Support NeoGAF

[PantherLotus]

No, but if you want to compete for manufacturing jobs you might want to consider either lowering the minimum wage or find a way for those workers to increase productivity.

Hey Kittonwy, what does our minimum wage need to be to compete with the poorest day-workers on the planet? 23 cents per day?

Does that makes sense to you?

Also, do you know why their minimum wage is only 23 cents a day?

 

[Rentahamster]

Hey now, stop assuming that because you are continually, endlessly, and tiringly proven wrong again and again and again that it means you are less intelligent. Feel free to point out what my "democratic rhetoric" is, though. Feel free to point out what my "mean spirited generalizations with more than a tinge of hate" are. I love it when people try to find what isn't there.

Well, you did come off as mean-spirited when you mocked Gaborn's education level while boasting about your own.
"You don't know what post-secondary education is, first of all, which probably speaks to your education. (lol)"

"Why are we in Japan, Gaborn? Sometimes I wonder if you finished high school."

"Did you graduate high school? I'm currently working on my MBA at a top-20 school in the nation"

You also called him an "ass-hat teabagger" which is a fairly obscene pejorative, and also sounds even worse and mean-spirited, considering Gaborn's gay. To your credit, though, you did apologize.

You debate well, and with passion, but I think you should try to tone down the heat a little. It tends to hurt your position.

 

[Kittonwy]

Hey Kittonwy, what does our minimum wage need to be to compete with the poorest day-workers on the planet? 23 cents per day?

Does that makes sense to you?

You don't have to set the minimum wage at 23 cents per day when their production methods might not be as efficient as yours, but when you are facing the fact that manufacturing jobs are being outsourced, it might be a good idea to considering lowering the minimum wage to maintain competitiveness. At the end of the day you either want those jobs or you don't, you can't prohibit companies from taking advantage of cheaper labor.

What you can do is lower the manufacturing costs in your country by either lowering the minimum wage, or incentivize businesses through tax cuts or subsidies.

 

[Javaman]

Sorry if this is a repeat from the hundreds of posts skimmed through, but: I don't know about other states, but in Indiana we're supposed to pay taxes on online purchases. However, since you just have to fill in a blank on the tax form it's easy for most people to get away with claiming little or nothing. So I wouldn't view something to solidify online taxes as a new tax, but fraud prevention.

Technically it's tax fraud, but I wonder how many people skip over that. I'm sure it's over 80%

 

[gcubed]

or, like we currently do, turn a blind eye to migrant workers from Mexico.

i can't imagine the cost increase for goods and services if an Arizona law was implemented everywhere

 

[Kittonwy]

i can't imagine the cost increase for goods and services if an Arizona law was implemented everywhere

Well do you want people coming into your country illegally or do you want citizens of other countries to respect your borders?

 

[PhoncipleBone]

You don't have to set the minimum wage at 23 cents per day when their production methods might not be as efficient as yours, but when you are facing the fact that manufacturing jobs are being outsourced, it might be a good idea to considering lowering the minimum wage to maintain competitiveness. At the end of the day you either want those jobs or you don't, you can't prohibit companies from taking advantage of cheaper labor.

What you can do is lower the manufacturing costs in your country by either lowering the minimum wage, or incentivize businesses through tax cuts or subsidies.

Wait, what? Lower the minimum wage when a large percentage of the country already lives below the poverty line because of working minimum wage? Yeah.

 

[PhoncipleBone]

Well do you want people coming into your country illegally or do you want citizens of other countries to respect your borders?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100624/ap_on_en_tv/us_immigration_take_our_jobs

 

[avatar299]

Hey now, stop assuming that because you are continually, endlessly, and tiringly proven wrong again and again and again that it means you are less intelligent. Feel free to point out what my "democratic rhetoric" is, though. Feel free to point out what my "mean spirited generalizations with more than a tinge of hate" are. I love it when people try to find what isn't there.

It would be nice if you actually could prove me wrong. Instead i get this

2. No lies, I'm not an expert on how public schools are funded in every state--and I definitely don't (and didn't) support No Child Left Behind or its derivations.

a.k.a I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

Just pointing out the funny when conservatives start wishing for national taxes

a.k.a I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

As for mean spirited

I called you an ass-hat teabagger. Did you graduate high school

That just one thing. You know what you have posted. You act like a child.

 

[PantherLotus]

Well, you did come off as mean-spirited when you mocked Gaborn's education level while boasting about your own.
"You don't know what post-secondary education is, first of all, which probably speaks to your education. (lol)"

"Why are we in Japan, Gaborn? Sometimes I wonder if you finished high school."

