The true cost of Low Wages. Who is really to blame.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Fault for this can't lie with the corporations; their whole reason for existing is to grow and produce more profit. It lies with the government which has abdicated its responsibility to "provide for the general welfare." Fault obviously lies with the government.

Don't misunderstand me, I do agree with that statement. The problem is we live in a time of corporate owned and influenced governments. So when joining the dots together the fault does arrive back at the doors of these giants. The government won't tighten control for the benefit of the people, They will instead pretend to be helping the people whilst law after law is passed doing the exact opposite for anyone watching carefully. TPP springs to mind. You can get a persons vote by standing on a stage, telling lies and enforcing almost tyrannical PR. Big investment in your campaign requires catering to the giants. You can't lie your way out of the latter.

Which kinda shifts some of the blame from the government to the guy you see in the mirror every morning.

"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."

Could'nt agree more. But current politics, laws and systems don't work and never will. You can't destroy a weed with removing its roots.

1st. since I haven't seen you in the "Intro" forum, I wish to....

you to this wonderful "single-other-open-closed" minded realm of ATS.
2nd.
I am looking forward to your progression on this topic. You touch on several issues, the economic and behavioral(attitude).
Your explanatory fashion with links is much appreciated.

On an anecdotal level.
The plight of the "worker" has captured me for decades.
I was fortunate to live in and obtain an education in a Scandinavian country, but then I made the abhorrent mistake to move to the US, assuming that my trade was as valued as it is there.
This is not about me, my point is that I have observed over the past decade, of living in this purgatory, that manual labor any kind, which makes up the majority of production, is.....
devaluated, despised, diminished at every level.
I see it as a cultural problem. Even though the US deems it self "a civilized" nation, it holds its manual laborers in a grip of inferiority. It is in the collective consciousness. Decades of habituation.
The individual is habituated to accept the "status quo".

It is incomprehensible to me, with my back ground, that the majority ignore their own opinion and proudly assume martyrdom. Where did this come from?

Perhaps I have strayed off topic, please forgive me, it is a subject dear to my heart.
I was a union "rep" for years and made an effort to uphold the dignity of those with no voice.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Edumakated

You cannot artificially increase wages without it causing other issues somewhere else

But you can keep wages low with 10-30 million illegal immigrants. And lobby congress to keep a steady flow of invisible labor.

these jobs were not designed to be careers

No manufacturing jobs are good careers, but those are gone.
We are in a huge transition in our country. I can tell you people making 9$ an hour making products they can't afford would like to make a better living, be off social services. But I'm not sure we have an economy set up to do that.

I don't disagree which is why I am against importing low skilled immigrants. However, one of the political parties prefers to call these immigrants Dreamers at the expense of the lower skilled American worker.

The destruction of the manufacturing base is sad. This is why I am against globalism.

The American consumer though is also to blame. The ever increasing desire for finding the lowest prices pushes corporations to constantly look for ways to cut costs.

a reply to: WanderingNomadd

You can't destroy a weed with removing its roots.

I couldn't agree more. I can only disagree on what constitutes the roots.

Corporations do have (in most cases) one redeeming characteristic. They are greedy, yes, self-serving, yes, corruptible, yes, but they do make a product or provide a service. That is their only source of income. In contrast, government as well is greedy, self-serving, and corruptible, and government makes nothing but laws and requlations, usually designed with government's own self-interest at heart. Government has an unlimited supply of income via taxation, enforced at the point of a gun.

Corporate greed may be the fertilizer, but I see government as the root. Remove the fertilizer, and you slow the growth. Remove the root and the evil dies.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

And who control's the government? The Oligarchy. Who's the Oligarchy? Big Business and Banker Scum.

So you can say government and try to shift the burden, but we've lost our "government" long ago.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: WanderingNomadd

You can't destroy a weed with removing its roots.

I couldn't agree more. I can only disagree on what constitutes the roots.

Corporations do have (in most cases) one redeeming characteristic. They are greedy, yes, self-serving, yes, corruptible, yes, but they do make a product or provide a service. That is their only source of income. In contrast, government as well is greedy, self-serving, and corruptible, and government makes nothing but laws and requlations, usually designed with government's own self-interest at heart. Government has an unlimited supply of income via taxation, enforced at the point of a gun.

Corporate greed may be the fertilizer, but I see government as the root. Remove the fertilizer, and you slow the growth. Remove the root and the evil dies.

