A
antunesaa
Guest
This is just an example. And I’m not arguing for the elimination of any sort of regulations related to work security, worker’s health, and infant work. These are very different things that must be regulated.
- Status
R
Rubee
Guest
I’m sorry but that does NOT seem “win-win” at all. It seems like the plantation owner gets EVERYTHING, and the two workers (White and Black) nothing.
I hope it’s meant to be facetious?
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
So we can guarantee the guy picking cotton a job for life. And he’ll need to be kept fit and healthy so the owner can get a good return. And kids working? Of course not. He can only have his father’s job when he’s old enough.
F
Freddy
Guest
It most definitely was. But it’s telling in a thread like this that it’s difficult to tell.Freddy:
I hope it’s meant to be facetious?
Last edited:
A
antunesaa
Guest
There are other things to do than harvesting cotton. That’s the whole point of liberty. The owner can pay two dollars but he will have zero harvesters. He would have to compete with restaurants, universities, the military, corn farms, municipalities, entrepreneurship, etc. Can’t you see that freedom destroys the power that you ascribe to the owner of the plantation? The black guy can get a job wherever he wants; in cloudier days only the white guy could!
A
antunesaa
Guest
See my other post on why the plantation argument makes no sense under freedom.
J
John_Martin
Guest
When the good Samaritan saw the stripped and beaten man on the side of the road he did not say, “Look at that poor Jew (race) dying; I will be a good Samaritan (race) and create racial tolerance.”
No, Jesus told how this Samaritan conquered and transcended race. He loved the Jew as himself; he said to himself as he looked at the bloody and battered man, “Look, that is myself there bleeding and broken; I must help myself, protect myself, pay for myself’s care needs.”
When I see a black man (or woman, or white man, or woman), you are myself. I will look out for you, as Jonathon for David, as the good Samaritan for the Jew - you are myself. That is what Catholics do in the midst of America or wherever they sojourn.
No, Jesus told how this Samaritan conquered and transcended race. He loved the Jew as himself; he said to himself as he looked at the bloody and battered man, “Look, that is myself there bleeding and broken; I must help myself, protect myself, pay for myself’s care needs.”
When I see a black man (or woman, or white man, or woman), you are myself. I will look out for you, as Jonathon for David, as the good Samaritan for the Jew - you are myself. That is what Catholics do in the midst of America or wherever they sojourn.
R
Rubee
Guest
Well . . . It’s what we are supposed to do, anyway.
A
antunesaa
Guest
Paralel to minimum wage law elimination you also have to eliminate oligopolies to force competition upon incumbents. Under competition the power of companies to explore workers is severely diminished. Moreover, nothing of what I’m saying is incompatible with robust unions solely interested in increasing the workers’ share of the surplus stemming from the match between firm and worker. The problem is that unions tend to be a part of the political system and only promote the interests of insiders.
J
John_Martin
Guest
Try it; it is quite surprising how real infused Virtues are; look at anyone and say or contemplate, “That is myself.” Start with your husband, your wife, your child, your co-worker, then people different - call them yourself also. You will start doing good for “yourself”, start being concerned for “yourself”.
A
antunesaa
Guest
Homogeneous in the sense of there being a rough consensus among the population that (a) you can have employment insurance if you need it and that (b) it is immoral not to try to get a job. In these countries you get chastised for not looking for a job. In any case there are time limits for receiving unemployment insurance. As for minimum wage, it’s low relative to the median so it doesn’t matter actually.
R
Rubee
Guest
I don’t understand. Do you mean break up the Amazons of the world? Also, I think you missed this from earlier: I really want to understand the homogeneity argument @antunesaa.
antunesaa:
I’ve heard this a lot from people who listen to um. . . lets just say sources I’d rather not recommend. What do you mean homogenous? In what way? And how does this homogeneity factor into supporting a country’s poor? Give me the logic.
Last edited:
R
Rubee
Guest
Sorry, I hadn’t seen this. Are you saying that in the U.S. people are not interested in “looking for a job” just . . . because? What does this mean?
Last edited:
E
Elizabeth3
Guest
So there is no benefit to be gained in combating racism by having strong families, a strong community, and more economic opportunities? Those things don’t mitigate the effects of racism by those who are victims of it?
