How progressives think the world should work

In a nutshell we can see right of the bat how broken progressives and their ideology are if you pay attention to things happening now. For example, there are a bunch of people agitating for fast food workers to strike and demand they be paid $15 an hour, for a job that can probably be done by monkeys or robots cheaper. At the same time, we have these same people telling physicians that they have to work for less or government controlled pay.

Think about that. Real hard. The message from progressives is that we should pay people whose most difficult task at work might be to flip burgers like kings, but those that have the acumen to put up with one of the most grueling, expensive, and long education tracks, should be treated like slaves of the state.

Yeah, you got to love that way of thinking, don’t ya?

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    But, the rich/wealthiest nation on Earth shouldn’t let the poor go without (insert made up “right” here)!!

    Or some such bullshit.

    This is why the movie Elysium was such crap – they had invented a machine that, within seconds, cured everything and made people immortal. And yet they weren’t making an absolute fortune selling it to everybody and taking advantage of the savings of mass production. It would be like having the capability to generate so much food that entire nations are overweight (like right now), and instead going “Nope. Not gonna do it. Just enough for me, and to hell with the rest of you. I’m just going to sit back and not get rich.” (just like envirotards want people to do via advocating returns to 18th century farming technology).

    Think about it: we already have the technology to feed the world with less farmland than we used to need for half the people, if you added super-cheap immortality to the mix then resources previously used for medical care (20% of the economy) would be freed up for the development of other technologies. In the movie they already had sustainable space stations – overpopulation wouldn’t have been a problem (nor the need for such drastic security measures) if capitalism would have actually been depicted accurately in the movie.

    Ironically, what he did do was show the natural results of excessive, omnipresent government regulation – stunted capitalism, gangs, and people fleeing what was obviously an oppressive police state to live in a nearby utopia which they guarded fiercely.

    Thumb up 6

  2. Aussiesmurf

    I don’t see a real contradiction here. In the opinion of certain people, there are both under-paid and over-paid workers in the economy.

    And ‘slaves’ is a pretty charged word. Are you sure that’s a fair comparison?

    Thumb up 0

  3. CM

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Thumb up 0

  4. CM

    By the way, since when did ‘kings’ get $15 an hour?
    Why should the rest of the population subsidise the owners of the company via ETCs, so they can pay them less?

    Thumb up 0

  5. Seattle Outcast

    So, CM, why not just raise the minimum wage to $50/hour, or $100? I’d like that – or, at least the current lifestyle that buys at the moment. Just for flipping burgers or mopping the floor. Perhaps everyone should make the “minimum wage”, then we’d all be equal. Oh, wait, every time people tried that in ended in abject failure….. BUT THIS TIME WE’LL DO IT RIGHT!!

    And that is what this actually boils down to – a minimum lifestyle just for existing and, maybe, doing monkey level labor. And that lifestyle always gets better – free healthcare, better electronics, better vehicles, bigger home, free food, free utilities, AC, central heat, free Xbox Live Gold, free pussy (and better pussy!!), top shelf liquor…. and make sure every time I squirt out a baby I get an increase in all that. A cushy life is a “right”, don’t you know…

    There is really no such thing as a “living wage”, in reality it’s nothing more than lifestyle envy of those who made better decisions, worked harder, and took more risks.

    Thumb up 3

  6. Poosh

    I think it’s perfectly acceptable and even “good” that fast food workers go on strike and demand higher pay. The low minimum wage in America is vile and disgusting – though I think i still oppose it because of the problems it causes, unintentionally, are worse. That being said if Fast Food workers think they are underpaid then, as a capitalist, I hope they do strike. If they are easily replaceable then one can conclude they weren’t being overpaid. If it turns out the workers were needed after all and difficult to replace then the workers are entitled to argue for higher wages and strike – and get their higher pay.

    Given that many people are willing to work (or forced to work due to the circumstances they were born into) for what is basically a punch in the face at Walmart etc, I’m fairly sure people are willing to work for significantly less than $15 (which is insane, £9!?) so eh good luck with being paid that….

    It’s disgusting that private sector workers cannot unionise. The amount of power such companies have over people is woefully disproportional given they should have no more power than a homeless person, in the first place.

    Then again the less well you treat your workers the more global power you gain, it seems (China, I’m looking at you).

    Thumb up 0

  7. Poosh

    “There is really no such thing as a “living wage”,”

    Is not a living wage what you need to maintain the “base life” which is basic clothing to keep warm and be presentable for work, basic food, and basic shelter and utilities. The living wage is what would you need to live and nothing above that. This can be worked out, calculated.

    There are millions of people with little skill at all, and have reached their potential when they work at Mc Donalds, and it’s luck of the draw. No matter how hard they work, their lott is fixed. A life bound to minimum wage for these people? I don’t know, but it’s always essential to put yourself in their shoes.

    – Though note all this talk of low pay, the huge benefits etc. that the state “gives” are never taken into account.

