Food for thought: The US Congress

[Gawain 0]

Quote

pssst....there's an unemployment rate because....drum roll.....people seeking jobs are unemployed. That means all available positions, including those paying minimum wage, are filled. Ipso facto...someone has to take those jobs. Or we could just fill them with illegal immigrants I guess.

*Buzzer sound* Please try again.

Not every job is "filled" as you say. Many of the "unemployed" in the count fall into students (HS and College who quit after a summer is over, etc) and people not willing to accept the minimum wage jobs that are available.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Unless we go to a completely communistic society where everyone is totally equal, there will always be poor people.

Yes, but that does not imply there will always be poor people unable to meet their basic needs. If you want capitalism to work in the long term, the less successful must be looked after, lest they be cut out of the economy. When that happens the line between the successful and the unsuccessful moves farther above the median of the population, until eventually, you end up with a small super rich elite being successful, and everyone below them losing ground or falling behind, with a substantial percentage of the country living in abject poverty.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

Quote

pssst....there's an unemployment rate because....drum roll.....people seeking jobs are unemployed. That means all available positions, including those paying minimum wage, are filled. Ipso facto...someone has to take those jobs. Or we could just fill them with illegal immigrants I guess.

*Buzzer sound* Please try again.

Not every job is "filled" as you say. Many of the "unemployed" in the count fall into students (HS and College who quit after a summer is over, etc) and people not willing to accept the minimum wage jobs that are available.

Nope. Unemployed are only counted as those who are ACTIVELY seeking a job (ie. they are going to interviews, answering ads, not just reading the paper).

BLS puts people into three categories for unemployment stats:

Employed
# On vacation;
# Ill;
# Experiencing child-care problems;
# Taking care of some other family or personal obligation;
# On maternity or paternity leave;
# Involved in an industrial dispute; or
# Prevented from working by bad weather.

Unemployed
* Contacting:
An employer directly or having a job interview;
A public or private employment agency;
Friends or relatives;
A school or university employment center;
* Sending out resumes or filling out applications;
* Placing or answering advertisements;
* Checking union or professional registers; or
* Some other means of active job search.



Neither (students, housewifes, etc)


However, just because there is an unemployment rate does not mean ALL jobs are filled as ReBirth is trying to say. That would be absurd. There is always a job SOMEWHERE. It just means that those who are seeking jobs are not getting the one's they desire since to be considered unemployed you have to actually APPLY to a job or answer an ad.

For instance, Joe HS Diploma goes to an interview for the managment position at a local restaurant with no experience. He still counts as part of the unemployment stat even though his qualification is quite lacking for the position.

see the BLS website if you want:

Unemployment Measurement

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

The "it's not our job to take care of people; it's their job to take care of themselves" attitude led us right into the Great Depression.

Why should some 18-year-old right out of high school be guaranteed a job for $30,000 per year flipping hamburgers? What about the more skilled people with further education who were formerly making $30k per year prior to the implementation of a $30k minimum wage? Will you raise their salary to reward them for their extra skills and education? What about a guy with a wife and baby? Doesn't he deserve more money than a single guy?

What you are advocating would lead us to socialism - complete government control of all wages, and therefore of industry. It would be end of freedom and prosperity in America.

Quote

It would be great if everyone could be successful, but that's not how capitalism works. In a capitalist society, in order for someone to get ahead, someone else has to fall behind.

Bzzzt. Wrong! Just because someone makes more money, does not mean that another person is making less. The amount of wages in the job market is not a finite sum.

Besides, if what you say were true, then by your own definition, raising the minimum wage would have to come at the expense of taking money away from others. So, who do want to take it from? Should the rich have their bank accounts seized so that the money can be doled out to the minimum wage workers? Should there be a maximum amount that anyone should be allowed to earn?

Capitalism allows every individual to succeed to the degree that they work hard to try. Just because someone starts out working at McDonald's, doesn't mean they'll be there all their life. People move up and make more money as they acquire education, skills and experience. That's the way it should be. I started out at EJ's Burger World for $1.75 per hour, and in my best year since I've earned $120,000.

It should not be the goal of government to equalize wages, or to determine who should make how much for doing what job. That leads to the destruction of free enterprise and prosperity.

If what you advocate was so great, how come Russia isn't the greatest industrial giant in the world, with the highest standard of living?

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

Capitalism allows every individual to succeed to the degree that they work hard to try.

Along with their parents' influence (early education and nutrition, access to college), where they grew up (access to role models, education), physical health (it can limit you from working hard), innate intelligence (it can also limit you), family conditions (maybe you support your parents or a disabled sibling) and mental health (duh).

I'm sure there are more, but there are a whole lot of limiting factors on "success" besides these. But it's not as easy as saying "you can be as much of a success as you want." Some people can't. Some people have to work harder than others to get there.

That doesn't make it wrong for that to be the case. But it is wrong to deny it or gloss over it.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Why should some 18-year-old right out of high school be guaranteed a job for $30,000 per year flipping hamburgers? What about the more skilled people with further education who were formerly making $30k per year prior to the implementation of a $30k minimum wage? Will you raise their salary to reward them for their extra skills and education? What about a guy with a wife and baby? Doesn't he deserve more money than a single guy?

What you are advocating would lead us to socialism - complete government control of all wages, and therefore of industry. It would be end of freedom and prosperity in America.

Please read my posts before you reply to them. I never mentioned raising the minimum wage. I said if you take care of those who are unable to take care of themselves, it will eventually cause severe detrimental effects on the economy again.

You are the only one who mentioned guaranteeing $30K for flipping burgers. Why sensationalize? If you are going to counter my points, I would appreciate it if you make sure I said what you think I said.

Quote

Bzzzt. Wrong! Just because someone makes more money, does not mean that another person is making less.

Read Adam Smith, and then tell us where the profits come from in a capitalist society. Mind you, I'm not dogging capitalism, but history has already shown us that without some government intervention, it will lead to a devastating collapse of the economy.
No economic system is perfect, except on paper. If we don't mitigate the ill effects of capitalism, fewer and fewer will reap the benefits of such a system.

Quote

It should not be the goal of government to equalize wages, or to determine who should make how much for doing what job.

Who said anything about equalizing wages? Or determining who should make how much?

Quote

If what you advocate was so great, how come Russia isn't the greatest industrial giant in the world, with the highest standard of living?

Again, John, I haven't advocated anything, except not ignoring the poorest of our society.