Slashdot Mirror

Your views on economics seem to come from the plutocrats' pet think tanks. Ricardo's "iron law of wages" is that wages must be sufficient for subsistence. If not, either the supply of workers will diminish due to deaths, or the government will have to take up the slack to prevent those deaths and the taxes required will be more that would be needed to simply pay the workers a living wage to begin with. The current minimum wage is set at around the bare subsistence level (not counting medical care or transportation in most cases, and constantly shrinking due to inflation).

Ricardo would agree with you on the idea of a purely "market-based" wage system, but despite his basic insight, his arguments in that direction are a string of non-sequiturs mixed with falsehoods: he starts with the false assumption that increasing population means increasing prices for necessities and then asserts that this proves that wages should not be regulated, as this would interfere with contracts - despite having stated in the same paragraph that workers have no choice but to take whatever they're offered if they are to have any subsistence, thus making the contract under duress and with no bargaining power or legal protection for the worker at all. History since Ricardo, particularly in the 19th and early 20th centuries, shows that employers will either abuse such power or will be at a competitive disadvantage to those who do.

Really wages often aren't set by the nebulous, all-powerful "market" so much as by specific forces that that term tries to sweep under the rug: geography, custom, personal relationships, perceptions and social power (though rent-seeking, regulation (particularly licensure), and the drive to convert worthless shareholder profits into valuable management compensation certainly also play a role). None of the minimum wage increases has hurt the economy - in fact, they increased the size of the market by providing more people capable of buying, not only the bare necessities but also other goods because the minimum wage provides a floor that gives a social/ customary reference point for setting wages for most hourly workers in the bottom half of the distribution.

(Another good take on Ricardo, this time on his theory of comparative advantage, and how its assumptions have been ignored by free-trade zealots is here. Short form: Ricardo says comparative advantage only holds if there are no externalities; nations trade only goods and services, not debt and assets; the factors of production are only domestically and not internationally mobile; long-term growth is caused by short-term efficiency; there are no economies of scale; and here is no cross-border investment. None of these being even approximately true, free trade will often lead to worse economic outcomes both for specific nations and for the world economy than managed trade and even outright protectionism.)

And you're still thinking 20th century warfare. Who said anything about guns? The grade-school bully used intimidation mostly.

Not that I'm comparing China to grade-school bullies. China is much better at this all this than a grade-schooler.

I'm not saying we haven't also done so for decades. And I'm not trying to keep score of who is right or wrong, and how often. Just pointing out that the world is not all that kind to us, and hasn't been for a long time, whether we deserve it or not. If you think pursuing a policy of behaving better and being kinder to the rest of the world is in our best interest, say so and support those who agree with you. I'm saying that along with a policy of behaving better, we need to also pursue a policy of self-preservation, while trying to avoid doing so in a way that hampers our future prospects. And how to do that, in detail, is beyond me. So be thankful I'm not in power.

will give up any freedoms because they are "supposed to" in order to "be safe".

Yeap. And not only their freedom, but their money too: TSA's budget 2009 roughly $8.1 billions. Funny thing, not only the money of those willing to sacrifice their liberty, but also part of those that are not willing.

Granted, the $8.1 billions is just below the cost of a single month of war in Iraq and Afghanistan (also in the name of security): $11.1 billions= $5.4 (Iraq)+$5.7 (Afghanistan). Seriously guys, do you think is it still an affordable endeavour?
1. unemployment rate at 9.8%
2. a public debt running at $13.56 trillion (that is 94% of the annual GDP)
3. a foreing debt of $13.45 trillions
4. a trade deficit of $44,033 million only for Sept 2010 - i.e. loosing money every month.

What amazes me is that the various "war on..." had placed US in this situation, yet US still persist in them crazy spendings (monthly cost of Iraq+Afghanistan - $11.1 billions; TSA budget 2009: roughly $8.1 billions).

Even letting aside the legitimacy/efficiency of the said "wars", at least the question of affordability springs into mind.

Im not a programmer, but I do many in this field. Many job shop, too. My suggestion is to not take all you hear as gospel, but investigate. Subscribe to Rob Sanchez' "Job Destruction" newsletter at http://www.jobdestruction.com./ Join the Programmers Guild and subscribe to the newsletter at http://www.americaneconomicalert.org./ In October, 2005 Elaine Chow, Bush's Sec. of Labor held back 50,000 high tech jobs so businesses could apply for H-1B visas. In November, 2005, the Senate planned to sell 385,000 high tech jobs via H-1Bs. By the way for those, who think this is a Republican only deal know that Senator Carl Levin voted to sell those jobs as a way to help the economy. You can locate a letter in response to a resident of Oakland County, MI. If you want to program do it, but plan carefully so you are least likely to be outsourced. I suggest learning Aida, as well. I suggest watching Lou Dobbs if you're able, as well. Anyone who thinks the American economy is being dismantled as a Republican plan missed NAFTA, which is an agreement not a treaty coutesy of the Clintons.

I'll start by saying that I don't *want* the US to be in decline. I much prefer a US hegemony to a Chinese hegemony.

I'm just a bit worried about your economy, your human rights and your leader. Oh, and your economy. Oh, and your economy.

By the way, ad hominem attacks are fun, but if a hippy says something true, it's still true no matter what kind of hair they have.

Peter

$79 billion annually? Is that a WHOLE $79 billion? Well, thank God, then. I guess we have nothing to worry about then.

Wait a second, that's wrong! Our trade deficit is roughly $60 billion per month. In the face of that, $79 billion is a drop in the bucket. We're hemorrhaging money, jobs, and manufacturing capacity and if we don't end it and encourage domestic manufacturing, we'll be totally fucked soon, ESPECIALLY if WWIII breaks out (that's where we're heading with our current foreign policies) and need to manufacture artillery and vehicles on short order.

Check this out for monthly trade deficit tallies: http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/ticker_home.a sp

For a US trade deficit graph underscoring the seriousness of the matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_surplus#United_ States_trade_deficit

This car looks worse than most cars of the late 70s early 80s

I think the Prius is one of the best looking non-sports cars on the road. It actually looks somewhat like a futuristic "concept car" design, rather than yet another Ford Taurus clone.

if you wanna "support your country" buy american

Or not. Ford are shutting down 14 plants in the US and moving all the jobs to Mexico and China. GM have been moving their manufacturing to Mexico too. Meanwhile, Toyota built their first US plant in Kentucky in 1988. They're still expanding into the US, they just built a big new manufacturing plant in Texas.

Tell me, why should I give my money to Ford and GM who are busy shifting jobs out of the US, rather than to Toyota who are investing in the US? How does that support the US?

Try this for starters.
http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/news_item.asp ?NID=1201190 But many, many more than just Cisco got burned - research Volvo, Stanley Tools, etc. etc.