• OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re really just saying you are against any increase in the minimum wage that could ever actually pass. So you’re against raising the minimum wage.

      If I wasn’t so sure the number was just a random number high enough that you can never be accused of being realistic, I’d ask how you decided on that number in particular.

      • If minimum wage was tied to productivity, the metric I would argue we should be using, it would be about $26 an hour, by the time we get any momentum both productive forces and inflation will have eaten up most of the gains we have made, so I increased the current minimum wage, and saw we where close to a pleaseing looking number. Believe it or not I did put thought into the number I chose.

        What I am opposed to is this begging for concessions, by the time we get them we are too little too late, but all the liberals go out to brunch because mission accomplished.

        Also why do we have to argue abput minimum wage in the first place, is not all fruits of labor, labor’s by right, why must we put up with capital stealing from us to increase their hoard?

    • substill@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Perfection is the enemy of progress.

      Also, that’s an awfully specific figure.

      • ☭ Comrade Pup Ivy 🇨🇺@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hardly perfection, if it was perfection I was at it would be the complete and unequivocal destruction of the Dictatorship of Capital and Liberation of Workers, in such that they get the full value kf their labor and no longer must beg for scraps, for without the laboror nothing would get done. But I understand that right now it is impractical to do with our level of class contiousness, so my compromise is $33.33 minimum wage or greater,

        And it tracks roughly with the levels of production done. If we are doing more work for the Capitalist the Capitalist must pay.

        • substill@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even assuming that hourly rate did track roughly with the production of the least skilled labor, why would anyone pay that? That’s the employer guaranteeing payment to at best break even, without accounting for any other costs or risks incurred by the employer.

            • substill@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              But there’s no law that requires hiring anyone in the first place. I’m 100% for raising the minimum wage. I’m for raising it to at least a living wage. But the math does not work if the wage paid by the employer = the price charged to the purchaser. At that point, the employer’s best case scenario is $0 profit, and unless the work is performed, sold, and paid for immediately, a loss on every single transaction. No one has any incentive to employ anyone at that rate.

              I have no idea whether $33.33 per hour is the actual productivity rate of the least skilled worker. I tried Googling it but the closest I could find is that the average American worker grossed $29.76 per hour, not the value of their work output. I also see a Bureau of Labor Statistics report that says the average worker creates $57.54 worth of goods and services per hour. But I don’t see the $33.33 figure in admittedly half ass searching.

              Regardless of what the figure is, there must be some spread between work output and take home pay or no one has any incentive to hire anyone else.

              • albigu@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                The profit should equal exactly the minimum wage, no more and no less. In fact it should not even be called “profit”, just the wage of the administration. Doesn’t matter if a profession is “skilled” or “unskilled”, people should be paid to live not to value their skills above others. No reason an MD should be paid more or less than a janitor and we wouldn’t be able to live without either of them. The pandemic showed clear as day how much work is “essential” and badly paid compared to “inessential” and “skilled”.

                It’s not even like employers themselves are particularly skilled anyways. Now if you believe that some people inherently deserve a worse life due to their profession, you can just say it.

                  • Wooly@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    14
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Ok, I’ve read all this. And it’s ridiculous, no one will open a business if they make $0. Raise the minimum to something livable like $20 and let them make a few million, probably with hard caps over something like $10+ million profit. They won capitalism, congrats, the rest goes back into the company/taxes. It shouldn’t meet exactly the productivity, just better than what we have now.

                    This idea is fine if you literally just want to survive, but your perfect world would have nothing of joy in it.

              • If they do not hire anyone, no work gets done. They have to hire about the same amount of people as already employed, as no capitalist trying to maximize profit is going to pay you more they they think they can get away with, and they will not operate with more workers than they need. They need us, we do not need them

          • If by skilled labor you mean all labor that is more than being a CEO, then yes, the idea of skilled and unskilled labor is a myth to devide the working class and should be disreguarded.

            Second in what universe should we, labor, care about capital or how they feel, they steal from us, they steal our suplus value, they rob the best years of our lives, and in the US, they activly argue aganst us getting basic government survices, they are not our friends. Risk does not cause value, me standing near a fire does not create value, labor creates value. And they would pay it because they need labor, Capital needs labor, labor does not need capital.

      • Bloops@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Workers: Hi bourgeoisie, I would like a $30 minimum wage.

        Bourgeoisie: Fuck off.

        Workers: Sorry about that, can we just have a $15 minimum wage?

        Bourgeoisie: Fuck off.

        Workers: OK you’re right. But we’ve had a $12 minimum wage before, so can we just go back to that?

        Bourgeoisie: Fuck off, we’re sticking to $7.25. Enjoy your pay cut next year as we increase inflation.

        This is to say, the ruling class are not some neutral pencil pushers that listen to reason. They want all the money they can get, and workers want as much of the value they produce that they can get. The only way workers can win higher wages is through class struggle, not winning a logic debate with capitalists.