|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htmShow nested quote +
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Fair enough, though I'm interested to see how they derived those numbers.
Nonetheless, an increase of the minimum wage has only a negligible effect on the incomes of the poor. It's an increase, but a paltry one at best.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995
Additionally, a minimum wage increase will probably be followed by a corresponding increase in the cost of living. Which is a problem which makes a minimum wage increase, while attractive politically, a relatively weak solution to the problem of wealth inequality and poverty.
I would argue that a dramatic expansion of social services, including universal healthcare and college education, and a refocus on urban public transit systems is necessary. Also ending tax loopholes and probably raising the tax rates on the upper income brackets. The entire point of a democratic government is wealth redistribution after all.
Going to recommend the book Hand to Mouth for a more personal view of what poverty is like in America.
Increasing the minimum wage is not enough, by a long shot.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
raise cap gains tax, close le loopholes. lower corporate tax rate as bargaining chip.
|
On November 08 2014 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Blows my mind you can pay $2.13 an hour if your patrons tip your employees well enough.
Yeah, but that is the weird american tipping system which is basically not a tip anymore, just a way to dodge tax on that income. Patrons are expected to tip 15%, if you don't tip 15% you are an asshole, because the waiters don't actually get paid a reasonable amount of money to work there, it is expected that a large part of their income comes from the tips. Weirdly enough the whole system kinda works, it just feels really, really weird to europeans who expect waiters to be paid, and tips to be actual tips for good service.
|
On November 08 2014 07:57 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Blows my mind you can pay $2.13 an hour if your patrons tip your employees well enough. Yeah, but that is the weird american tipping system which is basically not a tip anymore, just a way to dodge tax on that income. Patrons are expected to tip 15%, if you don't tip 15% you are an asshole, because the waiters don't actually get paid a reasonable amount of money to work there, it is expected that a large part of their income comes from the tips. Weirdly enough the whole system kinda works, it just feels really, really weird to europeans who expect waiters to be paid, and tips to be actual tips for good service.
Its not only weird, but also terrible. It increases the dependence of the worker in an already unequal situation.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
pretty much the only benefit there accrues to the employers.
|
On November 08 2014 06:58 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Fair enough, though I'm interested to see how they derived those numbers. Nonetheless, an increase of the minimum wage has only a negligible effect on the incomes of the poor. It's an increase, but a paltry one at best. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995Additionally, a minimum wage increase will probably be followed by a corresponding increase in the cost of living. Which is a problem which makes a minimum wage increase, while attractive politically, a relatively weak solution to the problem of wealth inequality and poverty. I would argue that a dramatic expansion of social services, including universal healthcare and college education, and a refocus on urban public transit systems is necessary. Also ending tax loopholes and probably raising the tax rates on the upper income brackets. The entire point of a democratic government is wealth redistribution after all. Going to recommend the book Hand to Mouth for a more personal view of what poverty is like in America. Increasing the minimum wage is not enough, by a long shot.
Increasing min wage is not enough, so don't increase it... It's no argument really
And in some states, increase min wage might even increase employment.
|
On November 08 2014 07:57 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Blows my mind you can pay $2.13 an hour if your patrons tip your employees well enough. Yeah, but that is the weird american tipping system which is basically not a tip anymore, just a way to dodge tax on that income. Patrons are expected to tip 15%, if you don't tip 15% you are an asshole, because the waiters don't actually get paid a reasonable amount of money to work there, it is expected that a large part of their income comes from the tips. Weirdly enough the whole system kinda works, it just feels really, really weird to europeans who expect waiters to be paid, and tips to be actual tips for good service.
Yeah I knew it felt funny. That means a waitress who does an excellent job and gets 20% on 5 $5 tabs makes the same as a waitress who has 0 customers or 1 who they give terrible service.
|
On November 08 2014 04:38 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 04:29 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 04:12 Doublemint wrote:On November 08 2014 04:01 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 03:40 Doublemint wrote:On November 08 2014 03:33 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 03:30 oneofthem wrote:
ISIL isn't a native syrian organization though. they came from iraq to take advantage of the power vacuum in syria, but stabilizing syria by itself probably won't stop ISIL altogether since they draw strength from the whole sectarian mess in iraq.
Yes. However, having a Syria that isn't currently in chaos would result in a drastically weaker ISIL presence, as any Syrian government would be actively working against them and preventing them from seizing land and assets.
Again, ISIL can set up in Syria, but without a civil war in Syria, they would not have the same strength, period. That is a pipe dream though, do you really think that the US - or any nation for that matter - would have been able to install anything even close to resembling a stable, democratic government there? The track record in the region, your track region too, says no. No. However, the situation would be more stable. Similarly, while Libya is in deep shit right now (would be better if Europe and the US had committed more non-military resources to help build up the Libyan government, but eh), it's still in a far better than where Syria is now.