"Did you graduate high school? I'm currently working on my MBA at a top-20 school in the nation"

You also called him an "ass-hat teabagger" which is a fairly obscene pejorative, and also sounds even worse and mean-spirited, considering Gaborn's gay. To your credit, though, you did apologize.

You debate well, and with passion, but I think you should try to tone down the heat a little. It tends to hurt your position.

You're right, I definitely should be more careful and the whole discussion of education makes ME look like an ass-hat, not the other way around.

That said, I think the implication that insulting Gaborn is "even worse and mean-spirited" because he is gay is outright insulting to all gay people. We're all sensitive, not just gay people.

I apologize for being a jerk, guys.

 

[Kittonwy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100624/ap_on_en_tv/us_immigration_take_our_jobs

So you would support a guest worker program so you can pay mexicans shitty wages to do stuff real americans don't want to do?

 

[Skiptastic]

You know it's a fucked up thread when I find myself agreeing with Panther and gcubed.

I look at it as closing a loophole, not really creating a new tax. But that's just my two cents.

This thread is already becoming a new PoliGAF dissertation on US defense spending and/or government use of tax dollars and I need to catch up on all the "fun" conversation.

 

[Kittonwy]

Wait, what? Lower the minimum wage when a large percentage of the country already lives below the poverty line because of working minimum wage? Yeah.

Like I said, do you want those manufacturing jobs or do you not?

 

[Jayge]

Whatever. All that means is I'll be buying less and spending less on however little I do end up buying. If that's what they really want, so be it :-/ and if that really will help, power to them.

 

[PantherLotus]

PantherLotus doesn't know what he's talking about.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, avatar299. I need to be more considerate and realize that not everybody has the same perspective or life experiences that I do, and to realize that I don't have the same perspective or life experience as you.

I would much prefer to talk about why you think the Department of Education should be abolished, why the US should remove itself from the UN, and why we should lower the minimum wage, though.

Let's play a game--see who descends into insults first! Defend your position of one of the above and we'll go from there.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

I'm taking a wild guess to assume you "have not training" in Macro Economics?

Gallbaro is just being himself as usual. :lol

 

[Kittonwy]

I'll be 100% against tax hikes when citizens start using their amassed savings from lowered taxes to better their respective city's infrastructure and the alternative doesn't require budget cuts to stuff like education.

Basically you're for government taxing people more unless they spend their money the way you want them to spend it, it's a free society for a reason, if someone wants to spend his or her savings on french fries, he damn well has every right to.

 

[PhoncipleBone]

Like I said, do you want those manufacturing jobs or do you not?

So your way of thinking is that to get more jobs, we pay everyone less and keep them under the poverty line just to keep the jobs over here?

I know what you are wanting is a good thing (jobs to stay in America), but the methods make no sense and would lead to more issues down the line.

 

[PantherLotus]

Like I said, do you want those manufacturing jobs or do you not?

Now that, sir, is a great question, and not as obvious as some would imply.

Those in the "yes" camp would point to military history and that the home of a great (and mobilized) manufacturing base is the home of a easily-mobilized country in the threat of conflict. And they'd be right, too.

Those in the "no" column would probably assert that we're in the middle stages of an information-based economy (nomadic -> agrarian -> industrial -> service-based -> information based -> ???) and that the manufacturing jobs will eventually return (like, decades) once the rest of the world has fulfilled the natural economic progression from industrial economy to service-based economy. Even then, those in the no column probably believe that they would like to have those manufacturing jobs, but not at the cost of lowering minimum wage across the board or giving further incentives to multi-national corporations that may already be subsidized.

I think there's probably a solution that involves immigration, but that's a HUGE can of worms. My initial untested idea might be to have a path to amnesty and/or citizenship for illegal immigrants by allowing them to work lower-than-minimum-wage manufacturing jobs in select (and monitored) industries. This would allow manufacturers to compete in highly-effecient American sites while reducing labor costs. They'd have to make some agreement to have a 2-Americans-for-1-illegal immigrant concessions, though. The point would be to keep as many jobs here AND as many manufacturers here for purposes listed in #1 and to improve employment opportunities for all. I'm sure there are a thousand reasons that would be a bad idea, though.

Just a thought. Probably unfeasible.

 

[turnbuckle]

Hey Kittonwy, what does our minimum wage need to be to compete with the poorest day-workers on the planet? 23 cents per day?

Does that makes sense to you?

