raised in poverty was not a disadvantage, you would expect to see 20% of children who started in that bottom quintile remaining there as adults. That is not what research shows. According to a 2012 Pew Economic Mobility Project study[15] 43% of children born into the bottom quintile remain in that bottom quintile as adults. Correspondingly, 40% of children raised in the top quintile will remain there as adults at 63% of those children will remain above the middle. Additionally, large shifts in income between childhood and adulthood are very unlikely to occur. Only 4% of those raised in the bottom quintile to the top quintile as adults, and only 8% of children born into the top quintile fall to the bottom.[15] These findings have led researchers to conclude that "opportunity structures create and determine future generations' changes for success. Hence, our lot in life is at least partially determined by where we grow up, and this is partially determined by where our parents grew up, and so on."[16]
Economic mobility may be affected by factors such as geographic location, race, sex, as well as family wealth.[17] These factors exist because of the social constructs that are present within the United States."
cool_nameAlso is someone being born hard-working vs lazy any different than someone being born rich vs poor. Both are attributes one gets through luck.
cool_nameEither way both are just traits you would have inherited by luck.
/QUOTE]
Lol ya bro I'm so lucky that I work hard
cool_nameEither way both are just traits you would have inherited by luck.
Bill.NyeI don't play poker. I'm not interested in playing poker. I resent the fact that in order to live in america we need to use gambling analogies to justify the morality of our socioeconomic system. Gambling is a zero sum game, it's a very bad model for an economy.
Bill.NyeBecause life isn't poker, I don't want to play your game, and there are a lot of other people who don't want to either. This isn't an abstract discussion like you're trying to make it.
Bill.NyeI'm not stupid dude. You were asking about life being rigged by trying to make a poker analogy. I think anyone with a 5th grade reading level could make that connection. Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Bill.NyeHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!! Do you believe that because Shaun Hannity told you?
Wiki is where I go when I don't know where to start, so here's some wikipedia:
"The correlation between parents' income and their children's income in the United States is estimated between .4 and .6. If there was perfect economic mobility and being raised in poverty was not a disadvantage, you would expect to see 20% of children who started in that bottom quintile remaining there as adults. That is not what research shows. According to a 2012 Pew Economic Mobility Project study[15] 43% of children born into the bottom quintile remain in that bottom quintile as adults. Correspondingly, 40% of children raised in the top quintile will remain there as adults at 63% of those children will remain above the middle. Additionally, large shifts in income between childhood and adulthood are very unlikely to occur. Only 4% of those raised in the bottom quintile to the top quintile as adults, and only 8% of children born into the top quintile fall to the bottom.[15] These findings have led researchers to conclude that "opportunity structures create and determine future generations' changes for success. Hence, our lot in life is at least partially determined by where we grow up, and this is partially determined by where our parents grew up, and so on."[16]
Economic mobility may be affected by factors such as geographic location, race, sex, as well as family wealth.[17] These factors exist because of the social constructs that are present within the United States."
blondie.Nature versus nurture. Do you believe your parents taught you anything about being hardworking, or did you learn that? Do you think poor people are born lazy? Some might be, but can you make that generalization for all? I would think that the condition of their surroundings fosters that. Most hardworking people learn how to be hardworking and are motivated by intrinsic incentives. Similarly, lazy people lack those incentives and are lazy because they learn to imitate what's around them.
If you picked up a newborn baby in the street and knew it was born from poor, lazy, and uneducated parents, but you raised it in a loving and educated household, do you think that baby-kid-teen-adult would be like their parents?
Don't get me wrong, you get a lot from your parents, but there are social effects at work too that play a key role. Doesn't change that it's still "luck" but it stacks the deck even more against the unlucky many, point being that the system is a cruel and unfortunate cycle for those at the bottom.
cool_nameGlad to see that you still acknowledge that a majority of it comes from luck, whether it is luck of being born with those traits or luck of being put into the situations to nurture those traits.
the system is not perfect, but (to get back closer to the main topic) minimum wage will do nothing to help this, in fact it will make the lowest income bracket of people worse off as i previously explained in this thread
blondie.How our system keeps people stuck in those shitty cycles? Not so fine.