TheRedneck

Corporations also have a nasty habit of sucking up tax money and not paying taxes through very complicated schemes.

Remember the government roads, fire dept, cops, CDC, FDA, EPA, military, US mail (sort of)ect. I realize these functions are flawed, but so are corps. Let's try not to throw all the baby out with the bath water, but some should be thrown.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Government has become to big to fail. I fear only complete removal will suffice. I dont fear the sacrifice to achieve this, or the outcome, but rather how you get people to accept their king for what he is.

Corporate greed may be the fertilizer, but I see government as the root. Remove the fertilizer, and you slow the growth. Remove the root and the evil dies

You have caused a small internal enlightenment. My views are the same but in future I will be sure to include governments role in future debates as its corruption and guilt deserves recognition as much as corporations. Perhaps people will be more inclined to stop placing all the blame at the feet of those struggling to survive.

Ok I will admit it's a two rung problem.

It's government officials being willing to be bought and set up schemes that encourage bribery, and it's the super rich buying them bribing them to pull their puppet strings.

I don't discount the part of government in all this. I just get pissed that everyone seems think that the bankers and big business aren't 100% part of the problem as well.

It's a multifaceted issue and giving one side a pass is EQUALLY as stupid as giving the other.

This isn't a boxing where you pick government or big business and bet on a winner for most corrupt. They aren't beating on each other, they are both teaming up to kick our ass ass while we all fight over which one is punching us harder.

a reply to: Puppylove

Almost everyone wants to control the government. Just look at the activists, the lobbyists, the pundits. Even here on ATS we have a continual dose of people who wish to enforce some societal change. This very thread is predicated on controlling corporations via government. Considering that, it becomes difficult to separate your response from jealousy.

Of course, I know that's not the spirit it was intended in.

I completely agree that we lost our government some time ago, but we didn't lose it to corporations. They just filled the void. We lost it to apathy.

TheRedneck

a reply to: seasonal

Corporations do not have the power to tax. We have some instances where government relegated it's power to tax to some corporations, but it is governmental power they are using, not corporate power.

Our roads and bridges are in disrepair, our post office is faltering due to Congressional interference with an operational business model. The rest you mention are provided through local governances; I primarily speak of the Federal government.

TheRedneck

a reply to: WanderingNomadd

I am glad to hear that.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Even if you go with everyone wants to control the government, you can't remove the blame for what's been created by those who managed to acquire that control.

They got the control, they're responsible for what they do with it.

I'm not saying that apathy wasn't part of how they got that control, nor do I deny that part of the solution is taking that control back.

But ignoring that what we have is the result of being what they people who got control wanted is silly. They own it. They got their hand on the wheel and are driving us towards disaster.

Honestly I think they are idiots. We the people are not that hard to pacify and they are already leading the high life, but rather than be happy they keep pushing and pushing. When the pitch forks come, there's no sympathy from me, they have 100% control to stop it. Buy a few less Yachts, give up a private island or two. Honestly this conversation is ridiculous.

We're not having this conversation because there are people controlling the government, it's because they're too short sided to maintain a balance. The people aren't asking for much. It takes quite a bit actually to be bad enough to cause the pitchforks to come out.

You'd think they'd know that by now. But no, repeating the mistakes of the past.

The problem isn't that they're in control, it's that they are being idiots about it and learned nothing from those who've failed in control in the past and are forcing we the people to have to consider doing something NONE of us want to do.

A revolution and pitchforks will be no fun for anyone. It will be messy and things will be much worse before they get better. But it's getting to the point where we are considering it. That we're hitting such a point is ridiculous, has nothing been learned about being in power at all?

It's that which frustrates me. Not that it's being done, but that it's being done so badly. Really keeping the people pacified is both easy and cheep.

a reply to: WanderingNomadd

Why am I personally opposed to increases in the minimum wage? That's pretty easy to answer, the concept that min wage will go up and corporations will "just have to accept reduced profits" is a pipe dream and I'm 100% opposed to seeing America become a communist hell where the government must regulate all prices to force corporations to claim smaller profits and keep prices stable. I'm middle of the road financially... I make too much to qualify for any breaks, but am well below "F-you money" that would allow me to not get too ruffed over, say, a 10+% spike in the cost of consumable goods. If the burger flipper down at Burger Fi suddenly sees their salary jump from $9.00 an hour to $15.00 an hour, they've experienced a 67% raise. Does anyone really believe those making more than minimum wage are going to see a similar windfall? Am I gonna get a 67% raise? No? Well, what about a straight line $6 an hour raise? What boss? Do what to myself? Oh, I see...

