Wages

[Serpo]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-P5fhTeOIku0/UkSSH51xuyI/AAAAAAAAg2w/IyHerqmFLW4/s320/salaries.jpg



(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-P5fhTeOIku0/UkSSH51xuyI/AAAAAAAAg2w/IyHerqmFLW4/s1600/salaries.jpg)http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iBSRK76SMs8/UkSQTTyKYdI/AAAAAAAAg2Q/HMpNPKrrQsc/s320/mw.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iBSRK76SMs8/UkSQTTyKYdI/AAAAAAAAg2Q/HMpNPKrrQsc/s1600/mw.jpg)

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT

[EE_]

I'm thinking Bernanke is getting ripped off?

Ben Bernanke net worth: American economist Ben Bernanke is the current Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the central bank of the United States and he has an estimated net worth of $2 million with an annual salary of $180 thousand. According to Forbes, he is ranked sixth in the list of Most Powerful People in the World in 2012 while he was eighth in 2011.

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/republican/ben-bernanke-net-worth/

[Shami-Amourae]

Australia is inaccurate:

http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/real-hourly-minimum-wages-around-the-world_52263c18182b6.png

[madfranks]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/09/walter-e-block/can-inner-city-gangsters-be-stopped/

Eliminate the minimum wage law

Wages are determined by productivity (to be technical, by discounted marginal revenue product). What is productivity? If adding one more worker for an hour to the shop, factory or store means that total revenues increase by $5, this means the productivity of such a person is $5 per hour. In the free market there is a tendency for wages to equal this level. For, if compensation was only $2 per hour, a pure profit of $3 per hour could be earned by a competing employer. Such an employee would tend to both seek employment elsewhere, and to be targeted by other employers eager to “exploit” this worker, by paying him more. If payment were above $5 per hour, say, $9 per hour, then any employer who paid such an amount would likely be headed for the bankruptcy courts, particularly if he did this once too often. He would suffer losses of $4 per hour.
At the time of this writing, the minimum wage law is pegged at $7.25. This implies that a person with productivity of only $5 per hour would be unemployed, since giving him a job would result in a loss of $2.25 every hour he is working. If the minimum wage law is raised to $15 on an hourly basis, as many of our “progressives” are now advocating, then anyone with productivity of less than that higher amount would be consigned to the garbage heap of unemployment. But do not think that this nasty, evil and wicked law is solely the responsibility of lefties. Righties, too, support it. For example, Mitt Romney favored the minimum wage law in his 2012 campaign for the presidency of the U.S. Even a minimum wage of $5 is highly problematic; it unemploys people with productivity of less than that amount, for example, $1 per hour. It is only libertarians who can oppose this law as a matter of principle, not merely because it creates vast havoc in the labor market, although it certainly does precisely that. For paying someone a small amount of money simply does not violate the NAP, the be-all and end-all for libertarian law. And, all actions that do not offend the NAP ought to be legalized.
But it is difficult, nay, impossible, to live on $1, or $5, or $7.25 or even $9 per hour, many people will object. But this indicates economic illiteracy. For the minimum wage law is not an employment law; it is, rather, an unemployment law. It does not compel any employer whatsoever to hire anyone. It only stipulates that if someone is taken on the payroll, then he must be paid a certain amount of money. The present law, pegged at $7.25 does not compel anyone to hire anyone else at this pay level. It only mandates that if someone is hired at $7.25, that he must be paid at least that amount. So the minimum wage law is not responsible for the hiring a single solitary worker.
Many people see this law as placing a floor under wages. Raise the minimum wage level, and compensation will rise in lock step. Nonsense. No, nonsense on stilts. If a physical metaphor must be used, it is that the minimum wage law is more like a hurdle, or a high jump bar: one has to “jump over” the level of wages set by this pernicious legislation. If the minimum wage “bar” is set at $3 per hour, then, in order to land a job, one’s productivity must be at least that high. If the “bar” is increased to, say, $5 per hour, then one’s productivity must be boosted to at least that level, otherwise joblessness is the inevitable result. But productivity stems from how hard and smart we work, and how must capital equipment we can have at our command. It cannot be magically increased by law.
If the minimum wage law was such a blessing, why not raise it to $150 per hour, or $1500, or $15,000? Why be so niggardly, progressives, as to demand a mere $15 per hour? If by mere legislative enactment we could produce prosperity, then let’s get to it! Obviously, this is wrong. At a minimum wage of $15,000 per hour, with the possible exception of people like LeBron James or Bill Gates, we would all be unemployed, and it is difficult in the extreme to see how even they could still have jobs, given that none of us could any longer afford their services, as we would now have no wages with which to do so.

[Son-of-Liberty]

I find it hard to believe that the UK, France and other European nations come out ahead of Canada and the US in real wages. I thought Prices were extremely high in those places. Gasoline is $10-11 a gallon, real estate in the UK is so expensive that almost half the population receives housing benefits so they can afford housing.