I can't speak much to what increasing minimum wage will do because I know next to none of economics.
bieberhole69.So I agree that there should be more social mobility, but do you really believe it should be perfectly mobile? Shouldn't parents who worked hard for their money be able to give it to their kids, who weren't blessed with their intelligence, knowing that because of their hard work (and luck) their kid will be taken care of?
blondie.Nature versus nurture.
cool_namei am sure if it was possible to create an accurate measure of motivation and working hard
cool_namethe system is not perfect, but (to get back closer to the main topic) minimum wage will do nothing to help this, in fact it will make the lowest income bracket of people worse off as i previously explained in this thread
LIL_WATThe minimum wage is nothing more than a hurdle rate that only the more productive and usually better educated can surpass.
Bill.NyeThere is! It's called going out and actually meeting some people who aren't in your class and realizing that they are very smart and hardworking people much like yourself.
Also we can look at the changes in wealth disparity in relation to centuries of government and economic policy and how the two influence each other to see why it is that the very rich have gotten so much richer in the last 35 years for example.
This all takes a lot of reading and thinking and studying though, so it doesn't do much good to people who are already at the top of the order to waste time doing that just to learn that maybe they aren't as amazing as they've always been told they are.
Bill.NyeYou should tell these guys that. Seven of them are Nobel prize winners.
Bill.NyeThe productivity and education level of the average minimum wage worker is MUCH higher than it used to be yet the wage is lower relative to the economy, so why shouldn't we raise it?
cool_nameya i have met those people and guess what the hard working smart ones are going to succeed because i see them working their ass off at work and going to university
Bill.NyeSo unless someone goes to college you don't think they should be paid a living wage?
I'm not gonna argue your position for you, although I'm sure I could do a better job at it than you are. Nobody's gonna hand you anything in life.
Set it "correctly"? What the "correct" value for minim wage is depends again, on whom you ask. If you ask someone who owns a restaurant that just barely gets by what the proper MW is, they'd probably say $0 or close to it. I'd say their business needs to go out of business.
Bill.NyePS Mr Cool Name, you live in a place where college is much more available than here in the US, and MW is already $10.25 hour, so when you say that you know people who work jobs at the American MW I'm skeptical.
Check your bubble.
cool_nameis pointing out that there is clearly a large number of economists who refused to sign that letter a bad argument technique
cool_namei never actually said i know people working for the american minimum wage, i said i have met smart hard working people who aren't in my class, and guess what, they aren't earning the bc minimum wage either, because they are smart and hard working they are able to demand a wage higher than the minimum wage.
cool_namenow what has been stated before in this thread is that a minimum wage will deprive people of the opportunity to gather those references because it will price them out of the market and not give them a chance to improve their skills and prove they are worth a higher wage.
Bill.NyeNo, but trying to make an argument based on appealing to an authority is always a potentially very flawed argument, but I already made the logical argument for why raising the MW isn't a bad idea (profits are higher than ever, productivity is much higher, wages have stagnated, by historical standards it could easily be higher, and it could even help stimulate the economy because of a boost to AD) and you resulted to telling me that you "guarantee" that it's a bad idea, so I posted a large list of actual economists (7 of whom have nobel prizes) who think you're wrong because I was basically getting bored.
Bill.NyeOk, good for them, I've also never made the MW, but their wages are higher than mine because the minimum there is higher, which drives wages just above the minimum higher also.
Bubble.....
Bill.NyeThis is the part where I will remind you that just because something has "been stated before" doesn't make it true. I've "stated before" why those economic aliases are wrong, and backed up my theoretical framework with references to actual empirical studies!
So yeah, at this point I'm just really bored.
Read this paper
Bill.NyeThe productivity and education level of the average minimum wage worker is MUCH higher than it used to be yet the wage is lower relative to the economy, so why shouldn't we raise it?
LIL_WATObviously, because people are willing to work at those lower wages. Why should we FORCE employers to pay someone $20 when reasonable workers are willing to take $10?
Why should you or I lose out on a job, where I'm willing to take a lower wage than the more entitled applicant next to me, by having the State artificially price me out of the market?