I'm a logical, pragmatic guy who honestly doesn't desire shouldering the woes of the world on my own shoulders... that means I'm first and foremost looking out for what's best for the three faces that greet me every morning before I leave my house, then myself, the the rest of my family, then friends, etc. Raising minimum wage isn't best for my family or myself, so I'm opposed to it. The rest of the nation can continue to kick themselves squarely in the nuts until they realize it's counter productive and start looking out for number 1... but I'm well past the self immolation of being a working adult who supports emotion driven counterproductive policy changes.

a reply to: Puppylove

Reading this and your last post, I realized our primary disagreement is semantic. When I hear 'corporation' I think of those like Intel, Motorola, ExxonMobil, Bruno Foods, Schneider Logistics, Caterpillar, Dollar General... businesses providing a needed product or service and jobs.

From your posts, I see you are thinking of Citi, Aetna, BoA, and the other financial giants. I completely agree that they provide precious little needed service to society and have become a quasi-governmental entity in themselves. As such, they share the role of government in my previous posts. They are just another root that needs to die.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: WanderingNomadd

If the burger flipper down at Burger Fi suddenly sees their salary jump from $9.00 an hour to $15.00 an hour, they've experienced a 67% raise. Does anyone really believe those making more than minimum wage are going to see a similar windfall? Am I gonna get a 67% raise? No? Well, what about a straight line $6 an hour raise? What boss? Do what to myself? Oh, I see...

Of course they're not. More importantly, such a policy would incentivize large-chain fast food to accelerate the inevitable transition towards more automated systems that require less employees. You know what I already see at fast food is less people in general working the stores. It's very rare to see a second person at the drive through, and most employees are hustling between what used to task 2 to 3 people as roles.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I'm a logical, pragmatic guy who honestly doesn't desire shouldering the woes of the world on my own shoulders...
Raising minimum wage isn't best for my family or myself, so I'm opposed to it.

Understandable, but your low prices are the product of other peoples low standard of living. Saying there are opportunites out there does'nt change the fact the majority of low wage workers will remain low wage workers even if those opportunites were filled. Just keep your fingers crossed that when it reaches breaking point your own family does'nt suffer as a result of that. For the same reason you stated people will eventually turn from miserable to angry. And thats when everyone begins to fight back. We know how senseless people get during riots.

As far as increases go the video in my OP gives a fair example of how little prices would have to go up overall, atleast at wallmart.

But each to their own.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

So being logical, is it OK for the low paid employees access to social services?

Logically either private (employers) pay, or we (tax payer) pick up the tab. I would like to see the min wage adjust to medium income.

It seem simple, do 5 minutes of research and see where the $ have been going over the last 35 years.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Thats an interesting point to add to this thread.

As technology evolves, And you cant get much faster than this, Opportunities for flesh workers shrink. Automated arms exist. AI exists. Piece them together and you have one time investment factory workers producing at speeds embarassing the quickest human. Employee two technicians, Two cleaners and a manager and your set. New employee number down 80-90%

a reply to: TheRedneck

Ok yeah I can see us talking past each other, makes sense.

Kind of like, I'm always reminding people that my issue isn't with multi millionaires. I have no problem with wealthy folks until it gets stupid, like I think it's what 60 people controlling over half the worlds wealth right now?

These "rich" people thinking I'm after their money are paupers compared to the people I actually have an issue with. # my own brother is a millionaire and successful business man.

I don't see how someone can look at 60 people owning 50% of the worlds wealth and having a problem with that being a problem for people and having the nerve to call THEM greedy.

Short of saving the world from total annihilation I can't think of anything a person can do that deserves that much real estate.

If it were jealousy I'd be after the wealth of people like my brother. I'm not, I'm not even after wealth for myself really. I just want a small number of people to stop monopolizing the worlds resources and causing untold suffering.

Not even the most successful poor serial killer could cause the harm these people cause even if he started killing his mom during child birth and never got caught til he died as a 112 year old man choking his nurse with his catheter.

He couldn't even touch the amount of lives just one of these people destroy in probably a single year.

a reply to: WanderingNomadd

True, if we ignore this it will grow. Maybe by design?