No doubt that racism is an action of the racist and it’s up to them to change their behavior but is it the only way to combat it? Can we not talk about any other ways to fight it? Is there no effective and constructive way to react to the action of the racist? Is it possible to completely eliminate racism given fallen human nature which is not to say we shouldn’t try at all but if we’re realistic, there will always be injustices because there will always be sinners.
We have to be open to fighting the problem in all the ways we can. I don’t believe in shutting down all dialogue that offers varied possibilities and approaches from many different angles. I think we can say strong families help to combat racism right along with saying it’s up to racists to change their behavior. Why should the black community or any community wait to work towards having stronger families until all racist thought and behavior is eliminated? What is the downside of working towards that goal?
A
antunesaa
Guest
Fine. I don’t think that in the US people do not look for jobs. Being unemployed is highly uncomfortable when compared to Europe. What I’m saying is that someone with little experience will have more trouble finding a job than if there were no minimum wages. This is especially true for youngsters, who at the same time would benefit the most from working instead of hanging around. Even relatively low-paid jobs have a value because they train youngsters to deal with a time schedule, manage their hard-won money, develop a work ethics, etc. They’ll not work in those jobs forever but will still benefit from them.
One thing I didn’t mention is why jobs are more abundant without minimum wages. The reason is that only jobs yielding more than the cost of a minimum wage position (which is more than the minimum wage itself due to social security contributions, taxes and so on) are ever offered. Certain jobs are just not created because the minimum costs are too high.
One thing I didn’t mention is why jobs are more abundant without minimum wages. The reason is that only jobs yielding more than the cost of a minimum wage position (which is more than the minimum wage itself due to social security contributions, taxes and so on) are ever offered. Certain jobs are just not created because the minimum costs are too high.
R
Rubee
Guest
I don’t see how. Racism was at its worst in the past in many places in the world when families were strongest. There’s a difference between saying something is positive and good and should be pursued for those reasons and saying that that thing resolves racism. Families and cultures, in fact, are the very places where racism is taught/acquired/modelled/absorbed, so I don’t see how simply having strong families helps end racism.
Unless the idea is that people are being racially discriminated against for lacking them and this would stop once they had them. But while the Black family is more decimated, the white family has not been spared either. I don’t think White people face racial discrimination for coming from broken families.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
Who said they did? Where on earth did you get that idea from? And yes, the ONLY way to combat racism is to change racist views. Racist views are only based on the race of the person. The clue is in the name. It has absolutely nothing to do with what job you have, how old you are, whether you are an upright citizen or a criminal or whether you are from a single parent family or not.
Surely this doesn’t need to be explained.
R
Rubee
Guest
So if the homogeneity argument fails to present a reason for not implementing what already works in many other places, why not just do for your own people what many first world countries already successfully do for their own? You’d not have to argue for stripping your poor of the little help they already have if you do. As a plus, countries that do that have seen crimes virtually disappear (hyperbole, of course) which is beneficial to everyone, of course, in many ways; And it’s not because they lack a “criminal” gene in their population, being homogeneous and all, but because they’ve eliminated desperation from their population.
Last edited:
J
JSAD
Guest
Way to go …inferring something I did not say.
All I was alluding to …is the best way for anyone to work yourself out of a bad situation . Hard work and diligence
But of course if you want to be a victim and use it as an excuse and be angry…so be it…
Nobody is going to give you a hand out not should you expect one.
All I was alluding to …is the best way for anyone to work yourself out of a bad situation . Hard work and diligence
But of course if you want to be a victim and use it as an excuse and be angry…so be it…
Nobody is going to give you a hand out not should you expect one.
Last edited:
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
Yes, A may get the job without minimum wage and thus be employed rather than unemployed. But there is such a thing as being underemployed. In other words, you can have a job but still be part of the working poor because you are not making enough money to survive, especially if you have a family. Now, you might say that the employed person, after learning more skills, can work themselves up to a better-paying job. However, even if they can, which depends a lot on the economy and job market, they will once again, because there is no minimum wage requirement, be working for the least amount of money that the employer is willing to pay. Meanwhile, if the cost of living rises, they will not be significantly better off than they were with the prior job. And if the employer is also of the discriminating kind, s/he will pay even less and be able to get away with it because there is no minimum wage requirement. So how does this scenario help Black people, or White people for that matter?
Last edited:
- Status