Syria as a state has practically disintegrated; a limited intervention earlier on, anytime from 2011 to 2013 really, could have stabilized the situation significantly better than where it is now. No disagreement here, basically. Though we - as in the western world - just have RELIED on the likes of Assad, Gaddafi and Mubarak etc... to keep things "in order" and make it look like they are terrible and not in any way related to us and our interests. Now that that jinn is out of the bottle,we don't know what the fuck to do. The Western World (particularly FR/UK) fucked up the Middle East since 1918, unfortunately. Artificial borders, the dictators to keep a lid on both Islamism and secular pan-Arab nationalism, and really fking up with Israel/Palestine (The Occupation is one of the main handicaps to US efforts in the Region: the last two US commanders of CENTCOM have both agreed on this). I'll just point to Waltz and say I agree with him here. http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.586082 (interview with an Israeli News site, very interesting to see) Way before 1918 actually. But since the end of WW2, it's the US who are fucking things up.
Don't get me wrong, the buck does stop with us, but by the time we stepped in during 1956 to tell you guys playtime was over, the major problems we still have in the mideast were all in play, almost exclusively due to imperialist meddling. The arbitrary borders, the whole Israel/Palestine situation (made necessary by a European genocide), the Saudi kingdom, the Muslim brotherhood, and so on were all very much on the European watch.
But we've certainly done precious little to help since then, despite occasional earnest efforts.
|
On November 08 2014 07:57 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Blows my mind you can pay $2.13 an hour if your patrons tip your employees well enough. Yeah, but that is the weird american tipping system which is basically not a tip anymore, just a way to dodge tax on that income. Patrons are expected to tip 15%, if you don't tip 15% you are an asshole, because the waiters don't actually get paid a reasonable amount of money to work there, it is expected that a large part of their income comes from the tips. Weirdly enough the whole system kinda works, it just feels really, really weird to europeans who expect waiters to be paid, and tips to be actual tips for good service.
You have to pay taxes on tips, and you tip more for better service.
|
On November 08 2014 09:25 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 07:57 Simberto wrote:On November 08 2014 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Blows my mind you can pay $2.13 an hour if your patrons tip your employees well enough. Yeah, but that is the weird american tipping system which is basically not a tip anymore, just a way to dodge tax on that income. Patrons are expected to tip 15%, if you don't tip 15% you are an asshole, because the waiters don't actually get paid a reasonable amount of money to work there, it is expected that a large part of their income comes from the tips. Weirdly enough the whole system kinda works, it just feels really, really weird to europeans who expect waiters to be paid, and tips to be actual tips for good service. You have to pay taxes on tips, and you tip more for better service.
I'm convinced this happens 100% of the time
|
On November 08 2014 06:58 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Fair enough, though I'm interested to see how they derived those numbers. Nonetheless, an increase of the minimum wage has only a negligible effect on the incomes of the poor. It's an increase, but a paltry one at best. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995Additionally, a minimum wage increase will probably be followed by a corresponding increase in the cost of living. Which is a problem which makes a minimum wage increase, while attractive politically, a relatively weak solution to the problem of wealth inequality and poverty. I would argue that a dramatic expansion of social services, including universal healthcare and college education, and a refocus on urban public transit systems is necessary. Also ending tax loopholes and probably raising the tax rates on the upper income brackets. The entire point of a democratic government is wealth redistribution after all. Going to recommend the book Hand to Mouth for a more personal view of what poverty is like in America. Increasing the minimum wage is not enough, by a long shot.
We actually want inflation. Core inflation also helps these people pay off debts, or borrow even more money. Either way, it boosts consumption, which should expand the economy.
|
On November 08 2014 09:37 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 09:25 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On November 08 2014 07:57 Simberto wrote:On November 08 2014 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Blows my mind you can pay $2.13 an hour if your patrons tip your employees well enough. Yeah, but that is the weird american tipping system which is basically not a tip anymore, just a way to dodge tax on that income. Patrons are expected to tip 15%, if you don't tip 15% you are an asshole, because the waiters don't actually get paid a reasonable amount of money to work there, it is expected that a large part of their income comes from the tips. Weirdly enough the whole system kinda works, it just feels really, really weird to europeans who expect waiters to be paid, and tips to be actual tips for good service. You have to pay taxes on tips, and you tip more for better service. I'm convinced this happens 100% of the time
Well that's true, probably like how people didn't report use taxes on internet purchases. I doubt they owe much in taxes though, so I suppose the biggest issue would be with social security benefits.
|
Well the only way way I see this tip system actually work is if stuff actually is cheaper. Which is probably true to a degree but I guess a large part of the saved money just goes into the employers pockets. You've already mentioned the downsides of illegal employment.
