5 ms·

It's better for someone who needs money to get $0 than to get what they're willing to work for? They don't get a choice in what they find dehumanizing or what t

It's better for someone who needs money to get $0 than to get what they're willing to work for? They don't get a choice in what they find dehumanizing or what they're willing to do? 80% of the drivers have jobs elsewhere. So presumably this is to make extra money for things like a vacation, a new TV, or being able to go out for dinner a few more times. Those all seem to be good and worthwhile for people who want a flexible earning opportunity. I guess I don't understand why a government would tell those people they can't do what they're currently doing because they don't think the current process meets an arbitrary cutoff.

teawrecks 6y ago
If someone is willing to work extra hours, I contend that fact won't change regardless of whether they're allowed to work for less than they're worth. If they can't find any work to do, then they'll make some. That's how we got to where we are today. But from a government/society's POV, there's no difference between a citizen not making enough money to survive (aka a "living wage") and making $0. Both are roads to failure. A free market without consideration for the value of a citizen is a race to the bottom. It's a responsibility of a society to ensure its fellow citizens aren't killing themselves. Also, the "doesn't the person get a say in what's dehumanizing" argument is just so fucked up. I guarantee you it was used 200 years ago by plantations lobbying against emancipation. It conveniently benefits the person already in power while slowly exploiting and destroying their victim.
- WalterBright 6y ago
  > A free market without consideration for the value of a citizen is a race to the bottom. This doesn't explain while the vast majority of free market jobs pay far more than minimum wage.
  - teawrecks 6y ago
    The minimum wage is an example of "consideration for the value of a citizen". If you remove the minimum wage, what do you expect will happen? Nothing? Wages will go up? Then why do we have it? No, wages go down: https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-people-are-earning-725-hour/ https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-... Pure unchecked free market capitalism is nothing if not efficient. Where a company can't win by innovation (most companies), they'll gladly win by extracting and selling the wellbeing of their workers. Eventually the worker dies, and they get another. And the whole time they say "don't tell these people what's dehumanizing, let them make that decision for themselves!"
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      > If you remove the minimum wage, what do you expect will happen? Some people who were previously unemployed will make $7 instead of $0. Some people who were previously making $7.25 may make $7 too. But then everyone will pay lower prices for things. On net that turns into an overall gain. > No, wages go down: https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-people-are-earning-725-hour/ https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-... I don't see anything in that link that actually says that. And if all you're saying is that some people who used to make $0 start making $7 which then brings down the average, how is that actually bad? $7 is more than $0, it's just an artifact of not including in the unemployed/underemployed in the average. Meanwhile eliminating price controls can increase wages by increasing competition for labor. Right now Alice makes $8/hour but loses the equivalent of $2/hour to commuting expenses. You let an employer across the street from Alice pay her $6/hour and she takes that job instead, ends up with the same amount of spending money because she doesn't have to pay to commute anymore, doesn't have to waste an hour a day sitting in traffic, and her former employer has to pay $8.50/hour to get someone to replace her (or to convince Alice to stay given that she now has another alternative).
- sokoloff 6y ago
  > from a government/society's POV, there's no difference between a citizen not making enough money to survive (aka a "living wage") and making $0. From a free citizen's who wants to eat point of view, there's a huge difference between making $50 one evening when you have free time and making $0.

teawrecks 6y ago

If someone is willing to work extra hours, I contend that fact won't change regardless of whether they're allowed to work for less than they're worth. If they can't find any work to do, then they'll make some. That's how we got to where we are today. But from a government/society's POV, there's no difference between a citizen not making enough money to survive (aka a "living wage") and making $0. Both are roads to failure. A free market without consideration for the value of a citizen is a race to the bottom. It's a responsibility of a society to ensure its fellow citizens aren't killing themselves. Also, the "doesn't the person get a say in what's dehumanizing" argument is just so fucked up. I guarantee you it was used 200 years ago by plantations lobbying against emancipation. It conveniently benefits the person already in power while slowly exploiting and destroying their victim.

WalterBright 6y ago
> A free market without consideration for the value of a citizen is a race to the bottom. This doesn't explain while the vast majority of free market jobs pay far more than minimum wage.
- teawrecks 6y ago
  The minimum wage is an example of "consideration for the value of a citizen". If you remove the minimum wage, what do you expect will happen? Nothing? Wages will go up? Then why do we have it? No, wages go down: https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-people-are-earning-725-hour/ https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-... Pure unchecked free market capitalism is nothing if not efficient. Where a company can't win by innovation (most companies), they'll gladly win by extracting and selling the wellbeing of their workers. Eventually the worker dies, and they get another. And the whole time they say "don't tell these people what's dehumanizing, let them make that decision for themselves!"
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > If you remove the minimum wage, what do you expect will happen? Some people who were previously unemployed will make $7 instead of $0. Some people who were previously making $7.25 may make $7 too. But then everyone will pay lower prices for things. On net that turns into an overall gain. > No, wages go down: https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-people-are-earning-725-hour/ https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-... I don't see anything in that link that actually says that. And if all you're saying is that some people who used to make $0 start making $7 which then brings down the average, how is that actually bad? $7 is more than $0, it's just an artifact of not including in the unemployed/underemployed in the average. Meanwhile eliminating price controls can increase wages by increasing competition for labor. Right now Alice makes $8/hour but loses the equivalent of $2/hour to commuting expenses. You let an employer across the street from Alice pay her $6/hour and she takes that job instead, ends up with the same amount of spending money because she doesn't have to pay to commute anymore, doesn't have to waste an hour a day sitting in traffic, and her former employer has to pay $8.50/hour to get someone to replace her (or to convince Alice to stay given that she now has another alternative).
sokoloff 6y ago
> from a government/society's POV, there's no difference between a citizen not making enough money to survive (aka a "living wage") and making $0. From a free citizen's who wants to eat point of view, there's a huge difference between making $50 one evening when you have free time and making $0.