Wal-Mart's profits threatened by Canadian Union

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Therefore, it is corporation friendly, because corporations are those who will be using it for profitable purposes.

You could use it for profitable purposes too, if you wanted and you were capable of it (had enough money). It's not "corporation-friendly" at all, because the ONLY discrimination is based on how much money you pay, which is quite valid.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


While this seems logical on its face, historically it has proben to be untrue. Nearly every raise of the min wage is followed by economic expansion. Putting more money in the hands of the poorest workers raises demand for products, which in turn, raises demand for labor, despite it's increased cost. So while there may be a short term dip in employment, in the medium to long run, the working poor do much better.

You know Che, I still would favor subsidies to the working poor rather than impose a minimum wage. Being against the minimum wage doesn't mean one is against the poor. It means one is against price controls, which everyone with any sense at all knows are extremely destructive of economies.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
It means one is against price controls, which everyone with any sense at all knows are extremely destructive of economies.

That is not a universal truth. As I've pointed out, raising the min. wage historically is followed by economic growth as it increases demand for products. Utilities are frequently subject to price controls. As seen in California, occassionally when those controls are loosened, it results in economic disaster. In the case of Manhatten, price controls on rent have been a disaster.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


That is not a universal truth. As I've pointed out, raising the min. wage historically is followed by economic growth as it increases demand for products. Utilities are frequently subject to price controls. As seen in California, occassionally when those controls are loosened, it results in economic disaster. In the case of Manhatten, price controls on rent have been a disaster.

There may be some short term truth in this as those that remain employed get a raise and those that don't get unemployment.

That still does not change the fact that over the long term price controls are destructive.

[chequita guevara]

Again, history does not bear you out. That's the problem with you conservatives. You see something as true in one little spot and sudenly it becomes true everywhere for all times. Raising the min wage spurs economic growth, and despite your Republican articles of faith, that has been the way things have worked out in reality.

[Ned]

Imagine, Che, my reaction when Richard M(other F*cker) Nixon imposed wage price controls on the economy, and kept them on oil after the other controls had expired? I was appalled. My former admiration for this man as a president turned to something more akin to raw hatred.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Again, history does not bear you out. That's the problem with you conservatives. You see something as true in one little spot and sudenly it becomes true everywhere for all times. Raising the min wage spurs economic growth, and despite your Republican articles of faith, that has been the way things have worked out in reality.

Data please.

[chequita guevara]

Again, just because something is true in one case doesn't make it true in another.

[Wraith]

--"Raising the min wage spurs economic growth, and despite your Republican articles of faith, that has been the way things have worked out in reality."

Then why not just raise the minimum wage to $100/hr and make everyone rich?

Oh, that's right. There's only so much money available to hire employees. If the minimum you can get is higher, less will be employed. Wow, imagine that.

--"As seen in California, occassionally when those controls are loosened, it results in economic disaster."

Wow, MTG still hasn't pounded this line out of you?

Wraith
"Yes, to a first approximation."
-- Econominics professor Bernard Saffran, after being asked if money could buy happiness.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Wraith
--"Raising the min wage spurs economic growth, and despite your Republican articles of faith, that has been the way things have worked out in reality."

Then why not just raise the minimum wage to $100/hr and make everyone rich?

Just because a little of something is good doesn't mean a lot of something is. A little bit of a chemical is a medicine. A lot of it is a poison.

--"As seen in California, occassionally when those controls are loosened, it results in economic disaster."

Wow, MTG still hasn't pounded this line out of you?

It's more complex than that, but it is the basis of what happaned.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Ned


As of course, anything that allows more profit is evil, evil, evil... according to the left. And we are to trust these guys with the US economy?

I didn't say that. The quarrel started with DanS and Kuci saying something like that corporations in Canada must have their hands tied in the back because of our union friendly laws.

That point was only an example to demonstrate that most anything in society is designed to be corporate friendly, and that our union laws are nothing more than a grain of sand in the Sahara.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker




You could use it for profitable purposes too, if you wanted and you were capable of it (had enough money). It's not "corporation-friendly" at all, because the ONLY discrimination is based on how much money you pay, which is quite valid.

That's the whole ****ing point! It assumes that everything, up to natural resources, must be governed by money! I could be in favor of this system if the government was regulating the market so that sidecosts (such as those to health and environment) were taken into account, but alas it isn't.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Asher
Unions are nothing but a mob mentality endorsed by the government.

I don't care if people form them, I care if they force me to join and force me to pay union dues. My first real job as a union job. It's true my starting pay was higher than most of my friends' in similar jobs, but after the dues were deducted I was making less.

And where did my dues go? To the stupid ****ing left-wing propaganda they mailed MONTHLY to me even though I asked them to stop.

They'd also put out a biannual "newsletter", which was ALWAYS the same "we're going to strike unless they pay us more! In other news, dues are increasing..."

Losers

I you Asher.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
As seen in California, occassionally when those controls are loosened, it results in economic disaster. In the case of Manhatten, price controls on rent have been a disaster.

Economic disaster? I think you are refering to the ending of housing price controls in certain bay area cities. Sure, the prices shot up after the controls were lifted but that was only the market reflecting 20 years of price controls thus putting the land at it's true value instead of the artificially depressed price.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Economic disaster?

I was referring to the energy deregulation.