If I remember correctly you're also supposed to pay taxes on tips here in Germany if the waiter doesn't personally know the customer, but both from being a customer and occasional bartending I have actually never seen a single person do this.
|
On November 08 2014 08:17 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 06:58 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Fair enough, though I'm interested to see how they derived those numbers. Nonetheless, an increase of the minimum wage has only a negligible effect on the incomes of the poor. It's an increase, but a paltry one at best. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995Additionally, a minimum wage increase will probably be followed by a corresponding increase in the cost of living. Which is a problem which makes a minimum wage increase, while attractive politically, a relatively weak solution to the problem of wealth inequality and poverty. I would argue that a dramatic expansion of social services, including universal healthcare and college education, and a refocus on urban public transit systems is necessary. Also ending tax loopholes and probably raising the tax rates on the upper income brackets. The entire point of a democratic government is wealth redistribution after all. Going to recommend the book Hand to Mouth for a more personal view of what poverty is like in America. Increasing the minimum wage is not enough, by a long shot. Increasing min wage is not enough, so don't increase it... It's no argument really And in some states, increase min wage might even increase employment.
I think it's better to do a mix of programs. The expectation here in MA is that the min wage will go up, some small employer taxes will go down and the EITC will be expanded (Baker ran on this). Combined that should do a pretty good job of targeting the needy and take worries over job losses off the table.
|
On November 08 2014 06:58 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 05:55 IgnE wrote:On November 08 2014 04:21 Lord Tolkien wrote:
3) Minimum wage increases are ultimately meaningless (economic research is pretty clear on this: it'll only affects high schoolers and the very young with no impact on the people who most need it) No it's not. If you raise the minimum wage you effectively raise the wages of everyone near minimum wage. The veterans in retail aren't going to accept suddenly being on equal footing with the high schoolers getting the new minimum wage. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Fair enough, though I'm interested to see how they derived those numbers. Nonetheless, an increase of the minimum wage has only a negligible effect on the incomes of the poor. It's an increase, but a paltry one at best. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995Additionally, a minimum wage increase will probably be followed by a corresponding increase in the cost of living. Which is a problem which makes a minimum wage increase, while attractive politically, a relatively weak solution to the problem of wealth inequality and poverty. I would argue that a dramatic expansion of social services, including universal healthcare and college education, and a refocus on urban public transit systems is necessary. Also ending tax loopholes and probably raising the tax rates on the upper income brackets. The entire point of a democratic government is wealth redistribution after all. Going to recommend the book Hand to Mouth for a more personal view of what poverty is like in America. Increasing the minimum wage is not enough, by a long shot.
You say its effect will be negligible but its not. Even the CBO report you linked doesn't say that.
Your second assertion about an increase in the cost of living is not true. In theory it's based around some logic like the following: if you increase minimum wage, businesses will raise prices a corresponding amount to cover the wage increases resulting in a corresponding cost of living increase that negates the wages. This is not necessarily true, and even if it is true to some extent, prices will not rise to completely negate the increased wages. Secondly, "cost of living" is an average that in practice affects different people differently. Even if your dubious claim that businesses will raise prices is true to an extent, it disproportionately affects industries that rely heavily on service employees. People near the poverty line do not avail themselves of such services as much as upper middle and upper class people with expendable income. Grocery stores, Walmart, etc. have far fewer employees / $ of goods and services sold, so even if prices increased to reflect wages that would show up less in goods sold there than in other industries where more employees are used, like luxury goods. That is to say that richer people buy more goods and services which rely on a high number of employees being paid low wages. The whole thing argument, though, rests on the faulty assumption that prices are directly tied to employee wages in a 1:1 fashion, as if businesses were operating on razor thin margins as is. Fact is that corporate profits are at an all time high, and if the prices could be higher right now they would be.
You have a weird style LT: "This is not the only factor in X because Y and Z are also important, therefore we shouldn't do this." No one here is arguing for minimum wage to the exclusion of free education and universal healthcare.
|
On November 08 2014 10:12 Nyxisto wrote:
Well the only way way I see this tip system actually work is if stuff actually is cheaper. Which is probably true to a degree but I guess a large part of the saved money just goes into the employers pockets. You've already mentioned the downsides of illegal employment.
