Of course no sane person would consider it enough to live on. Therein lies the problem. Aren't you getting a wee bit tired of sudsidizing minimum wage employers? I am/ But mostly I'm appalled that anyone thinks you can have a robust economy with 1 percent of the population owning all the money and resources.Did you ever consider that minimum wage was not meant to be lived on?
Everything you say is true. The champions of laissez faire capitalism won't accept that you're right until they are dragged by the heels to the guillotine, and by then it will be too late for repentence.The problem with reason on this issue, and why the best evidence is ignored in favor of the anecdotal, or worse, is twofold. One, having a mw and raising it are both violations of Laissez Fairey orthodoxy, which faith is that leave it alone and all will be well. A case which has never been present since the first Europeans landed on this continent. Second, it violates and challenges one of the right's core hierarchy pairs: capital > labor.
Everything you say is true. The champions of laissez faire capitalism won't accept that you're right until they are dragged by the heels to the guillotine, and by then it will be too late for repentence.
no kidding, I can't hire someone unless I pay them enough to rent an apartment and buy a car?Did you ever consider that minimum wage was not meant to be lived on?
The problem with reason on this issue, and why the best evidence is ignored in favor of the anecdotal, or worse, is twofold. One, having a mw and raising it are both violations of Laissez Fairey orthodoxy, which faith is that leave it alone and all will be well. A case which has never been present since the first Europeans landed on this continent. Second, it violates and challenges one of the right's core hierarchy pairs: capital > labor.
As I mentioned before, in a way we do. Many inputs and products have regulations governing their quality and manufacture. That raises the total price. It doesn't set the final price, but it does put a floor under that final price.Why not have price controls?
In a capitalist economy, price controls are strictly a temporary emergency measure. Price controls might be useful to prevent price gouging in times of a crisis, but they wouldn't be useful here. The assumption that after a minimum wage increase everything adjusts and you end up in the same place as before the wage increase is probably wrong. The history of hikes in the minimum and their economic effects should be studied for clues as to what to expect.Please tell me the last time we had any major policy changes based on "reason"?
Everything we do is based on anecdotes and outliers in the data.
ACA is a perfect example.
Regarding the min wage. Why not have price controlls? That would REALLY address the problem of low wage workers running out of money before they run out of month. If you raise their wages, its just a temporary stop gap. Prices will go up and they will be right back where they are today. Can you make a reasoned argument against price controlls?