![]() |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Uncle_Bob
(Post 11328560)
.... The amount of times i've given my job title when asked in a social situation and gotten awkward remarks : flashy, geeky, what's that then? Oh your alright jack then etc etc etc.
I often find it easier to dumb down my job title to something simpler, more acceptable and that doesn't result in a bunch of follow up questions. The funny thing, from my perspective, is that while making observations, comments, or asking questions about personal traits or characteristics is generally socially unacceptable, I find it curious that people will ask about accents and more especially about someone's height, but only if they're tall. You wouldn't comment on someone being fat, thin, or short, so why do people think it OK to make comments to someone who is tall? Personally I don't give a stuff if someone asks, but I just find it odd that they do (ask), when nobody but a socially inept nitwit would say "My, aren't you short. How short are you?", or "Good heavens, aren't you fat?". :unsure: |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11328395)
I guess the Thatcher era in the UK.
There has been a race to the bottom that has been taking place for the past 50+ years. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328608)
It started ending long before the Thatcher era. In the 1960-1970s, the Japanese started manufacturing products at a very low cost since the Yen/US$ exchange rate was a very high 280:1 which was undervalued by about 50%-60%. Then in the 1980s, the Koreans, Indonesians, and Malaysians started to displace the Japanese as the Yen rose and those currencies were undervalued. Then the Chinese displaced the others with an undervalued currency. Now the cheap place with undervalued currencies to make products is Vietnam and Bangladesh.
There has been a race to the bottom that has been taking place for the past 50+ years. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11328611)
But the attitude?
However I will admit that people seem to have less tolerance now than in the 1960s when they see a high paid blue collar worker not accomplishing his/her job. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328640)
I don't think attitudes have changed significantly other than the well paying blue collar jobs have been lost and therefore some people assume that there must be decent paying blue collar jobs since there always was when they were younger. Therefore they may assume that people aren't trying hard enough.
There has been a cascade of changes over the years, technology in the 60's, move to the service sector in the 70's, then IT bubble and now what? You could envisage a rational balance, but seems most unlikely. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 11328651)
Certainly the level of expectations rose, and it is much harder to raise them that drop them.
There has been a cascade of changes over the years, technology in the 60's, move to the service sector in the 70's, then IT bubble and now what? You could envisage a rational balance, but seems most unlikely. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 11328651)
Certainly the level of expectations rose, and it is much harder to raise them that drop them.
I think many people have assumed that each following generation will be better off than the previous generation and that dream appears to be dying in most developed countries. Therefore parents may push harder or even make discouraging remarks. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328640)
I don't think attitudes have changed significantly other than the well paying blue collar jobs have been lost and therefore some people assume that there must be decent paying blue collar jobs since there always was when they were younger. Therefore they may assume that people aren't trying hard enough.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Pulaski
(Post 11328670)
Well for most of the low paid workforce, turning off the tap supplying virtually unlimited low-cost/low-skill labour would help, allowing the price of labour to reflect it's scarcity. But neither political party, nor the Fed seems willing to allow that to happen. Instead of restricting supply and allowing market forces to take care of the resulting "labour shortage", many politicians want to try to force the market price of labour up despite the fact that the supply- demand imbalance will only get worse, and exacerbate unemployment in the process.
If that was implemented in developed countries, I suspect there would also be a lot of $2 per day workers as businessmen cuts costs by finding the cheapest labor available. It would be the race to the bottom for many since someone will always do something cheaper than someone else if they are starving. Then shanty towns are created as that is all anyone can afford. All you have to do is look at Tijuana to see how well that system works. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328689)
But that type of government is primarily 3rd world where there are a few wealthy and 90+% are working for less than $2 per day. If you also look at the tax rate as a percentage of many 3rd world countries, it is very low since the only people that have money are the wealthy few and they have the power and don't want to spend money on education, health, and infrastructure for the masses.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Not sure about that, but I guess the biggest issue is that the current older generation are living off non replaceable accumulated wealth/borrowings which will diminish significantly over time.
So many Government programmes for example rely on the current tax payer coughing up for past liabilities and that only works if the wealth curve is going up. The NHS is a classic example, but all Western Countries have this issue of unfunded liabilities. Some far worse than the UK. Quite what happens when it all starts crashing is another issue. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by civilservant
(Post 11328400)
I agree with this - a society is built on the menial jobs. No one to stack selves, or hand you your McDonalds, or wait on your table etc.
