um. I am too busy to do this discussion justice, I really am, already robbing Peter to pay Paul in time management today. I was going to post the letter that I was talking about from todays Alibi, but the website is not updated yet. He does make a couple very key points. However, I do not think abolishing the minimum wage is an option because, if you go low enough to compete with workers in India and Mexico, people *really* won't be able to live, and except for the quasi-volunteer positions nobody will want the jobs except perhaps illegal immigrants. A passing thought - perhaps the solution is to let the really mindless jobs go. Early analyses indicate that the companies doing this are often sorry and I feel that this could not happen to a nicer bunch of guys. So perhaps economic development should focus more on what Americans actually do well.
Dana On 9/28/05, Matthew Small <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Looking at this argument: > > "This is the exact same argument as the minimum wage: pay people a wage > they didn't earn because they can't compete." > > Makes me think you didn't read what I wrote. > > Question: WHY can't companies compete here in the US? > Answer: Because it costs too much to pay our workers their wages, taxes, > and > FICA like Dana said. > > Question: WHY does it cost so much? > Answer: Because there's a minimum wage. > > Question: WHY is it more cost-effective to move operations offshore? > Answer: Because the cost of labor overseas COMBINED with a lack of a > federal > tariff, makes importing goods from foreign countries cheaper than > producing > them in the US. > > Question: WHAT can we do to prevent job loss? > Answer: EITHER > > 1) Raise tariffs so it costs as much to sell an imported > good produced overseas as it does to produce it here > > OR > > 2) Reduce the cost of production by eliminating the minimum > wage and other hurdles. > > What you apparently haven't understood yet is that the US Government has > imposed a production overhead cost in the form of minimum wages upon > domestic businesses AND removed any protection those companies have in the > form of tariffs. The effect is that now domestic companies move their jobs > overseas. I'm asking that they either level the playing field by imposing > tariffs OR remove the burden of production in the US. Which one do you > want? > > > Matthew Small > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:175433 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
