- Free market is a good idea for competitive markets and a terrible one for utilities, rail, healthcare or education.
- The most serious problems facing the world today are loss of civil liberties and a blurred line between corporation and government
| EdHieron said: My political compass tends to be pointing in a B direction for Bored or Burnt Out. I do think that every American worker that works 40 hours each week should be payed at least 25 thousand a year including a good health care plan paid for by their employers ( if you're part time the hours from your jobs should be added together so that if you're working 40 hours a week at different jobs that should count towards the total of 40). And that it should be illegal to raise the prices on goods and services from where they are now purely to take advantage of workers finally receiving a Living Wage. Also hoping the Religious Conservatives never make a comeback. |
And then all you get is shortages and rations. Learn economics. Prices settle at an equilliberium of supply and demand. Prices forced too low will result in shortages, prices forced too high will result in oversupply.
SamuelRSmith said:
|
People that work 40 hours each week should have decent healthcare packages and enough money to either enjoy themselves by being able to send their hard earned money on enjoyable leisure activities or enough time and money to send themselves to school or some type of training program to better themselves rather than having to be the wage slaves that they are now. It keeps employees happier, their morale up, and it makes them more productive than the current model of make your pitiful $15,000 a year, pay for the company's crappy insurance plan, and then come nack and work your back breaking, soul destroying job again tomorrow.
If the employers can afford to buy 4 or 5 houses and 2 or 3 Jaguars a year, then the employees should at least be able to buy their families nice Thanksgiving and Christmas Dinners, to take their kids to the movies or somewhere nice every weekend, to be able to buy them nice presents for Christmas ( like the latest video game consoles ), and to be able to afford decent automobiles when they need them $25,000.00 with prices for goods and services as they are now would allow them to do most of that rather than the current models in place at McDonald's and Wal~Mart.
EdHieron said:
Everyone should get free candy as well. Seriously, how do you plan to pay for all this? It keeps employees happier, their morale up, and it makes them more productive than the current model of make your pitiful $15,000 a year, pay for the company's crappy insurance plan, and then come nack and work your back breaking, soul destroying job again tomorrow. In the kind of jobs they're doing, productivity is already pretty maximal. There's no scope for creativity exactly. If the employers can afford to buy 4 or 5 houses and 2 or 3 Jaguars a year, then the employees should at least be able to buy their families nice Thanksgiving and Christmas Dinners, to take their kids to the movies or somewhere nice every weekend, to be able to buy them nice presents for Christmas ( like the latest video game consoles ), and to be able to afford decent automobiles when they need them $25,000.00 with prices for goods and services as they are now would allow them to do most of that rather than the current models in place at McDonald's and Wal~Mart. Number of CEOs in a company = 1 Number of minimum wage employees in McDs = 500,000+ It is FAR more expensive to give all of that free stuff/money to every employee than for a CEO to own 100 Jaguars. |
I understand what you're trying to argue, but it's economically impossible.
The price of retail goods would skyrocket and no one would actually be better off.
If you're arguing for redistribution, or reducing govt subsidies to minimum wage workers - OK. But ALL that is ridculous.
Do you understand that the value of money is not fixed? If you put wages up to $25k for everyone then goods will rise so that $25k feels like minimum wage. You need to fix the underlying problems.
Name: I'll keep that private
Age: 15
Gender: Male
I guess I'm far left.
Soleron said:
I understand what you're trying to argue, but it's economically impossible. The price of retail goods would skyrocket and no one would actually be better off. If you're arguing for redistribution, or reducing govt subsidies to minimum wage workers - OK. But ALL that is ridculous. Do you understand that the value of money is not fixed? If you put wages up to $25k for everyone then goods will rise so that $25k feels like minimum wage. You need to fix the underlying problems. |
It would be paid for by reducing the strict adherance that the companies have towards maintaining their profit margins and on the rule that company higher-ups must be paid an ungodly sum of money and extravagant bonuses in comparison to their employees.
Also, those people wouldn't be receiving those things for free. They are giving up at least 40 hours per week of their valuable time to those a-hole corporations.
Costco seems to do quite well while treating their employees far better than many other places.