I get this where I work - all the other departments, CNAs, Nurse and Doctors, all look down on my housekeepers and maintenance staff as not doing anything of value. As a result, they treat my staff like crap. Well if your floors were covered in blood, or poop, or you were hip deep in trash, you'd have trouble operating on patients wouldn't you? |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Pulaski
(Post 11328697)
I think you entirely missed my oblique reference to illegal immigration. I was sure that you'd have a comeback and criticism of my admittedly simplified analysis, but you appear to have got entirely the wrong end of the stick. :unsure:
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Jsmth321
(Post 11328708)
Or those who look down on trash collectors picking up their weekly trash. Funny thing is many who look down on these kinds of jobs make the same or less then those they are looking down on, but they have a fancy sounding title so they think they are better.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328689)
If that was implemented in developed countries, I suspect there would also be a lot of $2 per day workers as businessmen cuts costs by finding the cheapest labor available. It would be the race to the bottom for many since someone will always do something cheaper than someone else if they are starving. Then shanty towns are created as that is all anyone can afford. All you have to do is look at Tijuana to see how well that system works.
My first job I was dealing with a company that made clothes for M&S, at that time I think all the clothing was made in the UK, now none of it is. I worked in the Insurance sector, that was one of the growth areas, but even before I left many of the back office functions that had been moved out of London were moved overseas. They had Gladiator on the TV last night, you can only appease the mob for so long, you run out of bread. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328709)
Apologies, I misread your post. But if supply and demand is the primary criteria for the cost of labor, then that also applies to low wage workers.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 11328722)
Exactly, you can not outsource all jobs, which is why many support Immigration Reform.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 11328703)
Not sure about that, but I guess the biggest issue is that the current older generation are living off non replaceable accumulated wealth/borrowings which will diminish significantly over time.
So many Government programmes for example rely on the current tax payer coughing up for past liabilities and that only works if the wealth curve is going up. The NHS is a classic example, but all Western Countries have this issue of unfunded liabilities. Some far worse than the UK. Quite what happens when it all starts crashing is another issue. Economists assumed that developed countries would grow at a specific real gdp rate and the projected growth rate was pretty accurate and what they expected was that the benefit from the gdp growth would be more evenly distributed which didn't occur. If the benefits from gdp growth had been more evenly distributed, the problems you described would be significantly reduced. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Pulaski
(Post 11328732)
It's funny how those who claim to have the interests of the low paid at heart are often those who who are least willing to help cut the supply of cheap labour, which would push up the pay rates up for those on the lowest pay, and also help the unemployed. :rolleyes:
The democratic party wants to put in those strict sanctions in the current porposed bill. Illegal immigrants from poor countries will never stop crossing the border in masses without those strict sanctions in place. Also with an F2 visa, the worker can file grievances instead of just accepting the abuse that many employers hand out since they know they won't be reported. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328735)
Although economists didn't expect for the vast increase in life expectancy, a second problem also occurred that they didn't expect which made the problem far worst.
Economists assumed that developed countries would grow at a specific real gdp rate and the projected growth rate was pretty accurate and what they expected was that the benefit from the gdp growth would be more evenly distributed which didn't occur. If the benefits from gdp growth had been more evenly distributed, the problems you described would be significantly reduced. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Pulaski
(Post 11328765)
I don't think that economists foresaw the massive inflows of cheap labour, both legal and otherwise, that have flooded into North America, the UK, and Western Europe, either. The effect of that flood of cheap labour on holding down pay rates was almost entirely felt by the lowest paid and unskilled workers.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328735)
Although economists didn't expect for the vast increase in life expectancy, a second problem also occurred that they didn't expect which made the problem far worst.
Economists assumed that developed countries would grow at a specific real gdp rate and the projected growth rate was pretty accurate and what they expected was that the benefit from the gdp growth would be more evenly distributed which didn't occur. If the benefits from gdp growth had been more evenly distributed, the problems you described would be significantly reduced. I do not recollect any discussions of distribution but a Historian might mention that this had not previously occurred so why now? |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328774)
I'll agree since construction used to be a good paying job in the 1960s and 1970s and people could actually make a living as a farm hand.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11328783)
The corollary is that a strictly-enforced minimum wage would drastically cut down on illegal immigration.
Strictly enforced work places would but that is fanciful to say the least. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11328783)
The corollary is that a strictly-enforced minimum wage would drastically cut down on illegal immigration.
Also prosecuting employers and managers for hiring illegal immigrants would largely eliminate the demand for labour from illegal immigrants. You wouldn't have to lock up many managers, owners, and directors before the word would get around. What's actually needed is all of the above. |
Re: Minimum wage
And the chance of that happening?