[Jewboo]

Wages are determined by productivity (to be technical, by discounted marginal revenue product). What is productivity? If adding one more worker for an hour to the shop, factory or store means that total revenues increase by $5, this means the productivity of such a person is $5 per hour. In the free market there is a tendency for wages to equal this level.



http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-BM182_SAC_1_G_20130704195630.jpg


Forbes Magazine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes) estimates Cohen's fortune at $8.3 billion in September 2011, ranking him the 35th richest man in the United States.[13] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-13)

In 1998, the Cohen family purchased a 35,000 square feet (3,300 m2) home on 14 acres (57,000 m2) in Greenwich, Connecticut (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich,_Connecticut).[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-14)
His 2005 compensation was reportedly $1 billion,[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-wsj-15) considerably higher than his 2004 compensation ($450 million),[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-16) 2001 compensation ($428 million),[9] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-vickers-9) and 2003 compensation ($350 million).[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-17)
In addition, Cohen owns 7% of search engine Baidu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baidu)[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-18) and owns 5% of SSD design firm OCZ Technology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OCZ_Technology).[19] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-19)
On November 20, 2012, according to The Wall Street Journal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wall_Street_Journal), Cohen was implicated in an alleged insider trading (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading) scandal involving an ex-SAC manager, Mathew Martoma. Cohen was not directly named in an indictment released in New York, but was referred to as "Portfolio Manager A" "according to people familiar with the matter."[20] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-WSJ11202012-20)[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-21) Reuters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters) reported that Cohen "personally signed off on" the trades that are being investigated, but that "experts said prosecutors lack proof that Cohen knew the trades ... were based on inside information".[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-Reuters112012-22) A SAC spokesman later stated that “Mr. Cohen and SAC are confident that they have acted appropriately and will continue to cooperate with the government’s inquiry,” according to The Wall Street Journal.[23] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-WSJ2-23)
Five former SAC employees have been implicated in insider trading deals by prosecutors and three have confessed. Another three former SAC traders have been charged with illegal trading after they left SAC and two have pleaded guilty. SAC’s culture has been described as "high-stress, pressure-packed... (and) ruthless". The firm relentlessly digs "for information about publicly traded companies to form a 'mosaic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_theory_%28investments%29),' building a complete picture of the company’s prospects that gives the firm an edge over other investors."[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-New_breed-4)
In February 2013 Forbes listed Mr. Cohen as one of the 40 Highest-Earning hedge fund managers.[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_A._Cohen#cite_note-24)


:rolleyes: Jewish Productivity = Billion Dollar Wage ?

[palani]

Should you have the power and authority to set the price of a congress-critters wage at $10,000 annually you will be amazed that this salary will suddenly be quite valuable and your own wage will shrink to the $1,000 annual range.

[willie pete]

something I read not too long ago regarding some review of a Perth (I think) restaurant or bar, anyway it said the burgers there were $25....:D

[Hitch]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/09/walter-e-block/can-inner-city-gangsters-be-stopped/

Eliminate the minimum wage law

Wages are determined by productivity (to be technical, by discounted marginal revenue product). What is productivity? If adding one more worker for an hour to the shop, factory or store means that total revenues increase by $5, this means the productivity of such a person is $5 per hour. In the free market there is a tendency for wages to equal this level. For, if compensation was only $2 per hour, a pure profit of $3 per hour could be earned by a competing employer. Such an employee would tend to both seek employment elsewhere, and to be targeted by other employers eager to “exploit” this worker, by paying him more. If payment were above $5 per hour, say, $9 per hour, then any employer who paid such an amount would likely be headed for the bankruptcy courts, particularly if he did this once too often. He would suffer losses of $4 per hour.
At the time of this writing, the minimum wage law is pegged at $7.25. This implies that a person with productivity of only $5 per hour would be unemployed, since giving him a job would result in a loss of $2.25 every hour he is working...

This argument uses very simplistic logic that is completely unrealistic unfortunately.

History has proved there has to be protections in place for workers, from safety equipment such as hardhats, to minimum wage. In the above example, say there is no minimum wage, and productivity is $10 per hour/per worker. Would the worker see even $7 of that without minimum wage? No, if anything maybe $1 per hour. The reason, is if the worker will not accept that, the company will just import a bunch of illegals who will work for $1 an hour.

This is why gov contracts, state and federal, have prevailing wages. Every company bidding for a state or fed job, such as construction, must pay their employees the set wage rate. It levels the playing field. It makes Chinese companies unable to underbid and take local American jobs, on our own soil.

This is why we have unions too. Such as the iron workers, electricians, anyone needing these skilled trades must pay a certain rate for the work.

The unions have fought long and hard to protect the working class. Look at walmart for an example of corp greed without the protections of unions. The six heirs of walmart own more wealth than the bottom 1/3 of all americans! Think about that number!

[madfranks]

This argument uses very simplistic logic that is completely unrealistic unfortunately.