SamuelRSmith said:
Most of these things aren't "conservative", either. But most of rhese are inevitable consequences of big Gov't, which is something that I think many liberals/progressives need to understand. Expanding the size of Government to meet certain needs... nationalized healthcare, strong green legislation, welfare, well-funded education... it has the consequences of a Government that does many of the things you've listed above. The problem is compounded in the US, versus the EU, due to the extraordinary amount of wealth that the US Gov't can extract from its population. The Governments of Sweden and the Netherlands, for example, are confined by the fact that they cannot afford the global war on terror, the NSA, Afghanistan, etc, without severe and noticeable pressure on the quality of life of their citizens. This is exactly why people in Europe should be opposed to expansion of the EU. If the EU gets the power to tax citizens directly, we're just going to be dealing with a USA 2.0 |
Do you mean neoliberalism? Which is true, it's a form of modern day conservatism as you describe it, but there exists hunderds of other conservative ideologies. A traditionalist government or a nationalist government are still "conservative" and can have economic policies that oppose neoliberalism such as for example the Estado Nova regime in Portugal.
There is a very big misconception by people in this thread that neoliberalism means conservatism, which is false. Obama's neo-Con and right wing corporatism are what put him where he is.
Vikki said:
Go north of France to countires like the Netherlands, Belgium, the whole of Scandanavia, the UK and Obama would be laughed out of parliament if he called himself left leaning. |
Ok, so it's gone from "All of euopre" to like... maybe 1/4th of Europe at this point. (I didn't even bring up Eastern Europe... which gez.)
So, i've already more then proven my point i'd think, if we're using "Europe" as the bar to measure American politcians. Which seems weirdly anglocentric personnally.
Outside which...
Well Denmark is a Scandanavian country.
The Cato index is really conservative, so they should know conservatism right? Denmark is above the US when it comes to Economic Freedom. They have way less regulations in general when it comes to the economy.
Scandanvaia as a whole? Despite all the shameful anti-woman victim blaming engaged by left wing pundits during the whole Assange fiasco, sexual assault and sexual harrassment laws are way behind US equivelemts.
and I mean, holy shit, have you seen the rise of rightwing we outright hate minority groups? Like the True Finns and such?
Additionally... a fun graph.
The US is actually more progressive in taxation, only less so in actual spending of tax money. So much for not taxing rich people their fair share eh? And this is just direct taxes, it gets worse when you consider indirect regressive taxes, which are FAR more prevelent in europe. (Vat, Higher fuel taxes etc)
Now for the UK.
They're actually who i was talking about when i mentioned the Patriot act, everything in the patriot act is old hat in the Uk. Hell it goes farther then that. Do you know how the government gets a wire tap on someone in the UK? They ask a government official. Appointed by the Prime minister.
So that'd be like if Richard Nixon had to ask the attorney general for a wiretap.
Obama really ain't much different the the US, however Right Wing/ Left Wing comparissons with europe don't really pan out how you'd expect if you take into account their entire policy.
Remember that balanced budget ammendment? Something similar is already law for all EU countries. (Though they use creative accounting to get around it)
Not to metion the rise of Europeon right lately.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/09/world/europe/right-wings-surge-in-europe-has-the-establishment-rattled.html
The Europeon right is far more frightening than the tea party is.
Is the US the most liberal country in the world? No... but it's a lot closer to Europe then people are willing to admit... and a lot more liberal then a LOT of europeon countries, including countries like France which is usually seen as some super liberal paradise by undsicerning Americans. (and europeons)
| EdHieron said: ...
That is literally the function of a company. If you don't want that (and the market efficiency it brings), then regulate for the things it doesn't do well (e.g. environmental protection). But simply asking companies to do it themselves will not work. and on the rule that company higher-ups must be paid an ungodly sum of money and extravagant bonuses in comparison to their employees. This is because they are worth that much to the company. Supply and demand. How many good CEOs exist with the skills to turn around a failing multinational company? Not many. So those who do exist can demand millions. If they do a bad job for increasing profit, they get fired by the board. Also, those people wouldn't be receiving those things for free. They are giving up at least 40 hours per week of their valuable time to those a-hole corporations. And that 40 hours of a low-skill job is at present worth minimum wage. In order to be paid more they have to be worth more to the company. You are asking people to be paid more than the market has determined they are worth. Who is going to pay the extra and why? Costco seems to do quite well while treating their employees far better than many other places. If it was a profit-increasing strategy, another company would have done it. |
Libertarian-Right
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