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 11328823)
And the chance of that happening?
|
Re: Minimum wage
That high?
It is interesting to see how much effort is wasted on totally unrealistic proposals. |
Re: Minimum wage
E-verify
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Uncle_Bob
(Post 11328874)
E-verify
8/10 for the implementation. ½/10 for the operation. :thumbdown: |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Pulaski
(Post 11328821)
Also prosecuting employers and managers for hiring illegal immigrants would largely eliminate the demand for labour from illegal immigrants.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328891)
If the 1980s immigration reform bill that originally came out of committee was passed, we wouldn't have this problem now. I'll give you 5:1 odds that if a new immigration reform bill is passed, the same lobbies that watered down employer sanctions will get the republicans to water down the new immigration reform bill. After all, the republican party's primary concern is to make sure businesses are successful and profitable so that their success will "trickle down" to the masses.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Uncle_Bob
(Post 11328874)
E-verify
It is profitable for some businesses to hire undocumented workers since they don't have to follow labor laws (undocumented workers aren't going to file a complaint) and the chance of getting caught and fined is very small |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328891)
If the 1980s immigration reform bill that originally came out of committee was passed, we wouldn't have this problem now. I'll give you 5:1 odds that if a new immigration reform bill is passed, the same lobbies that watered down employer sanctions will get the republicans to water down the new immigration reform bill. After all, the republican party's primary concern is to make sure businesses are successful and profitable so that their success will "trickle down" to the masses.
I would put it somewhat akin to me playing for the US in the next World Cup. |
Re: Minimum wage
I am related to a retired politician of whom is a democrat, and neither party really wants reform, they talk but don't want lose Hispanic votes by appearing to be too tough on immigration and that really is the issue, politicians don't want to piss off a large % of voters, a good amount of whom don't vote for a certain party, but said party will need in the future to win certain states.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Jsmth321
(Post 11328944)
I am related to a retired politician of whom is a democrat, and neither party really wants reform, they talk but don't want lose Hispanic votes by appearing to be too tough on immigration and that really is the issue, politicians don't want to piss off a large % of voters, a good amount of whom don't vote for a certain party, but said party will need in the future to win certain states.
Currently there isn't any cap on H-2A visas but only about 55,000 are issued annually since most farm employers find it cheaper and easier to hire undocumented workers.:ohmy: So currently about 12 million illegal aliens but only 55,000 H-2A visas.:nod: Therefore if conservatives really wanted to solve the border problem and undocumented workers, there has to be teeth in any bill with strict employer sanctions. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 11328939)
Those odds are not very generous.
I would put it somewhat akin to me playing for the US in the next World Cup. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328952)
I disagree. In the 1950s and 1960s, the US issued a large number of F2A visas primarily to Mexicans. Most of the Mexicans came seasonally and returned home and were very happy with that arrangement. When undocumented Mexican workers were asked, most prefer that system since many would rather live in Mexico which they consider their home.
Currently there isn't any cap on H-2A visas but only about 55,000 are issued annually since most farm employers find it cheaper and easier to hire undocumented workers.:ohmy: So currently about 12 million illegal aliens but only 55,000 H-2A visas.:nod: Therefore if conservatives really wanted to solve the border problem and undocumented workers, there has to be teeth in any bill with strict employer sanctions. The issue though is not pissing off the illegal Mexicans, but pissing off the legal Mexicans who can vote. Just mentioning immigration reform and screams of racism come out. At the end of the day its the legal ones who can vote that matter. |
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Jsmth321
(Post 11328974)
The issue though is not pissing off the illegal Mexicans, but pissing off the legal Mexicans who can vote. Just mentioning immigration reform and screams of racism come out.
At the end of the day its the legal ones who can vote that matter.
|
Re: Minimum wage
Originally Posted by Michael
(Post 11328952)
I disagree. In the 1950s and 1960s, the US issued a large number of F2A visas primarily to Mexicans. Most of the Mexicans came seasonally and returned home and were very happy with that arrangement. When undocumented Mexican workers were asked, most prefer that system since many would rather live in Mexico which they consider their home.
Currently there isn't any cap on H-2A visas but only about 55,000 are issued annually since most farm employers find it cheaper and easier to hire undocumented workers.:ohmy: So currently about 12 million illegal aliens but only 55,000 H-2A visas.:nod: Therefore if conservatives really wanted to solve the border problem and undocumented workers, there has to be teeth in any bill with strict employer sanctions. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 4:04 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.