Proposed Tax Overhauls from "Gang of Six [Senators]"

[DougH 270]

Bravo, you can google and copy and paste.

Your example doesn't support an increase in the minimum wage.

Ford, the employer, decided that the value of their workers skills and the benefit of lower turn over was worth higher wages.

There is no similarity to a minimum wage increase that is set by the government and not the suppliers and buyers in the market.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[rehmwa 2]

This is a great example - about how competition is the best for the individual and the best for everyone else...

Ford offered better pay to attract the best workers.

However - if the government mandates higher minimum wage (for everyone), then you don't attract the best workers away from those that pay the minimums - you just get any worker, including the poor performer, but it costs more - productivity probably goes down.

I really think you need to sit down and try to figure out how stuff really works, not how you wish it would work. In reality - the best workers go out an prove that they are the best and then they get more. You pay a bad or average worker more - he's still bad or average.

Productivity results in better pay for the individual.
The converse of that is demonstrably false (more pay does NOT guarantee better performance).

in other words, the worker has to earn it - giving for nothing actually makes the situation worse.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Ford, the employer, decided that the value of their workers skills and the benefit of lower turn over was worth higher wages.

in fact, it's most likely that Ford's move resulted in several companies LOSING some of their best workers and their productivity either shot to hell, or they had to raise pay to retain the best

there is no such thing as getting something for nothing - Ford's gain had to come at the expense of someone else - until they responded in their own best interest

that's how we raise the bar - keep the economy in competitive tension

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,120]

>which is true.

So it's true but you don't get it?

>what is also true is that 'at this point in time' the benefit of productivity increases (an
>increase in real wages) are not being passed onto the worker. whereas you said
>productivity increases benefit 'everyone'. which is it to be?

Productivity increases benefit everyone ON AVERAGE. They do not benefit every individual (nothing does.)

[billvon 3,120]

>increase in minimum wage (in this example) leads to a fourfold increase in
>productivity...

. . . and three people losing their jobs. The company makes more money and the poor get poorer. However OVERALL people may well make more money, including the one remaining cashier and the owner of the company.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>may well make more money, including the one remaining cashier and the owner of the company.

those BASTARDS

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,150]

I think THIS was posted previously, but it's worth re-reading.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Your example doesn't support an increase in the minimum wage.

the ford example shows - counter-intuitively - that sometimes it is the right thing for a business to do to increase its basic wage. it worked for ford - it could work for the us...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Productivity results in better pay for the individual.

The converse of that is demonstrably false (more pay does NOT guarantee better performance).

it worked for ford though...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Productivity increases benefit everyone ON AVERAGE. They do not benefit every individual (nothing does.)

so the fact that productivity increases aren't going to the worker tells us that the market is almost certainly being manipulated...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>increase in minimum wage (in this example) leads to a fourfold increase in
>productivity...

. . . and three people losing their jobs. The company makes more money and the poor get poorer. However OVERALL people may well make more money, including the one remaining cashier and the owner of the company.

and that 'extra' money (from increasing the minimum wage) is going to circulate which is going to stimulate demand which is going to provide growth which will result in more jobs being created...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 3,120]

>so the fact that productivity increases aren't going to the worker

They are. See attached. Every percentile is increasing in adjusted dollars.

[billvon 3,120]

>and that 'extra' money (from increasing the minimum wage) is going to circulate which
>is going to stimulate demand which is going to provide growth which will result in more
>jobs being created...

Except even if you double the minimum wage AND lay off people due to automation, there is less money overall.

Case 1:

4 workers make $10.00 per hour - total $40.00 per hour in circulation

Case 2:

1 worker makes $20.00 per hour - total $20.00 per hour in circulation

[dreamdancer 0]

my figures show this...

Quote

The most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate real weekly wages declined again over the last year (2005-2006). American workers' reactions to this downtrend in real wages have profoundly shaped the nation's economy and society for the last thirty years.

Stagnant or falling real wages undermine workers' basic expectations of rising levels of consumption. Those expectations had become key parts of what it meant to be "an American." Rising consumption has long functioned as the evidence of success in achieving the American dream. When, after the mid-1970s, real wages no longer allowed for rising consumption, wage-earners turned, with growing urgency, toward other ways and means to maintain rising consumption . This delayed the inevitable, a falling standard of living, but at great economic and social cost.