Also, do you know why their minimum wage is only 23 cents a day?

23 cents a day in the US? PS3 sales will really suffer then.

 

[Kittonwy]

So your way of thinking is that to get more jobs, we pay everyone less and keep them under the poverty line just to keep the jobs over here?

I know what you are wanting is a good thing (jobs to stay in America), but the methods make no sense and would lead to more issues down the line.

What I'm saying is you don't have a choice, either you increase your productivity or you'll lose those jobs, or you find a way to make other countries like China less competitive like inject McDonald's and Starbucks into places like China, give them a taste of the American standards of living and drive up their production costs which will take years.

 

[Kittonwy]

Now that, sir, is a great question, and not as obvious as some would imply.

Those in the "yes" camp would point to military history and that the home of a great (and mobilized) manufacturing base is the home of a easily-mobilized country in the threat of conflict. And they'd be right, too.

Those in the "no" column would probably assert that we're in the middle stages of an information-based economy (nomadic -> agrarian -> industrial -> service-based -> information based -> ???) and that the manufacturing jobs will eventually return (like, decades) once the rest of the world has fulfilled the natural economic progression from industrial economy to service-based economy. Even then, those in the no column probably believe that they would like to have those manufacturing jobs, but not at the cost of lowering minimum wage across the board or giving further incentives to multi-national corporations that may already be subsidized.

I think there's probably a solution that involves immigration, but that's a HUGE can of worms. My initial untested idea might be to have a path to amnesty and/or citizenship for illegal immigrants by allowing them to work lower-than-minimum-wage manufacturing jobs in select (and monitored) industries. This would allow manufacturers to compete in highly-effecient American sites while reducing labor costs. They'd have to make some agreement to have a 2-Americans-for-1-illegal immigrant concessions, though.

Just a thought. Probably unfeasible.

Once you give them amnesty, they're entitled to minimum wage. A guest worker program is basically slave labor.

 

[Skiptastic]

Just a thought. Probably unfeasible.

How about base all manufacturing around defense? The government would foot the bill so profits wouldn't play into it, they'd have to pay minimum wage or better, and it would be going towards keeping mobilization feasible. Problem solved!

Once you give them amnesty, they're entitled to minimum wage. A guest worker program is basically slave labor.

Aren't they supposed to be earning a minimum wage regardless of their legal status?

 

[evilromero]

I think they need to fix their spending habits before they charge more taxes.

Exactly. We shouldn't even have sales tax to begin with.

 

[Rentahamster]

That said, I think the implication that insulting Gaborn is "even worse and mean-spirited" because he is gay is outright insulting to all gay people. We're all sensitive, not just gay people.

It just reflects the harsh cultural realities we have to deal with, really. Historically, insults having to do with female sexual acts upon men "cocksucker, teabagger, etc", or implicitly homosexual acts, "assfucker, teabagger, cocksucker, etc", are considered abnormal or less glamorous/deserving of respect than "normal sexual acts", i.e. acts done by a heterosexual male.

It speaks volumes to our culture and history, when labels that imply the other person is a woman or gay is considered to be an insult.

Objectively, they're all the same, but due to our cultural history, subjectively, they are not.

Don't get me wrong, I love insulting folks using these same words, and make fun of things with using choice quips that may or may not include the phrase "ass-rape". I wish we could all rip the shit out of each other and have a big laugh, as is common amongst close friends. However, this was in the context of a serious discussion, and as such, a little more tact is needed, perhaps.

...upon reading this again, I have an urge to delete this post because I really don't like the "holier-than-thou" attitude I get from my own words, but whatever.

 

[PantherLotus]

What I'm saying is you don't have a choice, either you increase your productivity or you'll lose those jobs, or you find a way to make other countries like China less competitive like inject McDonald's and Starbucks into places like China, give them a taste of the American standards of living and drive up their production costs which will take years.

I did reply to your last post, just above, but I'm not certain this is an either/or situation. It's possible that globalization, Americanization (yay jingoism!), and American state-building (see: Iraq?) could eventually lead to a middle situation: blue-collar workers around the world all demanding more.

There's a thought: world wide unions. Imagine, the UAW making an agreement with their Japanese, Chinese, and Korean counterparts! :lol

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

http://photos.webridestv.com/datast...d_Taxes_USA_Federal_Budget_64261_20080424.jpg

Jesus Christ. The F-35 is still getting billions in funding and so is the Osprey, while many education programs get little to no funding. Talk about a waste of money. :lol :lol

 

[turnbuckle]

I did reply to your last post, just above, but I'm not certain this is an either/or situation. It's possible that globalization, Americanization (yay jingoism!), and American state-building (see: Iraq?) could eventually lead to a middle situation: blue-collar workers around the world all demanding more.

