Controversial Political Opinions

[Eric the Green]

(03-25-2022, 02:40 PM)JasonBlack Wrote:

(03-23-2022, 01:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Saying what people should do is fine, but how do you enforce this or legislate this? Should this be part of civics class? Maybe, but the point of the minimum wage is to set a decent floor. Other wages will rise also under this policy. Beyond raising taxes on the rich and providing some income redistribution or investment programs, the minimum wage is about the only law that can produce some results quickly. As Nick Hanauer says, there's no reason why any company can't pay any of their employees enough to live a decent middle class life. How does that translate to policy, is a question.

In fact there is: it's never been done before. A society without a class of poor people has never existed, especially when you consider that payroll comprises the vast majority of company expenses already. It's not that simple.

Time to post that Nick Hanauer video again here Brilliant, and indispensable. If we continue down this road of excusing and allowing business leaders and entrepreneurs to pay unfair wages and keep people poor, then we will go back to feudalism. No-one should want to go backwards to societies where the mass of people were expected to be poor. A society without poor people has never existed, but we had a society for a while where the number was decreasing. We either have that or we go backward, in relatively fast stages--- now accelerated by another result of this neoliberal Reaganomics, climate change. Backwards to the undeveloped societies that still exist, usually ruled by tyrants today. Backwards first to the 1920s and the gilded age, then to the renaissance/baroque era of aristocratic excess, then to the middle ages and the dark ages, then QUICKLY all the way back to times when life was nasty, brutal and short. Why should we, just to keep the bosses happy? The unequal societies where people are not paid fairly for their work are either in revolution or in a police state, as Nick says. Under Trump, we were going rapidly that way. Any return of power to Republicans will bring back neoliberal trickle-down economics, and send us going backwards rapidly to absolute ruin.

Quote:

Quote:And there should be no time limit or conditions other than need, since economic conditions or unfair bosses, rather than laziness, misbehavior or incompetence, is why most people lose their jobs.

I think there should be time limits as a default, but that people who meet certain parameters (disability would certainly count) be exempt therefrom. We should also differentiate between benefits for the unemployed, part-time employed and fully employed. The last of which, at least, should not have a time limit.

Time limits forget that unemployment is usually determined by the economy, not the unemployed person. So how do we make sure that unemployed people do something in exchange for their coverage, and not just fake it? I don't know, but your solution needs some work.

Quote:

Quote:And if we as employees pay for SDI (disability insurance coverage), then we should not have to be destitute in order to get the benefits when we need them, as is the case now. And single men and everyone else should be eligible for welfare, not just mothers with dependent children.

hard agree. the disability benefits system in the United States is an abomination.

Good

Quote:

Quote:Maybe so, but how do we create this kind of standard?

The same way individuals already draw up contracts. Default models drawn up by lawyers would pop up quickly on their own. It's not something policy makers need to design themselves

Would such marriage contracts pop up quickly on their own, how? Why aren't they already popping up now, then?

Quote:

Quote:Yes, and 50% more for ANY overtime work. We need to bring back the 8-hour day, or make it even shorter or fewer days.

if we're talking hourly wage earners, yes.

And salaried people too. Giving someone a title should not entitle the employer to extract 12-hour days without overtime from the employee.