Jump to content

Nighthawk

Member
  • Content Count

    3,705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    Libertarian

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    Abc@abc.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Anytown, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Still waiting on an answer to the question above, jrock. This is now the FOURTH time I have asked this simple question. Good luck.
  2. Alright, let's try to focus on one point at a time and then move on to the next, starting with this idiocy you posted- If you knew how to read, you would see that I very, very, very clearly stated that the ***PROFITS*** would be roughly the same, regardless of the level of the MW. I never said a damn thing about their COSTS staying the same, you illiterate sack of shit! Seriously, how the hell did you get past elementary school without learning how to read? If costs (for labor, raw materials, or any other input) decrease (or increase) for an entire industry and their revenues simultaneously decrease (or increase) by an equal amount then in the long term, the ***PROFITS*** can still be roughly the same, dumbass. Let's see if you can finally give a straight answer to a simple question, and see if this can help you grasp a simple concept- Suppose that the MW is increased to $15/hr as you idiot libs want. And further suppose that after this increase in the MW, the unskilled workers for some group of companies over some period of time have a combined extra $1 million more in wages than they would have had if the MW wage had not been increased. Since just raising the MW does not magically conjure extra wealth out of thin air, then this means that some other group or groups of people have to have at least $1 million less than they would have had if the MW had not been increased. So what group or groups will now have at least $1 million less over this period of time? Good luck.
  3. Still waiting on an answer to the question above, jrock. This is now the THIRD time I have asked this simple question. Good luck.
  4. What the hell are you talking about??? Of course jobs (in general) have prices, numbskull! Hell, you can easily look up the prices up on websites such as this one- www.salary.com. Just like in the example I gave you above of entry level accountants in S.F. having an average price of $68,200/yr, where you have cowardly refused to answer my simple question about it. Just because you are too damn ignorant to realize something does not mean it has never happened. No, the value (minimum price) of jobs in general is determined by the market, not by some individual "person" or some "equation." And if left alone with no moronic government interference, this value/wage will always gravitate towards the value of the work being performed. Individual employers have absolutely no say in the matter. Period. What the hell does it matter if businesses don't employ many of the lowest-skilled workers because they "CAN’T pay" or that "they don’t WANT to pay" government-mandated wages that are higher than the productivity of those workers??? In either case, those unskilled workers are still ***UNEMPLOYED***, you damn idiot! No where in your post above did you say a damn thing about whether a business could "afford" to overpay their workers in regards to whether they would do so, just that it would be "poor business." I think you realize that you fucked up royally by accidentally admitting the very obvious truth that moronic MW laws make it difficult for some workers to be employed, and now you are desperately trying to backtrack on your own statements. Lol... Since you used another lame excuse instead of answering my question, allow me to rephrase it for you- Suppose that there is a MW law of $15/hr passed somewhere. Furthermore, assume that the all the employers in this area can afford to pay these higher wages if they want to do so. What will happen in this region to most of the group of workers that have a current "value of their labor" that is less than $15/hr? Will they: A. be greatly helped by this law, because there are tons and tons of "poor business men or women" that love to lose money when employing people, and as a result, these low-skill workers will still be able to keep a job and they will just get to enjoy getting overpaid, with no other consequences? or B. be greatly and cruelly HARMED by this law, because very few employers will want to lose money by hiring them, and thus they will not only be making ZERO, they will also be unable to gain skills and experience from on-the-job training? If you are unsure of the answer to this amazingly simple question, just refer to your own statement. Here is it again for you, in case you forgot- "Who hires someone to do something In which the value of the labor doesn’t supersede the monetary value? If someone is doing that, that’s just a poor business man or woman." So do you answer A or B? Good luck. Who the fuck would do something so idiotic? That is absurd- like literally cutting one's nose off to spite their own face. I bet you can't even post a single link to an example of a "lucrative business" being shut down by their owner solely as a "protest to MW laws", dumbass. Good luck. Again, you are just making lame excuses that have absolutely nothing to do with the point of the question because you are too much of a coward to simply give a damn answer. So allow me to rephrase it again to get around