RE: Help with a Minimum Wage Model

From: matus (matus@snet.net)
Date: Thu Apr 10 2003 - 10:35:32 MDT

  • Next message: Lee Daniel Crocker: "Re: Changing ones mind"

    > matus wrote:
    > >>On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:56:04AM -0700, Lee Corbin wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>I've never seen a society getting richer that got (internally)
    > >>>worse. I'd rather a country be run by rich hoodlums that by
    > >>
    > >>Define "internally worse". That rapid growth of GDP seems
    > correlated with
    > >>increasing inequality seems well-accepted (debate is over how much the
    > >>inequality matters.) The US has kept on getting richer over
    > the last few
    > >>decades, but income in the bottom segment has fallen in absolute
    > >>terms (module
    > >>the existence of stuff which couldn't be bought before... but
    > >>food and housing
    > >>are basics.)
    > >
    > >
    > > Do you mean to imply that food is more expensive, and getting
    > more expensive
    > > all the time? I find that hard to believe.
    >
    > Are you going to address housing and the other implied
    > necessities or just harp on your understanding of food
    > abundances (but not necessarily food prices).

    Quite frankly I prefer to speak only on things I know of and have a
    reasonably decent understanding of, is that so wrong? Perhaps if others on
    this list made an effort to do that more, the single to noise ratio on this
    list would be a litter more preferable.

    I could of course reply to you 'are you going to address or concede the
    point that food is obviously more abundant and cheaper than ever before?'

     If I have no home
    > or cooking facilities the types of food I can buy are also
    > severely limited and per unit of nutrition much more expensive.

    Again, the blame of the oppresive tyrannical governments that control most
    3rd world nations, not the fact that we dont have enough cheap nutritious
    food. Governments, I might add, that you tend to disagree with the US
    removal of. But let me ask you this, which would you rather have

    1) enough food to survive and no house
    2) a house but starve to death.

    I think the choice is clear, the fact that even the poorest of the poor in
    the worst countries get 30% more calories today than they did 30 years ago
    is clearly an extropic starting point. 1st, lets keep people from starving
    to death, THEN lets give them a warm place to sleep. But to do either of
    these at any reasonable rate, you must get rid of the murderous despotic
    governments that rule and enslave these people.

    > Are you going to attempt to say that the cost of living in say
    > 1970 dollars has not risen and risen dramatically in the last 32
    > years?
    >

    That being said, Ill comment on it since you are so concerned with what I
    think of the cost of residence. Though I have not investigated this in
    depth, I find it somewhat reasonable to assume that it may be increasing,
    given land and property are probably the most definitely finite resource
    around. Where other resources get cheaper as we are able to produce and
    acquire them better, and we dont look to be running out of them anytime
    soon, land is a different story. There is only so much land on the coast of
    California, so that land will necessarily get real expensive. Similiarly
    there is only so much reasonably buildable land as well, so it stands to
    reason as the amount of buildable land decreases, costs increase. The
    growing number of regulations imposed on building requirements certianly
    helps to raise this cost dramatically as well. However, technology has also
    enabled costs of construction to continually decrease, but when buying
    propery, its the land that is the biggest cost of the acquisition typically.
    The only thing I can see to change this trend is more available land, which
    would either mean less regulations on building (heights and distances
    between buildings and such) or water based floating platforms, underground
    dwellings, or cheap access to space.

    But, I would challenge your assertion that 'cost of living' has increased
    'dramatically' in 1970 dollars in the last 32 years. Assuming cost of
    living includes food, clothing, housing, etc, I would wager it has decreased
    primarily because 1) food, clothing, etc have decreased so much and 2)
    people in densely populated areas just live in smaller places. But I would
    welcome any evidence you can provide to support your claim.

    Michael Dickey



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 10 2003 - 10:28:55 MDT