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2006/wolff120606.html

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

and this...

Quote

The median hourly wage for American workers has declined by 2 percent since 2003, after factoring in inflation, while productivity has risen steadily over the same period, The New York Times reported on Monday.

With the economy beginning to slow down, the current expansion could become the first sustained period of economic growth since World War II that has failed to offer a prolonged increase in real wages for most workers, the report said.

As real wages fail to match the rise in productivity, wages and salaries now make up the lowest share of the nation's gross domestic product since the government began recording the data in 1947.

But corporate profits have climbed to their highest share since the 1960's, according to the report. UBS, the investment bank, recently described the current period as "the golden era of profitability."

Until last year, said the report, stagnating wages were somewhat offset by the rising value of benefits, especially health insurance, which caused overall compensation for most Americans to continue increasing.

Since last summer, however, the value of workers' benefits has also failed to keep pace with inflation, government data showed.

Productivity, the amount of output produced for each hour of work, is the key factor in boosting living standards because it allows companies to pay their workers more based on their increased efficiency without having to resort to raising the price of their products, which would increase inflation.

However, the downside of that increased efficiency is that companies, by getting more output from their existing work force, are able to avoid hiring new workers.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200608/29/eng20060829_297665.html

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 3,120]

From what you just posted:

"Productivity, the amount of output produced for each hour of work, is the key factor in boosting living standards because it allows companies to pay their workers more based on their increased efficiency without having to resort to raising the price of their products, which would increase inflation. However, the downside of that increased efficiency is that companies, by getting more output from their existing work force, are able to avoid hiring new workers."

And yet you just called that an upside. Odd.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>and that 'extra' money (from increasing the minimum wage) is going to circulate which
>is going to stimulate demand which is going to provide growth which will result in more
>jobs being created...

Except even if you double the minimum wage AND lay off people due to automation, there is less money overall.

Case 1:

4 workers make $10.00 per hour - total $40.00 per hour in circulation

Case 2:

1 worker makes $20.00 per hour - total $20.00 per hour in circulation

you've forgotten the extra $20 the company is making

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

From what you just posted:

"Productivity, the amount of output produced for each hour of work, is the key factor in boosting living standards because it allows companies to pay their workers more based on their increased efficiency without having to resort to raising the price of their products, which would increase inflation. However, the downside of that increased efficiency is that companies, by getting more output from their existing work force, are able to avoid hiring new workers."

And yet you just called that an upside. Odd.

it's an upside if the economy grows to hire those workers...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 3,120]

>you've forgotten the extra $20 the company is making

You are correct! And that is a good thing overall. Cutting minimum wage would allow the company to make even more.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>you've forgotten the extra $20 the company is making

You are correct! And that is a good thing overall. Cutting minimum wage would allow the company to make even more.

and productivity would decrease while at the same time throwing more costs onto the state...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 3,120]

>and productivity would decrease

Productivity (measured in products per dollar) would of course increase as labor prices go down. That's why factories locate in areas where they can pay lower wages to attract the same level of employee.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>and productivity would decrease

Productivity (measured in products per dollar) would of course increase as labor prices go down. That's why factories locate in areas where they can pay lower wages to attract the same level of employee.

so in some circumstances increasing basic wages can result in greater productivity (ford and the checkout clerk example) and in some circumstances decreasing wages can result in greater productivity. it's all in the (economic) timing

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 3,120]

>so in some circumstances increasing basic wages can result in greater
>productivity (ford and the checkout clerk example) and in some circumstances
>decreasing wages can result in greater productivity. it's all in the (economic) timing

Exactly! When companies can increase and decrease wages to best maximize their performance in a given economy, productivity goes up and everyone benefits.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>so in some circumstances increasing basic wages can result in greater
>productivity (ford and the checkout clerk example) and in some circumstances
>decreasing wages can result in greater productivity. it's all in the (economic) timing

Exactly! When companies can increase and decrease wages to best maximize their performance in a given economy, productivity goes up and everyone benefits.

glad you agree with me that increasing wages can result in greater productivity.

contrary to your model - at the moment productivity goes up and the workers don't benefit. which to me points to the fact that the market is seriously distorted...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[DougH 270]

This would be funny, if you were jerking our chains and joking with us. The humor fades when I realize you are face deep in the koolaid bobbing for your little socialism turd apples.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P