your lame excuse- Are you claiming that if moronic MW laws were abolished and some worker with a productivity of say, only $5/hr was paid $6/hr by their employer who can easily afford to pay this amount, because they wanted to generously help a family member, that this evil employer would be somehow "marginalizing their value", despite the fact that they are LOSING MONEY in the process of employing them, just because their pay is less than the magical number of $7.25/hr? Yes or no? Can you answer this time, or will you come up with another lame excuse? Good luck. Actually, Bezos has formally come out in favor of raising the federal MW to $15/hr, moron. And I bet you are too damn stupid to know why he would do this, aren't you? Here is a hint- it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with concern for the poor little workers and is entirely for selfish & greedy reasons. Not like what answers??? All I see is lame excuses while you cowardly duck and dodge nearly every question I ask. No, I would not give any moronic number for a MW whatsoever, dimwit. Unlike you idiot libs, I am not foolish or conceited enough to think I would know the appropriate price for some good or service. Only the market should be allowed to determine prices, based on supply and demand. Period. Sigh... I simply don't know how to get this through your thick fucking skull... I have tried telling you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over that- I do not really give a flying shit about the fucking employers- I am on the side of the lowest-skilled WORKERS, especially the black ones, unlike you racist idiot libs. I have also very, very, very clearly told you the following- 1. Employers in general paying their workers significantly below the level of their productivity is logically IMPOSSIBLE without using FORCE or FRAUD, even with no moronic MW laws whatsoever. 2. Regardless if there is a very high MW or no MW whatsoever, the profit margins of the surviving businesses in the long term will be ROUGHLY THE SAME, in general. And have you actually made anything even slightly resembling a rational or logical argument as to how these 2 claims are supposedly wrong? No, you just sit there and blindly say- "nuh-uh, you just wanna get rid of MW laws bcus you want to make higher profit by underpaying your workers", like some kind of brainless fucking retard. So, can you please explain why I would want to do get rid of MW laws because I supposedly want to do something that is IMPOSSIBLE, and/or would not even result in making a larger profit, imbecile? No they are not the only examples I have given, you fucking liar. I have also posted a MOUNTAIN of studies that demonstrate the severe HARM inflicted by moronic MW laws numerous times throughout this thread- Link. And this is in addition to the irrefutable logic and reason as to why these moronic laws are harmful. Well the sky-high MW laws were obviously not "conducive to their province" in American Samoa or Puerto Rico, dolt. The effects of those laws were exactly what basic economic theory and simple logic would predict. How do you explain that? No, I am "griping" about the SEVERE HARM that these laws inflict upon the lowest-skilled workers, especially the black ones. If I was an employer, I would not give a damn in regards to my own profits because they would not change in the long run whether the MW was $0, $7.25, $15, or anything in between, as my profit margins would be roughly the same. Why the hell is this so difficult for your to grasp??? So why the hell do you think we need a moronic law to hold something steady that is IMPOSSIBLE to do in the first place, moron? I didn't "imply" that *ALL* corresponding businesses are free from MW laws, idiot, I came right out and stated it as part of the hypothetical example!!! And what the hell does that have to do with my simple question? Since you cowardly dodged a simple question as usual, here it is again for you- So if there is no MW law for ALL businesses and some evil, cheapskate employer tries to employ a group of workers with a productivity of $8/hr for only $2/hr, when there is another competing employer offering those workers $8/hr (for similar work), would this likely to be- A. POSSIBLE for the cheapskate to be successful in their attempt to hire them for only $2/hr? or B. IMPOSSIBLE for the cheapskate to be successful in their attempt to hire them for only $2/hr? If your answer is B, then you need to explain why the hell we need a moronic MW law to prevent something that is IMPOSSIBLE. Good luck. Where have I ever stated a "desired preference" other than the price set by the market itself??? You can "reiterate" a load of complete bullshit until your ass bleeds, that doesn't magically make it come true. Basic economic theory and simple logic do not agree with that moronic claim that a lack of MW laws leads to "destitution", and numerous real world examples that I have provided show the exact opposite is clearly true. So how do you explain that? It would not be at the owner's expense even if there is a moronic MW law and someone is lucky enough to stay employed and make more money than they would without the law, because the evil owner is not the one ultimately paying it in the long run. The owner/employer is just a middle-man, dumbass. So what the hell is your point? How the hell is sentencing the lowest-skilled workers, especially the black ones, to chronic unemployment and great