Hey Democrats, you want wage increases? How about applying the principles of free market economics.

[Tsing Tao]

If they think they're going to get caught, or aren't in it for a quick buck.

So you firmly believe that companies who make baby food/formula would make crap if they could get away with it? I worked for a company that made formula and baby food. Did you?

 

[Ricter]

So you firmly believe that companies who make baby food/formula would make crap if they could get away with it? I worked for a company that made formula and baby food. Did you?

It's apparent when you look around and at history that some people will do anything, literally anything, they think they can get away with.

 

[piezoe]

FHL points out above how utterly ridiculous this is. The True Cost of a wage is what that wage is determined to be in the free market. Like anything else, as supply increases (of labor), demand falls and labor is cheaper.

Housing, food, etc, all have their own market forces balancing out the costs of them. If people cannot afford to live in San Francisco because minimum wage doesn't cover housing, food, etc, then they need to move to San Antonio where it does. Eventually, businesses paying minimum wage in San Fran won't be able to find labor and will have to raise the price of the wage.

Unless, of course, you don't want the free market to set labor and wage prices. But that wouldn't be you, right? I mean, you're a Libertarian!

hah...

You have to agree on how you will define "true cost" and that will depend on the purpose of the calculation in the first place. For example, if your purpose is to explore economic distortions in the labor market, you would define "true cost" in a way that allows you to identify these distortions.

 

[Tsing Tao]

It's apparent when you look around and at history that some people will do anything, literally anything, they think they can get away with.

Some people, yes. But I object to your categorically stating that companies are evil and none have any sense of morality whatsoever.

 

[Tsing Tao]

You have to agree on how you will define "true cost" and that will depend on the purpose of the calculation in the first place. For example, if your purpose is to explore economic distortions in the labor market, you would define "true cost" in a way that allows you to identify these distortions.

Cost is assigned to the entity that has to directly pay for it. End of story. If you want to talk about costs to society (or opportunity costs, incremental costs, etc), then state such. The cost drivers in these cases are more theoretical in nature.

 

[Ricter]

Some people, yes. But I object to your categorically stating that companies are evil and none have any sense of morality whatsoever.

I never stated that, nor meant it. The regulations and targeted inspections are a cost effective way to screen out those "some people". Yes, we all pay the price, but it's worth it.

 

[piezoe]

Adding costs through regulation that have to be recouped in pricing is an example of something not a free market would do. However, baby formula companies would keep the same quality and safety levels without government, because if they did not, they would be subject to the legal system and vast lawsuits. Additionally, they would lose business to companies with higher quality product - as their consumer insights groups would indicate in advance. All of this is free market.

The government adding costs in does not mean that these costs are part of the true cost of the product. They are overlays.

Don't forget. There is no such thing as a "free market". It only exists in economic models, virtually never on any substantial scale in the real world.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I never stated that, nor meant it. The regulations and targeted inspections are a cost effective way to screen out those "some people". Yes, we all pay the price, but it's worth it.

Well you certainly implied it. I'm glad you didn't mean it and I misunderstood you.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Don't forget. There is no such thing as a "free market". It only exists in economic models, virtually never on any substantial scale in the real world.

This doesn't mean we should voluntarily take things in the direction of less "freedom", right, my Libertarian friend?

 

[piezoe]

Cost is assigned to the entity that has to directly pay for it. End of story. If you want to talk about costs to society (or opportunity costs, incremental costs, etc), then state such. The cost drivers in these cases are more theoretical in nature.

That's the way you would define it for accounting purposes. You must be an accountant.