Why we need a mandatory living wage:

[bladevalant546]

Indeed, but what I am referring is the near religious unquestioning/blind following of politics nowadays. We like to make fun of North Korea, when we employ the same cult like following to politicians here in the US. Irony at its finest. One can almost call capitalism a new religion.

[Isun]

Some of the responses here are so misguided. The only reason why prices rise is not the soak up the cost of labor. But because they believe since everyone is making more they can charge more. Our economy is not run on supply and demand but on "what the market will allow" and since crowd psychology, and social propaganda. They can control the demand and easily keep people so dumb in some regards they will support anything as a belief.

Supply side economics has failed, as it should have never been even allowed. Capitalism is not being out done by taxes, but by technology. More and more, jobs are being replaced. Our current paradigm needs to change, we cannot believe that capitalism is this eternal system that has all the answers. There is barely a middle class, because I do not count people with credit being middle class. We have almost eliminated racism and sexism as prominent forces, why are we so attached to classism that money creates? Utopias are impossible, however a better society is not.

The problem with your statement is that people are allowed to sell at exorbitant price is because supply and demand allows them to do so. If you have a premium product or name, people are more than willing to buy at the inflated price (demand) dictated by supply. If you have more product than you can sell, a competitor to gain market share and to lower their inventory will sell for lower price forcing prices down.

The republicans had this fantasy that if you increase supply that it would lower prices. But businesses are far smarter than republicans and their politicians. They refuse to increase supply because it would lower their profit. It's why republican policy tends to hurt the economy and not improve it. If we taxed corporations and the wealthy as they should be taxed, then we would have more money to improve infrastructure and invest in "all" the people instead of the very few wealthy individuals. Thereby increasing demand and jobs.

The business i am in is a fairly mature market and there is almost no new manufacturing plants being created. It would lower cost over all sales and consequently it is cheaper to expand by purchasing competitors and maintaining prices than increasing supply and lowering prices.

[The Grand Nudger]

The problem with your statement is that people are allowed to sell at exorbitant price is because supply and demand allows them to do so.

Not supply, just demand. There is no shortage of sneakers in the world. Nor has Nike exhausted it;s productive capacity. They -could- produce even more sneakers (and they -do produce more sneakers than are actually bought, btw).

If you have a premium product or name, people are more than willing to buy at the inflated price (demand) dictated by supply.

Supply doesn;t dictate that - unless the company is actively controlling supply......which might carry legal ramifications. Price fixing.

If you have more product than you can sell, a competitor to gain market share and to lower their inventory will sell for lower price forcing prices down.

Hence payless, who pays-no-more to get their sneakers than does nike, they don't pay-less either. They get the in the same way, often from the same people. The only person for whom the price fluctuates here is the consumer.

The republicans had this fantasy that if you increase supply that it would lower prices.

Sure, because having more of something in relation to something else means that each individual unit has less value relative to that "something else". As you've noticed though, business doesn;t give a shit about that (and largely, can;t). It's in their interest to both increase the supply -and the price...as well as the number of transactions made. If they can achieve all three, they're golden. So, lets say you pay a laborer 3 bucks (so you can mass produce) and then slap a sticker of 70$ on the product (more for the next version..if people will pay more) so you can make money...and then go angling for tax breaks to ameliorate any shortfall or overproduction......effectively asking the government to buy your product without actually giving them the product they paid for.

"Why do you need these tax breaks?"
-"Well, you see, business wasn;t as good as we hoped. We made a bunch of shoes and they didn't sell at the price we were hoping for so we just wanted to know if you'd help us with that. You know this third world shithole over here -is- willing to help us with that....just so you understand the point at which our negotiations will begin. They promised to fill our factory floor with human labor daily at the effective cost of 1$ a pair in labor - no inconvenient strings like rights or human decency attached."

They're doing well.

[bladevalant546]

Some of the responses here are so misguided. The only reason why prices rise is not the soak up the cost of labor. But because they believe since everyone is making more they can charge more. Our economy is not run on supply and demand but on "what the market will allow" and since crowd psychology, and social propaganda. They can control the demand and easily keep people so dumb in some regards they will support anything as a belief.

Supply side economics has failed, as it should have never been even allowed. Capitalism is not being out done by taxes, but by technology. More and more, jobs are being replaced. Our current paradigm needs to change, we cannot believe that capitalism is this eternal system that has all the answers. There is barely a middle class, because I do not count people with credit being middle class. We have almost eliminated racism and sexism as prominent forces, why are we so attached to classism that money creates? Utopias are impossible, however a better society is not.

The problem with your statement is that people are allowed to sell at exorbitant price is because supply and demand allows them to do so. If you have a premium product or name, people are more than willing to buy at the inflated price (demand) dictated by supply. If you have more product than you can sell, a competitor to gain market share and to lower their inventory will sell for lower price forcing prices down.

The republicans had this fantasy that if you increase supply that it would lower prices. But businesses are far smarter than republicans and their politicians. They refuse to increase supply because it would lower their profit. It's why republican policy tends to hurt the economy and not improve it. If we taxed corporations and the wealthy as they should be taxed, then we would have more money to improve infrastructure and invest in "all" the people instead of the very few wealthy individuals. Thereby increasing demand and jobs.

The business i am in is a fairly mature market and there is almost no new manufacturing plants being created. It would lower cost over all sales and consequently it is cheaper to expand by purchasing competitors and maintaining prices than increasing supply and lowering prices.

I actually do not disagree with that statement. Actually we are both right. The issue here is taking into account of the psychological manipulation involved in getting people to buy things. It can be construed that the demand is not real demand but a socially manufacture demand. It is not a binary thing that is happening. With the advent of modern psychology, these tactics have grown rather effective.

[Isun]

Thats actually quite true. The theory of supply and demand is a simplex module of the economy. You then have to add the psychology of economics and perception which often seems to drive economists batty

[Dystopia]

Another problem with raising minimum wage that I believe no one has mentioned yet is that it can cause people to be fired - You can force employers to pay a minimum, you can't force them to not fire someone - If they reach the conclusion that the new minimum salary is too much, they'll fire people - That's how it works

Slipped through the cracks, but I just have to say "and"? Perhaps we don't need 50 minimum wage burger flippers per square mile eh? Let em fire folks, that's just their business autocorrecting towards it's new market. Maybe that'll free up some labor for more productivity elsewhere, eh? If the margins on their model are to slim to allow a human being to live a life removed from poverty - I'd say it's a shitty business model. If they can't afford to hire enough people to even stay afloat, oh well, the service/product is clearly too expensive. We're subsidizing those hamburgers with our wage laws. Of course cutting them off of the bottle would be rough - hell, they seem to have forgotten how to even engage in business without a system in-pocket.

But, all of this hinges on my thinking that the market should work for us, not the other way round. If the market delivers me goods that can only be produced by breaking the backs of the less fortunate, It needs to be fixed, and I damn sure don't want to find myself on the shittyend of that market. I'm not going to be content with a system that does this just because I happen to be on the right side of the velvet rope (for now).

Maybe that wouldn't be a problem in the US - But in some European countries that possess a high (20% or more) unemployment rate it is unwise to allow more people to be fired - You nailed it by saying the market should work for our benefit and not the other way around

[CapnAwesome]

Indeed, but what I am referring is the near religious unquestioning/blind following of politics nowadays. We like to make fun of North Korea, when we employ the same cult like following to politicians here in the US. Irony at its finest. One can almost call capitalism a new religion.

In North Korea you can be sent to a concentration camp for not keeping your mandatory picture of the Kims clear of dust. So no, we don't have the same cult like following here.