suffering as a direct result of moronic MW laws, supposedly showing them "sympathy and empathy", idiot? And most of your replies are just lame excuses and arguments against things I have never, ever said. And this is IN SPITE OF moronic MW laws, not BECAUSE of them, dullard. But these evil, greedy employers are ALREADY paying the vast majority of workers way, way, way more than the MW, all on their own. This definitively proves that your idiotic little fearmongering scenario is complete and utter bull-fucking-shit!!! Why can't you see this? Employers can't magically "recalibrate" the price of a given type of labor anymore than they can magically "recalibrate" what they pay for oil or any other good or service, dumbass. No, people create/provide and sell labor. People also create/provide and sell barrels of oil and ounces of gold. So what is your damn point? No the price oil isn't "arbitrary", it is determined by supply and demand. Have you never so much as even opened a book on basic economics even once in your entire miserable life? Lol... You don't have to just pay what "someone" says is the price of oil, dunce. It is what is set by the market, based on supply and demand. The same goes for the price of a certain type of labor. Period. And if an evil, greedy employer doesn't pay the price for labor as set by the market, they will also "go cold." So what is your damn point? Of course, gas prices will shoot up after a hurricane because that is the market setting the price based on supply and demand, which have changed as a result of the hurricane. No fucking duh. Gas companies don't keep prices high all the time because the maximum they can successfully charge is not up to them, dullard. The prices are set by the market based on supply and demand. Similarly, in the absence of moronic MW laws, employers can't keep wages low because it is also not up to them- it is up to the market based on supply and demand. Seriously, even a dull-witted child should be able to understand something so simple and obvious... AGAIN- I have never, ever compared or equated the value of any of these things to each other. Please learn how to fucking read! For the umpteenth time- I am simply illustrating a PRINCIPLE using oil as a random example, you damn moron! That PRINCIPLE is that it is IMPOSSIBLE in general for companies to pay below market value for goods or services (without using FORCE or FRAUD), regardless of how greedy they are. Yes, I have utterly destroyed your claims about Switzerland here- Link, and you never refuted a single thing I posted about them. I keep referencing the places I do because they very clearly demonstrate that basic economic theories work in the real world exactly as predicted. For example, basic economics predicts that if there is no moronic MW law, then there will essentially be no involuntary unemployment among unskilled workers, such as most teenagers. And guess what? Switerland has no moronic MW and also has essentially no no involuntary unemployment among unskilled workers, such as most of their teenagers. Basic economic theory also predicts that a very high MW law compared to the median wages will result in ECONOMIC DEVASTATION and sky-high unemployment among unskilled workers. And guess what? This is exactly what happened in American Samoa and Puerto Rico. Are you going to sit there and claim that these places exactly matching the theories is just one big, gigantic coincidence? Lol... And how does making many of the less fortunate UNEMPLOYED COMPLETELY with moronic MW laws, where they will not only be making ZERO, they will also be unable to gain skills and experience from on-the-job training, supposedly "help" them??? I did not ask you to argue oil regulations "in relation to a human", dunce. I am simply asking you to defend your moronic claim about there being some supposed "oil regulations" that would prevent a greedy company from paying below market value and thus make more profit. Are you now admitting that your claim was full of shit? The fact is, the market itself prevents greedy companies from underpaying for oil, just like it keeps them from underpaying for labor, with no moronic minimum price laws required. AGAIN, I am not, have not, and never will talk about selling humans!!! Humans are not something that should ever be bought or sold, nimrod. I am talking about humans selling things of value, such as goods like oil or services like labor. A human can sell a barrel of oil and a human can also sell an hour of their labor. And again, I have never, ever stated that all the goods or services that they can conceivable sell are equal to each other, just that people buying those goods or services have to pay the price set by the market for those goods or services. Period.
  5. You are most welcome. Yes, it is a lot of fun destroying and humiliating these idiot libs. Though sometimes, it feels just too damn easy beating up on these poor, pitifully stupid little retards. Hell, apparently most of them barely even know how to read. Just look at the idiotic response from the board dullard dontlooknow above, with the key word of the request put in bold capital letters. I made a very simple request that I would think even a very dull-witted child could comprehend, but it was apparently still too difficult for him to grasp. Lol... I am totally and completely baffled how people this damn dumb can somehow manage to survive in daily society without constant supervision...