There's a thought: world wide unions. Imagine, the UAW making an agreement with their Japanese, Chinese, and Korean counterparts! :lol

Yes please.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Yes please.

The decline in union memberships is one of the main reasons for a decline in wages?

Kittonwy-Would you have been in favor of a "war tax" on the rich to pay for the war in Iraq?

 

[PantherLotus]

Yes please.

Have we thought about what it would mean? Are there legal precedents for allowing such a thing? Are the countries that we compete with (manufacturing-wise) economically stable enough to handle unions? Do they already have unions?

Unions used to be a fantastic thing, actually. They were the mechanism for which the public answered the government's refusal to regulate industry. It's possible we are waiting for the same thing to happen abroad, but it's also possible the countries in which we are waiting for it to happen have put legal restrictions in place to prevent it from ever happening.

 

[scorcho]

Aren't they supposed to be earning a minimum wage regardless of their legal status?

hearty laugh.

the 'beauty' of hiring migrant workers, aside from keeping the cost of production down, is that you can do almost anything you want since these workers are unlikely to go to law enforcement. the feds are more likely to work out deals with local employers to arrest a batch of migrant workers, while they turn around to hire a new group the very next minute.

shitty working conditions and even shittier wages? it's a Kittowny's economic wet dream.

except they're taking jobs away from Canadians Americans (who don't want them).

 

[Gaborn]

Aren't they supposed to be earning a minimum wage regardless of their legal status?

If that's a law it's fucking stupid. We need to make it easier to come here legally, but we really need to crack down on anyone who employs an illegal immigrant with extremely harsh fines, then give the money to the city or state.

 

[PantherLotus]

If that's a law it's fucking stupid. We need to make it easier to come here legally, but we really need to crack down on anyone who employs an illegal immigrant with extremely harsh fines, then give the money to the city or state.

YES.

Serious question: why does this seem so obvious (punish the hiring company enough to offset the savings from hiring an illegal immigrant) but not legally possible? Why hasn't this happened yet?

I mean, what am I not seeing in this perfect idea that would prevent it from happening? Campaign donations from local construction and roofing companies? I don't get it.

 

[Gaborn]

YES.

Serious question: why does this seem so obvious (punish the hiring company enough to offset the savings from hiring an illegal immigrant) but not legally possible? Why hasn't this happened yet?

I mean, what am I not seeing in this perfect idea that would prevent it from happening? Campaign donations from local construction and roofing companies? I don't get it.

The Dems won't do it because it's unpopular with their Hispanic base. The Reps won't do it because it's unpopular with their business interests and the inroads they WANT to make with Hispanics.

 

[scorcho]

The Dems won't do it because it's unpopular with their Hispanic base. The Reps won't do it because it's unpopular with their business interests and the inroads they WANT to make with Hispanics.

targeting immigrants directly works against the 'Hispanic base'. Dems aren't likely to target employers for the same reason Reps won't - it works against their economic interests.

 

[PantherLotus]

The Dems won't do it because it's unpopular with their Hispanic base. The Reps won't do it because it's unpopular with their business interests and the inroads they WANT to make with Hispanics.

I don't believe that. It's probably true, but I don't believe it regardless.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Someone has to do the jobs that the rich don't want to do. Who's going to sweep the floors? Pick up your garbage? Stock the groceries? Run the gas station? This is why we need to make sure that these low-skilled jobs have a living wage.

Hell, look at Brave New World or even Bioshock's Rapture. You get all the scientists and doctors to do low-skilled jobs and chaos breaks out.

 

[scorcho]

btw, love how closing the internet sales tax loophole has now morphed into illegal immgration/migrant worker policy.

<3 GAF.

 

[PantherLotus]

^It's actually a pretty easy and logical progression.

Someone has to do the jobs that the rich don't want to do. Who's going to sweep the floors? Pick up your garbage? Stock the groceries? Run the gas station? This is why we need to make sure that these low-skilled jobs have a living wage.

Hell, look at Brave New World or even Bioshock's Rapture. You get all the scientists and doctors to do low-skilled jobs and chaos breaks out.

You'd better edit that before avatar299 finds out that you're using cultural examples to draw nefarious conclusions!

 

[PhoncipleBone]

btw, love how closing the internet sales tax loophole has now morphed into illegal immgration/migrant worker policy.