    Thumb up 0

  8. Seattle Outcast

    Actually, semi-skilled labor pays less than $15/hour in many instances – so there’s always that. Many salaried jobs start off at around the $40K, which is just a bit more, and if they worked overtime, a step down.

    Another way to think about this is that the median 2-income family income is around $45K (thanks for slicing that top 10% Obama, we know we can always make by with less), and if monkey-smart labor is suddenly worth over $30K, then someone in this picture is suddenly not needing to work as much. But that’s OK, hours will get gutted, or positions eliminated, so there isn’t a net effect on that income level.

    Not that this “strike” has gained much ground in the Puget Sound region, but the people that keep those fast food places in business (me and my coworkers, who have $$$ to spend freely on lunch) are extremely aware of when something “costs too much” for what we get. Six figure incomes and the dollar menu go hand in hand. And I think it says something when there is an AppleBee’s right in the middle of fast food heaven and I don’t know anybody that has set foot in there in the decade it’s been open.

    Thumb up 0

  9. Seattle Outcast

    It’s disgusting that private sector workers cannot unionise.

    The can unionize – taking any steps to punish those who attempt to do so is illegal, and they will be taken to court. Having worked at a union machine shop I can tell you that there were exactly two types of thought concerning the union, which took a big chunk of money every month in dues, and in return maintained an antagonistic relation ship with the owner & management to the point of bad faith negotiating on both sides.

    1) The pro-union losers, who actually made more money when there was no union, but were unemployable drug addicts, alcoholics, and unteachable fucktard idiots that could not be fired.

    2) Everyone else who worked there, who realized what a shit sandwich was being presented, and moved on to another company within a couple years.

    Guess which people were always round, year after year, until the company was eventually bought out?

    Thumb up 0

  10. Poosh

    I’m sure I read somewhere, maybe in that article, that you could chose to not employ people who would unionise. I’ll submit to your first hand knowledge.

    In practice, for reasons you’ve talked about and others I’m sure we all know, unions are bad – but supporting the right to unionise to sell your labour and barter, is not the same as supporting current or past unions – or supporting Public Sector Unions.

    *Even though $5.30 min wage is absolutely disgusting (shameful), that money would actually be worth a lot more if taxation etc wasn’t so high, and the government stopped screwing over the buying power of your currency.

    Thumb up 0

  11. CM

    So, CM, why not just raise the minimum wage to $50/hour, or $100?

    Obviously that wouldn’t work.
    I’m a little on a fence when it comes to the minimum wage. But I don’t see how it’s sustainable for everyone to effectively top up wages via tax credits. That’s essentially a huge public subsidy for what are often large and extremely profitable companies.
    I think it’s true that many of these jobs are held by people who are ‘moving up/through’ to better paying jobs. I think the larger problem (for the economy) is the low pay (relatively speaking) of the jobs further up the rung, which is killing off the middle class. That better lifestyle now requires two earners, working longer hours.

    Perhaps everyone should make the “minimum wage”, then we’d all be equal. Oh, wait, every time people tried that in ended in abject failure….. BUT THIS TIME WE’LL DO IT RIGHT!!

    Yet again you appear to be speaking to someone else. I’ve never even remotely advocated anything like that. Not sure why you keep employing this tactic. Perhaps it works with some of the audience?

    There is really no such thing as a “living wage”, in reality it’s nothing more than lifestyle envy of those who made better decisions, worked harder, and took more risks.

    Same as above.

    I don’t have any easy answers – I don’t think there are any. But no doubt you’ll forget this the second you stop reading it. Because ideology.

    Thumb up 1

  12. Seattle Outcast

    Obviously that wouldn’t work.

    Why not? If raising it at all is a “good idea”, which Keynesian theory says it is, why not just raise it arbitrarily to any level?

    When you can explain why minimum wages are self-defeating, you’ll also be explaining why Keynes was wrong about nearly everything. Hell, in the end, Keynes knew better.

    Thumb up 0

  13. CM

    Keynesians in the golden age of Keynesianism were quite critical of the minimum wage and were sympathetic to its victims. One of Paul Samuelson’s best lines in the 1970 edition of his textbook was his comment about a proposal to raise the minimum wage from its existing level of $1.45 an hour to $2.00 an hour:
    ‘What good does it do a black youth to know that an employer must pay him $2.00 an hour if the fact that he must be paid that amount is what keeps him from getting a job?’

    Keynesians Gunnar Myrdal in the 1940s and James Tobin in the 1960s and 1970s were also critical of the minimum wage.
    In 1973, for example, Tobin stated:
    ‘I am against minimum wage legislation and have said so. It diminishes job opportunities, ceteris paribus, and it is an inefficient and haphazard tool for income maintenances or redistribution. At the same time, it does contribute to the existence of a Phillips trade-off, at least in the short run; this is because it makes for asymmetry in the response of wages to changes in demand and in rates of inflation.’

    Thumb up 1