From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Sun Apr 06 2003 - 17:41:36 MDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Hixson" <charleshixsn@earthlink.net>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2003 5:39 PM
Subject: Re: Help with a Minimum Wage Model
> Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
>
> >In a message dated 4/5/2003 11:21:14 PM Central Standard Time,
> >rafal@smigrodzki.org writes: As usual with such schemes, those who are
> >burdened so, will attempt to reduce the payout, e.g. by substituting
> >mechanized labor, stopping to patronize businesses which have to increase
> >...
> > Figuring here on the back of my envelope I will lose the savings
in
> >labor as that is lost due to the payraise.
> >Ron h.
> >
> I did a few spreadsheet calculations, involving the current minimum
> wage, the hours in a week, and the cost of rent in substandard housing
> in the area where I live. Working full time at minimum wage, and
> without counting taxes
### People living on minimum wages do not pay direct taxes.
--------------------------------------
or any other expenses (e.g., food, clothes, etc.)
> a persons would end up with less than $7 per day after paying their
> rent. (I forget how much less, and I made several optomistic
assumptions.)
>
> You might want to think about that, when you are recommending that the
> minimum wage be lowered or removed. Effectively, it already has been.
> People can't avoid paying taxes, so they would actually end up in the
> hole for paying their rent at the end of a month, even with no other
> expenses at all. (e.g., food, clothes, medicine.)
>
> Now actually the way people live through this is by stuffing an illegal
> number of people into one apartment. So this means that they are at the
> mercy of any authority who has it in for them, and since they are easy
> targets there are many who take advantage. And I forgot to include
> transportation. Another necessity which must be paid, and can't be
> afforded.
>
> Your estimates and models are based on assuming that free choice is
> available. This is in contradiction to the observed facts. If you want
> to know why a disporportionate number of low income people turn to
> violent crime, look at the above and consider that desperation might be
> involved. Or a reluctance to willingly sign themselves over to a life
> of slavery. (Yes, it's a bad answer. But desperation frequently yields
> bad answers.)
>
> And yes, I know individuals who have escaped from the trap. This
> doesn't alter the fact that for the majority, it is real, present, and
> appearantly unavoidable. If you strip hope from people, don't be
> surprised if they strip life or property from you. It can be reliably
> predicted that this wouldn't help most of them much, but *you* wouldn't
> be there to know.
>
> I have never supposed that "Homeland Security" was mainly intended to
> protect us against foreigners. I look at what they are doing, and
> observe who is mainly being observed, and I figure that where they are
> paying attention is where they intend to act. Most of the powers they
> have been granted have nothing to do with stopping foreign terrorists,
> and a lot to do with controlling citizens. Especially those who have
> been "law abiding". So I feel that the government is well aware that it
> is driving many citizens to the point of desperation, and is intending
> to be able to ride out the storm. Like Napoleon as the Corporal of the
> Guard (I think he was still a corporal then), they will be able to draw
> a deadline, and kill anyone who crosses it. I don't know how that bit
> of history will work out this time around, but if we live to see it, we
> will consider ourselves quite lucky if we live through it.
>
>
### I wasn't quite able to find out if you were pointing out the inadequacy
of minimum wage laws, asserting their superiority over minimum wage
subsidies, or making other points. My previous posts merely indicated that
the minimum wage law is not a good way of helping the poor, that it in fact
it reduces their chances of improving their lives, and that changing it in
favor of flat-tax supported wage subsidies is likely to be a more effective
way of providing help.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 06 2003 - 17:48:50 MDT