  6. If that is a lame attempt to respond to my simple request, then you need to try again. I did not ask you to just show everyone how unbelievably fucking stupid you are. My request was very, very, very clear and simple. Good luck.
  7. If you are idiotically claiming this is BECAUSE of their higher moronic MW laws, then let's see you prove it, dunce. Good luck.
  8. Still waiting on an answer to the question above, jrock. Good luck.
  9. No, workers are not "given" a fucking thing by people in regards to their productivity. A worker's productivity is simply a measure of how much goods and/or services he can produce by doing a certain job over a certain amount of time. What, you think some evil employer just arbitrarily picks a number and proclaims- "I hereby declare that Bob has a productivity of $10/hr!" and that is how it is decided? Lol... Hot damn! Now we are getting somewhere! I can't believe you actually said something at least partially correct on this subject. Yes, employers in general (but not always, see below) will NOT hire someone when they would lose money in the process. Now that we have established this very obvious fact, let's take it one step further- Suppose that there is a MW law of $15/hr passed somewhere. What will happen in this region to most of the group of workers that have a current "value of their labor" that is less than $15/hr? Will they: A. be greatly helped by this law, because there are tons and tons of "poor business men or women" that love to lose money when employing people, and as a result, these low-skill workers will still be able to keep a job and they will just get to enjoy getting overpaid, with no other consequences? or B. be greatly and cruelly HARMED by this law, because very few employers will want to lose money by hiring them, and thus they will not only be making ZERO, they will also be unable to gain skills and experience from on-the-job training? If you are unsure of the answer to this amazingly simple question, just refer to your own statement. Here is it again for you, in case you forgot- "Who hires someone to do something In which the value of the labor doesn’t supersede the monetary value? If someone is doing that, that’s just a poor business man or woman." So do you answer A or B? Good luck. And while this does not happen in general, there are certainly some occasions where this could happen. Perhaps someone hires a relative and overpays them just to be generous to a family member. But I still don't know what the hell this had to do with my simple question. It seems like you are just making a lame excuse so you don't have to answer. So let me rephrase the question for you- Are you claiming that if moronic MW laws were abolished and some worker with a productivity of say, only $5/hr was paid $6/hr by their employer, because they wanted to generously help a family member, that this evil employer would be somehow "marginalizing their value", despite the fact that they are LOSING MONEY in the process of employing them, just because their pay is less than the magical number of $7.25/hr? Yes or no? Can you answer this time, or will you just cowardly dodge it with another lame excuse? Good luck. I was not saying that the "productivity" was arbitrary, you illiterate cretin! I was saying that the level set for the MW is arbitrary, dolt. My point was your claim that it is only a "valid wage" just because it is higher than this arbitrary MW number is retarded. For the love of all that is holy, please learn how to fucking read!!! Why the hell do you keep pretending like I don't know how MW laws work, dumbass? Where have I ever said anything about it being legal to pay someone on the books less than the MW in the places that have these laws??? No, dimwit, intelligent people such as myself primarily have an opposition to moronic MW laws because they cause higher unemployment among the lowest-skilled workers, especially the black ones, in addition to hurting the economy in general. I don't give a flying shit if employers just "save on labor costs." Why the hell is this so hard for you to comprehend??? So your solution is for me to personally go out and hire every single unskilled worker in the country myself? What, do you think I am some kind of multi-multi-billionaire? Lol... How about we simply abolish all moronic MW laws and there is no need for me to hire them as the market will provide jobs for them all on its own if it is allowed to do so? This is exactly what I have been trying in vain to explain to you, numbskull!!! Of course no one is likely to work for me for $2/hr when someone else is offering a similar job at $8/hr! So if there is no MW law and some evil, cheapskate employer tries to employ a group of workers with a productivity of $8/hr for only $2/hr, when there is another competing employer offering those workers $8/hr (for similar work), would this likely to be- A. POSSIBLE for the cheapskate to be successful in their attempt to hire them for only $2/hr? or B. IMPOSSIBLE for the cheapskate to be successful in their attempt to hire them for only $2/hr? If your answer is B, then you need to explain