i think this is an argument for not increasing the minimum wage

the worth of human labor will perhaps go down but we want to give people a chance to sell their labor, so they can earn at least something

if deflation is happening. having $100 from your cheap job is better than having $0 from no job.

if you increase minimum wage, you will increase the rate of automation, you will accelerate the communist dyst/ut/opia

alternatively, we should let the market figure out the new types of labor that come about from the new technology, at whatever their worth, and not interfere with minimum wage as it may well be less than that

the more we interfere in the economy, the more *we need to interfere*, look at venezeula

and its a downward spiral

one measure causes problems so introduce new measures to fix the problems etc. everything goes to shit

Yeah minimum wage is bad

i'm arguing for not touching what we have. i wonder would happen if we just removed it though.

if it ain't broke though... idk

maybe we'd see deflation?

think of it... all these homeless ppl begging for money, if there was no minimum wage, someone might at least give them a job sweeping the street or some very low paying job which would be an improvement to their state now

but as of now they are difficult to employ

having non-zero is a hell of a lot better than having zero

i think the toughest candidate dems could pick is yang

he's the only one not talking about identitarianism race/gender stuff

Yeah deflation is good

he's almost like bernie was in 2016 before he fell into the left identitarian narrative

or in 2015 idk

a trump vs. yang debate

i don't think that he will be picked though.

ya

The idea is that being poor and begging for a job and receiving a very low-paying job under a completely deregulated economy is not preferable to having “free” money on hand to counteract any loss of jobs from forces beyond your control

And @sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ you’d probably freak out at this idea but I’ve been considering the merits of QE4P (which is now my nickname), which would mean direct money supply injection alongside or instead of interest rate targeting by the Fed

That during, say, an economic downturn, the Fed could send every citizen a check for some reasonable amount of new money in order to counteract money supply contraction

It could then be free to raise interest rates and reduce/call in loans later when growth is restored

i am not sure the negative effects of having this "free" money would be outweighed by the good

we can see for instance minimum wage is almost useless

and at worst a job killer

i would like socialism to work, but i don't think it does

that said i do think a social safety net is required but i would like to see it minimized/reformed

The negative effects would be mostly inflation, so it would have to be limited during times of higher inflation

i think the burden is on the proponents of this to prove it will work. we have seen time and time again socialism destroy countries. ubi has never been tested on a mass-scale for long periods. the study in finland was unable to show their hypothesis was true

i do not want america to be the guinea pig, if other countries want to try it, in europe, go for it

and we need to reform welfare laws now

it seems our welfare laws discourage two-parent households

lol "mostly inflation" like that's negligable, just inflation. inflation is a killer. at best it nullifies your policy, at worst it destroys the economy

the problem in venezuela is inflation

Yes; however, the current low-inflation/low-growth environment likely needs a change in policy to fix

And a UBI would encourage two-parent households since it doubles your combined UBI