I rarely enter political discussions because people sometimes get emotional and no one ever changes their mind. It's really a no win situation all around, but you asked why someone would be a liberal so I decided to explain.
When I look around, I see a small number of people holding a majority of the wealth and power and I don't see them doing anything that I consider worthwhile enough to justify their position. I don't consider being an employer an heroic act (at least, I don't feel like an heroic employer), or making something that people buy to be necessarily praiseworthy.
I also see a hell of a lot of people who got thrown under the bus. There's just no economic incentive for the urban poor imo. The minimum wage in the US is farcical. So they should have studied harder, worked harder. Maybe, but there are always going to be garbagemen, ditchdiggers, etc, and I think a man should be able to work 40 hours a week and afford to raise a family. If market forces don't pay him enough to do it, then his government should legislate a living wage for him.
That's pretty much where we differ, I guess. You say the market will provide for people accordingly. I look around and say obviously not. You want the government to get out of the way of the market. I consider it the role of government to ensure the welfare of its people. You trust the market, I don't. I'm never going to convince you otherwise, but we all knew that already. I think you're still a good dude, we just have a different take on which side of the market vs government scale needs more weight.
Sir, it is not a matter of convincing one or the other who is right and who is wrong. The issue is clarity. I just want you to be clear as to where I stand and also I want to be clear where you stand and for both of us to recognize the consequences and trade offs of our beliefs.
You say that you see a small number of people holding a majority of the wealth and you don't see, in your opinion, that they are doing anything worth while. Well my friend, the reason they got so rich is that many, many people see otherwise and are willing to pay them big bucks to do it.
You may think that a school teacher is very important to society and maybe more important than, say, an MLB pitcher. But in economics, one of the factors that determines somethings worth is scarcity. What's more important to human life than air? But it's free because there's a lot of it and it's easy to get. It is far easier to find a qualified school teacher than it is to find someone who can throw a baseball 95 mph. Such is life. What do you want to do about it? Force team owners to pay their players less? But since it's their money to begin with it just means the owners will keep it -- or should they also be force to divert those funds to teachers? If so, how much?
An employer may not be a hero but if there were no employers there would be no jobs. And I do disagree with you and I think it is very praise worthy to provide someone with a good or service that they want. Don't take things for granted my compassionate and kind hearted friend. Do you know how something like the refrigerator has made such a tremendous impact on our lives and vastly improved it's quality and convenience. How about the car or the computer you are now typing on? What kind of world would we live in if you couldn't simply go to the store and buy a nice prime rib for your supper? Or order a pizza because you're too busy to cook (or stalk and slay your meal)? Everything around you right now in your room and house didn't just magically appear. Don't ever unestimate or take for granted the industrious and determined entrepreneur that wants to get rich. Take that incentive away and you will have a stagnate and moribund society -- much like Communists societies.
And where did you get this idea that it is the employer's responsibility to insure someone can support himself and a family? Are you saying that a person can now decide what kind of house he should live in, what kind of car he should drive, and how many kids he wants to raise and then it's up to the employer to provide him with this wage? It may come as a surprise to you but an employer hires someone because they need to have a job done. Not to insure that they have a comfortable life style.
Al Gore once paraded around some woman working a minimum wage job and demanded that employers start paying a "living wage." What does that mean? The woman took the mike and also made that demand. "All I want is for my employer to pay me enough so that I can support myself and my kids."
I couldn't speak for her kids but from what I could tell she looked very much alive to me despite claiming she is not being paid a "living wage."
It is not, and never has been, the role for the government to take care of you. They are to protect your freedoms and your rights so that you can take care of yourself.
And what do you mean there's no economic incentives for the urban poor? How about finding a job so that they can support themselves and not be poor? Like some on this board (in fact, there was thread devoted to it which I declined to comment on) I know what it is like to be homeless. At 18 yo I was sleeping on park benches and showering at the beach. Never did I beg. Never did I ask for a hand out. I eventually got a job working a grave yard shift security guard. I save my money until I could afford a place. It took six months but I didn't have much choice. I then moved to Cali. Worked a year to established residency and save money and put myself through school graduating from UCLA with a degree in Math and Applied Science and a minor in Economics. It took me seven and a half years to do it. And working seven days a week and going school five days a week it wasn't an easy time in my life. In fact, it was a very miserable time. But I realized that if I didn't get an education I would have no future. That was my incentive.
I'm going to tell you right now how you can be guaranteed a decent life in America. And I'm only speaking for this country. It doesn't mean you will be rich and live a life like Hazbin or Alex. You have to have a little, not necessarily a lot, of smarts. But most importantly you have to plan for the future as those two did.
Graduate from high school. Don't get in trouble with the law. Don't have kids until you are married. Get a job. Any job. And take it seriously and work hard. Don't give me this minimum wage nonsense. Nobody stays at minimum wage for more than six months to a year and if they do then something is wrong with them. When I left Cali over three years ago I sat next to a man who was from Laos. He came here in the late seventies when everyone was trying to escape the Communist (the massacre we tried to prevent in that war before we just left due to political pressure). He got a job at Jack in the Box. Not as a cashier but as a janitor because he could barely speak the language. That was over thirty years ago. He is now a district manager and has a vacation home in Hawaii and his primary residence in Marin County. A manager at McDonalds makes over 35 grand here in Hawaii. Yeah, you're not rich but your not homeless and on the government dole either.
You implied that you are an employer. How much are you paying your employees? And how would it effect your business if the government determined that a living wage is $15.00 an hour?
You also implied that if the employer cannot meet this burden then it is the role of the government to make up the difference and give these employees their living wage. Make no mistake about it my friend, the government can't give anybody anything simply because it has nothing to give. Whatever it gives to one person it has taken from someone else.