<3 GAF.

Soon it will be about the country descending into a fascist/marxist/communist state.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

^It's actually a pretty easy and logical progression.



You'd better edit that before avatar299 finds out that you're using cultural examples to draw nefarious conclusions!

Too late now. You fucking quoted me! ::angry::

 

[Gallbaro]

Gallbaro is just being himself as usual. :lol

Nice to know I have a forum rep.

 

[Kittonwy]

The decline in union memberships is one of the main reasons for a decline in wages?

Kittonwy-Would you have been in favor of a "war tax" on the rich to pay for the war in Iraq?

I don't get the whole "let's tax the rich for ______", it's like the rich have an obligation to pay for everything like they haven't been already, if you have to tax, tax everyone, and no I don't support a war tax, people are already taxed enough as it is.

 

[turnbuckle]

Someone has to do the jobs that the rich don't want to do. Who's going to sweep the floors?

A machine

Pick up your garbage?

A machine

Stock the groceries?

A machine

Run the gas station?

A machine

This is why we need to make sure that these low-skilled jobs have a living wage.

That's why I like the idea of worldwide unions. Other countries will have comparative advantage anytime they're willing to have more lax standards. I'm not advocating everyone make the same salary (not by a long shot) and there's no way to get every nation to agree, but if there was a real organized effort by people to not buy from companies that choose to run their operations in the most lax human/employee rights standards, and if citizens in the most prosperous countries voted in representatives that were willing to put sanctions on businesses that don't meet some agreed upon minimum standards, we'd be doing better off.

Instead, the situation has people advocating that we become more like third workers in third world countries that are forced to work under slave-like conditions.
I think it's more reasonable to expect corporations to be held to first world standards and treat all their employees, wherever they may be located, the same [not the same pay, but some level of compensation calculated as a "living wage" for the respective territory] as opposed to having all first world/third world citizens adapt to living in third world conditions.

Business has every right to want to make a profit, but it should never be universally accepted that it should do so at the expense of people being able to make a living. Without some multi-national organized effort by people and their governments though, I don't see the pattern changing.

As much as I'd love to see the future, unless there's some radical reformation in how people and businesses sustain themselves, the thought of being in the market for a job in 2110 is laughably depressing....as if 2010 wasn't bad enough. Maximizing efficiency is always measured by the individual business and in terms of [work done / amount of time invested + cost incurred]. The problem is that such isolated efficiency causes woefully inefficient results by other metrics - such as collective quality of life of citizenry / time + effort invested. An average person not making enough to live a modest life despite working 40 hours a week sounds pretty inefficient to me. Each marginal hour of work put in after that is just another hour of inefficiency. Not having enough of these already inefficient hours of labor demanded by employers just illustrates how inefficient the system is when it's not measured solely from a profit maximization standpoint.

 

[KingJ2002]

I will go for this only if this means that they can lower sales tax rates, since (theoretically) they will collect more taxes.

lol Yeah, I know.)

same sentiments exactly.

 

[Kittonwy]

I don't believe that. It's probably true, but I don't believe it regardless.

You don't have to believe it, and it is true.

 

[Kittonwy]

targeting immigrants directly works against the 'Hispanic base'. Dems aren't likely to target employers for the same reason Reps won't - it works against their economic interests.

I don't know why people keep calling them immigrants, they're illegals, someone who applied to be an american citizen through legal channels is an immigrant, not someone who crosses the border illegally.

 

[ClosingADoor]

A machine

Machines aren't anywhere near being able to do that stuff as effectively as humans can.

As for the rest of your points, yes, in the perfect world everyone would be paid fairly and everyone working a 40 hour work week should be able to pay for your living. But I'm afraid that is never going to happen.

 

[Kittonwy]

I did reply to your last post, just above, but I'm not certain this is an either/or situation. It's possible that globalization, Americanization (yay jingoism!), and American state-building (see: Iraq?) could eventually lead to a middle situation: blue-collar workers around the world all demanding more.

There's a thought: world wide unions. Imagine, the UAW making an agreement with their Japanese, Chinese, and Korean counterparts! :lol

LOL, it would be funny if it isn't a horrific idea of completely destroying productivity.

 

[Drkirby]

Stock the groceries?

A machine

I would like to see this shelf stocking machine of yours. How much does it cost? What is the expected level of maintenance per year?

Wait this was that internet tax topic? Are you sure, it doesn't look like it to me? The mods must be playing a joke, switching topic titles.