why the hell we need a moronic MW law to prevent something that is IMPOSSIBLE. Good luck. Where the hell have I ever said a fucking thing about "devaluing" anyone??? Of course I want workers to make more money. The higher the better. But this is only if FORCE is NOT being used, idiot. If workers can be made more productive by doing things such as improving education or encouraging more capital investment, and as a result, the workers NATURALLY get higher wages to match their higher productivity, then this would be absolutely fantastic for everyone, retard. What part are you not understanding? Or if you are just saying my statement is false, then why can't you prove it for fuck's sake? What the hell is "subjective" about my statements #1 or #2 above??? They are simply factual statements based on basic economic theory and simple logic. And as I have told you dozens of times now, if the productivity of the workers is above "destitute levels", then the market itself would make it IMPOSSIBLE for an evil cheapskate employer to pay them significantly below that. Thus, there is absolutely no need for a moronic MW law to prevent this from happening, twit,. No, I am simply using oil as a random example to illustrate a PRINCIPLE, dullard. That principle is that it is IMPOSSIBLE in general for companies to pay below market value for goods or services (without using FORCE or FRAUD), regardless of how greedy they are. And an hour of labor doesn't "have bills to pay" or "get hungry" or "have kids" either. It is just something that can be sold, similar to oil or other goods or services. So what is your fucking point? I never said that oil and humans were the same thing or were valued the same. Holy fuck, please learn how to read!!! If you know that I never said something, then why the hell are you continually pretending that I have said it?!?!? No, they aren't the same, but the PRINCIPLE that it is IMPOSSIBLE in general to pay below market value is the same for both of them. An ounce of gold and a barrel of oil are also not the same thing and each of them have vastly different prices as well, but in both cases, people wanting to buy them have to pay market value in both cases. And no moronic minimum price law is required to make this happen. And I already clearly explained how no, Switzerland really is not that socialistic and their union support does not cover all workers. And all of this is completely irrelevant to the point anyway. There are plenty of other "socialistic" countries that have very high youth unemployment. The main difference is that Switzerland has no moronic MW and just as basic economic theory would predict, they have basically no unemployment of unskilled workers. And there is no great catastrophe like you idiot libs pretend would happen without these moronic laws. No, the reason I "conveniently" selected American Samoa and PR is because the level of the MW was very high in comparison to the median wages, and thus the severe HARM these moronic laws caused was much easier to see. In most of the US, increases in the MW have always been in very small increments and very close to the market value of unskilled labor for most (but not all) workers. This makes it very hard to see the harm in all the noise from other variables changing simultaneously. If the US had a sudden increase in the MW that was as high compared to the median wages as occurred in these territories, then you would have seen very similar economic DEVASTATION, dope. How the hell does this change the undeniable FACT that they had a massive increase in their MW laws and economic DEVASTATION resulted, just as basic economic theory would predict??? No fucking duh. Sigh... as I very, very, very clearly told you in a post above- THE INITIATION OF FORCE AGAINST OTHERS = BAD Do you not even know what the word "initiation" means, moron? This does not mean that all FORCE = BAD. If someone else has "initiated" FORCE, then someone else responding with FORCE to defend against that first action is perfectly fine. So if someone is trying to assault, rape, murder, etc.. another person, then it is fine for the government or another citizen to counter that first use of force with force of their own. In fact, that is one of the very few legitimate functions of government to start with. But none of this has anything to do with my simple question above. Since you cowardly dodged it, here it is again for you- So let's see you show what supposed "oil regulations" prevent greedy companies from paying less than $58/barrel when they buy their oil, other than regulations or laws against using FORCE or FRAUD. Good luck. I don't need luck, because I always base my positions on basic economics and simple logic, therefore I am always on the correct side of a debate with no luck required.
  10. As I have asked you numerous times, where the hell can I supposedly go to get paid to post on this forum, shithead??? Can you please hook me up with some kind of link or contact name where I can sign up for this? So far, I have only been humiliating you idiot libs for the fun of it, like some kind of chump... Thanks in advance!