The restaurant industry is really competitive so I don't think the employer's pockets are a real worry.
|
On November 08 2014 09:12 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 04:38 WhiteDog wrote:On November 08 2014 04:29 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 04:12 Doublemint wrote:On November 08 2014 04:01 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 03:40 Doublemint wrote:On November 08 2014 03:33 Lord Tolkien wrote:On November 08 2014 03:30 oneofthem wrote:
ISIL isn't a native syrian organization though. they came from iraq to take advantage of the power vacuum in syria, but stabilizing syria by itself probably won't stop ISIL altogether since they draw strength from the whole sectarian mess in iraq.
Yes. However, having a Syria that isn't currently in chaos would result in a drastically weaker ISIL presence, as any Syrian government would be actively working against them and preventing them from seizing land and assets.
Again, ISIL can set up in Syria, but without a civil war in Syria, they would not have the same strength, period. That is a pipe dream though, do you really think that the US - or any nation for that matter - would have been able to install anything even close to resembling a stable, democratic government there? The track record in the region, your track region too, says no. No. However, the situation would be more stable. Similarly, while Libya is in deep shit right now (would be better if Europe and the US had committed more non-military resources to help build up the Libyan government, but eh), it's still in a far better than where Syria is now.
Syria as a state has practically disintegrated; a limited intervention earlier on, anytime from 2011 to 2013 really, could have stabilized the situation significantly better than where it is now. No disagreement here, basically. Though we - as in the western world - just have RELIED on the likes of Assad, Gaddafi and Mubarak etc... to keep things "in order" and make it look like they are terrible and not in any way related to us and our interests. Now that that jinn is out of the bottle,we don't know what the fuck to do. The Western World (particularly FR/UK) fucked up the Middle East since 1918, unfortunately. Artificial borders, the dictators to keep a lid on both Islamism and secular pan-Arab nationalism, and really fking up with Israel/Palestine (The Occupation is one of the main handicaps to US efforts in the Region: the last two US commanders of CENTCOM have both agreed on this). I'll just point to Waltz and say I agree with him here. http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.586082 (interview with an Israeli News site, very interesting to see) Way before 1918 actually. But since the end of WW2, it's the US who are fucking things up. Don't get me wrong, the buck does stop with us, but by the time we stepped in during 1956 to tell you guys playtime was over, the major problems we still have in the mideast were all in play, almost exclusively due to imperialist meddling. The arbitrary borders, the whole Israel/Palestine situation (made necessary by a European genocide), the Saudi kingdom, the Muslim brotherhood, and so on were all very much on the European watch. But we've certainly done precious little to help since then, despite occasional earnest efforts.
Seems like you are shifting the blame on european tho. Nothing was made "necessary" by the holocaust by the way.
But if you look at the middle east map right now, where are the european assets ? Who's the country protecting Israel ? Who has deep ties with Saudi Arabia (who finance most of the terrorists groups) ? Who has messed up in Iran plenty times ? Who invaded Iraq twice with no support from international community ?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 08 2014 10:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2014 10:12 Nyxisto wrote:
Well the only way way I see this tip system actually work is if stuff actually is cheaper. Which is probably true to a degree but I guess a large part of the saved money just goes into the employers pockets. You've already mentioned the downsides of illegal employment. The restaurant industry is really competitive so I don't think the employer's pockets are a real worry.
competitiveness does not necessarily justify much of what results from it by itself. cost cutting is being competitive, offering better products is another way of being competitive, so is having the mob beat up the competitors.
if cost cutting is easy, at the expense of the workers, then it will be pushed to an extreme degree precisely because of the high level of competition. however, if there is restriction on how much they can compete on cutting certain costs, then yes, the food becomes a bit more expensive, but more people will be better off.
|
Well it certainly is true that an independent restaurant or bar owner won't make a fortune with their business. But if large chains actually pay these ridiculous low wages then something is clearly wrong.
I don't think minimum wages are really great though, because I don't see how higher prices are not going to make the whole thing ineffective. If redistribution is the goal I think social transfers via taxation make more sense because they are not hitting small businesses that legitimately can't afford to pay the minimum wages.
|
President Obama will announce his choice of U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch as the next U.S. Attorney General this weekend, the White House says. The president will formally announce his intention to nominate Lynch Saturday.
Lynch, whom the White House describes as "a strong, independent prosecutor who has twice led one of the most important U.S. Attorney's Offices in the country," will be introduced at the White House Saturday, alongside current Attorney General Eric Holder.
The plan comes after NPR's Carrie Johnson reported Thursday that Lynch, a lead federal prosecutor in New York City, could be nominated within days.
"Lynch, a graduate of Harvard Law School, worked her way up the ladder in Brooklyn," Carrie said, "a huge office that handles everything from old-school Mafia busts to new forms of cybercrime."
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
