From kragen@dnaco.net Thu Jul 9 12:51:35 1998 Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 12:51:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Kragen To: systalk@ml.org Subject: Re: [ST] Emigration In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980709114509.008435d0@impaqcomp.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Keywords: X-UID: 389 Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Rik Thomas wrote: > At 11:03 AM 7/9/98 -0400, you wrote: > on business. I think Wall Street is the largest influence, business cut to > make > the investors happy and of course they have to have some left over for > themselves, True. Part of this has to do with 60% or so of American stock being owned by "institutional investors" -- mostly pension funds -- with no real oversight from the people whose money is being invested. In the absence of such oversight, the fund managers act to maximize profits -- in fact, I think they are legally obliged to do so. > >A fair wage is one that adds up to a decent living. This means buying > >a small house, not living off credit cards, having enough beans and > >rice to eat, supporting two or three kids and a spouse, being able to > >send your kids to college, and being able to retire when you can't hoe > >beans or pick apples anymore. > > There are many people who do this on those wages. Which wages? $5.15 an hour? > >> Quite honestly, what is a fair wage for someone picking apples? Certainly > >> not 20 cents and hour but do they deserver more than minimum wage? > > > >Minimum wage in the US does not meet the above standard. > > Minimum wage is really improving. In the long term, no. Minimum wage now is about half of what it was in 1970, adjusted for inflation. It has improved significantly in the last year or two, though. > But should minimum wage buy you a house? > That would mean a 16 year old is able to buy a house while flipping burgers? Sure! After she saves up for ten years, of course. > I tend to think of minimum wage as providing you with a roof (rented), Renting costs a lot more than owning, on a larger-than-individual scale. Rented housing tends to be maintained more poorly and more expensively (with little DIYing). This is a way of destroying wealth. > enough > food for you and maybe on dependant and transportation (bus or a used car). > I don't think it should buy you a house, a new car, a 35" television, etc. > Those are material items that are not necessary to live. > Minimum wage is just that, providing the basic items to live. I don't think a *new* car or a 35" television should be involved, necessarily. And I don't think everyone on minimum wage should have to depend on commercial day-care providers for their children, either. > >> They should become Americans, they should pay taxes, they should live up > >> to community ideals (not morals but ideals). > > > >I agree with the last two. By and large, immigrants do those things. > > immigrants to, illegal aliens do not, other than paying consumption taxes, > gasoline, sales, etc. Actually, "illegal aliens" usually *do* pay payroll taxes, and they don't even get their income tax refunds. So they actually end up paying *more* tax than U.S. citizens in the same income bracket. What tax are you thinking of that these folks *don't* pay? > The unions helped with that during the period when citizens really did not > understand their right nor what the government and a well placed fax could > do for them. Times have changed and *most* Unions are bloated, corrupt, > and greedy. There are far more better ways to get things fixed. The > Government is not the end-all to labor problems, but it is a place to start. The reason the gov't is responsive to labor concerns at all is because unions have PACs. > >I think that, if unions are causing unskilled workers to be paid more > >than skilled workers, then the skilled workers should unionize too. > > My big problem with Unionizing all labor is that it socializes everything. I don't think so. How is unionization the same thing as socialism? > Socialism has never worked. America, like it or not is becoming more > and more socialist with each passing administration and each new politically > correct rules that passes. Not that the fundamental idea of socialism is > necessarily bad, but it will never work her, there is just too much money to > be had! ;) Actually, more of the US's stock is owned by ordinary workers (in the form of pension funds) than in most nominally socialist countries. I believe this is less true now than it was in the 1970's and 1980's, but I'm not sure. > >I know unions aren't perfect -- they have corruption and excessive > >conservatism, and they tend to be mired in the outdated adversarial > >model of business. I think these things can be remedied. > > There never will be a way to fix that as long as money and power have a > higher place in life then human sanctity. Unions were established to honor human dignity above money and power. Kragen