  11. But you STILL have not come remotely close to showing how I would supposedly be able to successfully do those things, moron. See post above. The key difference between these things is that killing someone against their will involves using FORCE, dolt! Of course using FORCE against someone is immoral. No fucking duh. Simply offering to pay someone a wage below some arbitrary value and that person VOLUNTARILY accepting the offer, with no use of FORCE or FRAUD whatsoever, IS NOT IMMORAL, numbskull!!! So your analogy makes no fucking sense! Yes, explaining things to a very dumb person who can barely read is indeed quite a problem... For the umpteenth time- market competition will stop wages from "petering out" at anything less than something close to the productivity of the work being performed. Therefore, wages can only "peter out" at $2/hr if the productivity of the work being performed is also $2/hr. Can you please tell me how many more times I am going to have to post this before it sinks through your thick skull? Thanks in advance. Again- I never, ever said that the markets would somehow allow wages to go ABOVE the productivity of the work being done, you illiterate twit! If the productivity of a burger flipper maxes out at say $9/hr, then yes, that is where the wages for those workers will also max out. This is really not that complicated, so why can't you get it??? Let's try this for a random example and see if it can finally penetrate that thick skull of yours- According to this website - Link - the median salary for an entry-level accountant in San Fransisco is $68,200/yr. Now, why is this salary the level that it is and not lower? Why isn't it $60,000, $50,000, or $40,000? Wouldn't these evil, greedy employers make more of that evil profit if they only paid $50,000 instead of $68,000? You can't use the dumb answers you gave earlier about no one would work for these amounts, because people would obviously work for $50,000/yr. And you can't claim it is due to "bargaining power", as an entry-level worker is very unlikely to have any such power over an employer. So how do you explain this, based on your retarded little theories of how the world supposedly works? Good luck. See post above. Of course not, idiot! China and North Korea are not fucking free markets!!! But it does indeed seem to "work my way" for accountants in S.F., based on the link above. Damn, you really are quite stupid... Again- you STILL have not come remotely close to showing how I would supposedly be able to successfully do those things, moron. I did not ask you for an example of "who", dimwit. I very, very, very clearly asked you for an example of "how" evil employers can "manipulate" the labor market without using FORCE or FRAUD in a way that allows them to underpay workers. What, are you just too damn stupid to know the difference between the words "who" and "how"? I must ask again, how did you get past elementary school, as most 1st graders probably know the difference between these 2 words. Lol... And yet you can't say it "wasn't good" for Switzerland that has had great economic prosperity for unskilled labor "w/ the likes & times of me." Oops. If you knew how to read, you would see I was talking about how your idiotic theory that employers of burger flippers would have some magical power that would allow them to pay significantly below the value their workers can provide is complete bullshit EVEN IF THERE WERE NO MORONIC MW LAWS WHATSOEVER, retard! Damn, it is like I am conversing with a brick wall or something...
  12. How the hell is it doing any such thing if the value that worker is providing is also below the MW? Are you claiming that if moronic MW laws were abolished and some worker with a productivity of say, only $5/hr was paid $6/hr by their employer, that this evil employer would be somehow "marginalizing their value", despite the fact that they are LOSING MONEY in the process of employing them, just because their pay is less than the magical number of $7.25/hr? Yes or no? I wonder if you are really insane enough to claim that the party that is LOSING MONEY in an economic transaction is still somehow doing something immoral in this transaction... And your definition of "valid wage" has nothing whatsoever to do with the value the worker brings to the employer, dope? It is simply some number arbitrarily pulled out of someone's asshole and the productivity of the worker is completely irrelevant in your fantasy world? Lol... [sarcasm]Wow, I guess you really put me in my place with such a well-reasoned and thorough rebuttal of my arguments, point by point. I guess I need to rethink my entire stance on this issue now.[/sarcam] Lol... Sigh... as I told you multiple times in a post above- Let me make this as clear as possible for a dullard such as yourself- I do not really give a flying shit about the fucking employers- I am on the side of the lowest-skilled WORKERS, especially the black ones, unlike you racist idiot libs. Again- I do not really give a flying shit about the fucking employers- I am on the side of the lowest-skilled WORKERS, especially the black ones, unlike you racist idiot libs. and third times a charm- I do not really give a flying shit about the fucking employers- I am on the side of the lowest-skilled WORKERS, especially the black ones, unlike you racist idiot libs. I have also very, very, very clearly told you the following- 1. Employers in general paying their workers significantly below the level of their productivity is logically IMPOSSIBLE without using FORCE or FRAUD, even with no moronic MW laws whatsoever. 