History has proved there has to be protections in place for workers, from safety equipment such as hardhats, to minimum wage. In the above example, say there is no minimum wage, and productivity is $10 per hour/per worker. Would the worker see even $7 of that without minimum wage? No, if anything maybe $1 per hour. The reason, is if the worker will not accept that, the company will just import a bunch of illegals who will work for $1 an hour.

This is why gov contracts, state and federal, have prevailing wages. Every company bidding for a state or fed job, such as construction, must pay their employees the set wage rate. It levels the playing field. It makes Chinese companies unable to underbid and take local American jobs, on our own soil.

This is why we have unions too. Such as the iron workers, electricians, anyone needing these skilled trades must pay a certain rate for the work.

The unions have fought long and hard to protect the working class. Look at walmart for an example of corp greed without the protections of unions. The six heirs of walmart own more wealth than the bottom 1/3 of all americans! Think about that number!

It's unrealistic to expect it to work in our currently distorted world economy. Let me ask you a question. Did you know that 100 years ago, prices and wages were pretty much the same all over the world? Back then, it was not cheaper to import apples from China when an American could grow apples in his own back yard. Why now, do we import apples from China? Because the currency we use is artificially distorted; the american dollar is wayyyy overvalued, and the Chinese yuan is wayyyyy undervalued. Do you see the insanity of this??

The same goes for labor. Why back then, didn't people leave Mexico to come to America and farm in America? Because the wages were so close there was no economic reason to move so far to gain so little, or nothing. Only because today we have such an overvalued fiat currency do we have this mass distortion in how things are valued from one political location to another. If the world's economies never got on the fiat bandwagon where hundreds of fake paper currencies had to be floated and artificially maintained, we'd never have the problems of illegals trying to work for less than what their overvalued American competitors are being paid. The fact that we have immigrants all over trying to work for less is the simple law of equilibrium happening before our eyes. Americans are overpaid, Mexicans are underpaid, equilibrium is somewhere in between that we can never find due to political regulations and rules.

[Hitch]

It's unrealistic to expect it to work in our currently distorted world economy. Let me ask you a question. Did you know that 100 years ago, prices and wages were pretty much the same all over the world? Back then, it was not cheaper to import apples from China when an American could grow apples in his own back yard. Why now, do we import apples from China? Because the currency we use is artificially distorted; the american dollar is wayyyy overvalued, and the Chinese yuan is wayyyyy undervalued. Do you see the insanity of this??

The same goes for labor. Why back then, didn't people leave Mexico to come to America and farm in America? Because the wages were so close there was no economic reason to move so far to gain so little, or nothing. Only because today we have such an overvalued fiat currency do we have this mass distortion in how things are valued from one political location to another. If the world's economies never got on the fiat bandwagon where hundreds of fake paper currencies had to be floated and artificially maintained, we'd never have the problems of illegals trying to work for less than what their overvalued American competitors are being paid. The fact that we have immigrants all over trying to work for less is the simple law of equilibrium happening before our eyes. Americans are overpaid, Mexicans are underpaid, equilibrium is somewhere in between that we can never find due to political regulations and rules.

Dang madfranks, this is one of the most eye-opening things I've read. I never thought about it like this before, it all comes down to the banksters and their manipulation and greed. It is complete insanity.

[Ponce]

I remember back in Cuba where the monthly wages was of $145.00.......but......rent was $11.00, electricity $6.50, Coke 0.05 cents, can of condense milk 0.10 cents and so on.............around the world there are now many countries where the same thing is going on, like India or China, so that it does not bothers me that they earn so little.......but of course, as soon as the bankers digs their claws into their countries then problems will prevail.

Freedom of bankers means freedom for the country.

V

[mick silver]

what freedom to take more then they need for nothing

[madfranks]

Thanks hitcher, for the compliment. You are right, it's the bankers that have fucked up the world to the distorted state it's in now. It's hard for a modern person to realize that there was a time in the past where there was a world-wide currency (gold), and that you could take a gold coin, and anywhere in the world buy pretty much the same things with it, be it food, clothing, tools or labor. Today with all the jacked up fiat money economies, it is impossible to know what something will cost in one location compared to another. Re: minimum wages, in a world without government/banker control of fiat money, wages would tend to equalize to their productive values. In the world we live in, government tries to step in and decree what labor should be valued at.

[Hitch]

Thanks hitcher, for the compliment. You are right, it's the bankers that have fucked up the world to the distorted state it's in now. It's hard for a modern person to realize that there was a time in the past where there was a world-wide currency (gold), and that you could take a gold coin, and anywhere in the world buy pretty much the same things with it, be it food, clothing, tools or labor. Today with all the jacked up fiat money economies, it is impossible to know what something will cost in one location compared to another. Re: minimum wages, in a world without government/banker control of fiat money, wages would tend to equalize to their productive values. In the world we live in, government tries to step in and decree what labor should be valued at.

No, thank you immensely. I'm personally so grateful to all out on the internet who've helped me learn, keep learning, and keep preparing. Here's a little gold/silver pron to add to this thread. Bump.

5411