2. Regardless if there is a very high MW or no MW whatsoever, the profit margins of the surviving businesses in the long term will be ROUGHLY THE SAME, in general. And have you actually made anything even slightly resembling a rational or logical argument as to how these 2 claims are supposedly wrong? No, you just sit there and blindly say- "nuh-uh, you just wanna get rid of MW laws bcus you want to make higher profit by underpaying your workers", like some kind of brainless fucking retard. Now, if you can actually and finally disprove my claims using logic and reason, as opposed to just hurling false accusations as to my motivations, then let's see you do it for fuck's sake. Good luck. Neither is labor, dumbass. We are not fucking talking about selling humans, like some kind of slaves, idiot. We are talking about humans selling their services (i.e. labor) to other humans. And guess who the fuck is selling oil, dipshit? That is right- humans are selling goods (like oil) to other humans!!! And according to basic economic theories, there is no difference between humans selling services and humans selling goods. The buyers of these goods or services do not have some magical power that allows them to successfully underpay for them regardless of which category they are in, twit. No, I am doing nothing of the sort. I am simply using oil as an example to show how it is logically IMPOSSIBLE for companies to supposedly underpay for goods or services, regardless of how greedy they are (other than by using FORCE or FRAUD). And you are just too damn stupid to comprehend it. And a service doesn't have to do any of those things either. A human selling the service may have to do them, but a human selling goods may have to do them as well. So what the fuck is your point??? Oh really? Then why don't we compare how things go where the people in control follow my intelligent positions regarding moronic MW laws, such as Switzerland, to places where people in control follow your idiotic positions regarding moronic MW laws, such as Puerto Rico & American Samoa, and see which places fared better as a result? Oh wait, I have already done that multiple times in this thread and the facts clearly showed that your dumb ideas led to ECONOMIC DEVASTATION with massive unemployment and suffering, while mine led to ECONOMIC PROSPERITY with practically no unemployment. Oops, there goes your dumb little theory... Lol... if you knew how stupid your argument was before making it, then why the hell did you go ahead and show your stupidity anyway? So let's see you show what supposed "oil regulations" prevent greedy companies from paying less than $58/barrel when they buy their oil, other than regulations or laws against using FORCE or FRAUD. Good luck.
  13. What the hell are you babbling about? Why would a bidding war "regress"? A bidding war will gravitate towards the productivity of the work being performed, as I have told you over and over and over and over and over. No, my vision is that wages in general will always be close to the productivity of the work being performed and that some evil, greedy employer foolishly trying to "seek personal benefit" by "devaluing, marginalizing or exploiting" their workers is logically IMPOSSIBLE without the employer using FORCE or FRAUD. Period. And if I may be permitted to translate, in laymen terms, what you are actually saying- "If you are inexperience and low-skilled such that you are currently incapable of providing value to an employer equal to some arbitrary number someone pulled out of their asshole, you are not going to be allowed to work at all." How tyrannical of you. What?!?! Chopping off heads is immoral and evil regardless of whether there is a law against it, shit-for-brains. So what the hell does that have to do with anything I have ever posted? Are you just posting random dumb statements for the fun of it because you have nothing else? Lol... You don't know what the word "truly" means??? Try opening a dictionary and looking it up, moron. The market will determine the productivity of various workers and jobs all by itself. If some profession is generally being underpaid compared to the value those workers produce, then more and more and more and more investment will flow into that industry from greedy entrepreneurs to capture the high profits from employing those workers. The resulting increase in demand for those particular workers will cause their wages to be bid up and up and up until the profits come back in line with the risk being taken, because the wages are now closer to their productivity, and the new entrants into the industry level off. And the opposite will happen if workers are overpaid. This is why wages will ALWAYS gravitate towards productivity in a free market. What does any of that have to do with anything I have ever posted? Then let's see you give an example of how evil employers can "manipulate" the labor market without using FORCE or FRAUD in a way that allows them to underpay workers. Good luck. Why the hell do you keep on "illustrating" a point that does not refute a single thing I have ever posted, numbskull? Of course a burger flipper is not going to "leverage" against a job as a partner at a law firm and a doctor is not going to do it against Burger King. No fucking duh. Employers of burger flippers will be competing against other competing employers of unskilled labor up until the wages of the workers are close to the value those workers can provide to them. This means that your moronic theory that employers of burger flippers would have some magical power that would allow them to pay significantly below the value their workers can provide is complete bullshit. Period.
×
×
  • Create New...