Austerity isn't really working is it?

Mr. Incognito

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

You have a phd in economics? Seriously? From where. I find that shocking from your posts. I don't believe that. I know phd economics students in NUIG!
, my alma mata and they do not share your views.

People at phd level should really be able to articulate themselves and deal with the substantive issues. Then again is the chestnut of academia vs practice again.

But from my recollection the academics predicted the crash and they are largely opposed to austery now.

You might let me know where your phd is from.

You're scolding someone for not being able to articulate themselves when your basis for "you can't have a PHD" is "because I know people who disagree with you"? And "you kids", "I have zero interest in this despite posting repeatedly", "I won't lower myself to explain or back up anything I've written" - go clear your head a bit in the park.

Bullseye1

Phoebas wrote: »

Spain's minimum wage is just one part of their screwed up labour market. Its probably not sensible to think that a minimum wage is the only ingredient in a labour market.

It appears the three people who thanked you are obsessed with the abolition of the minimum wage and yet for most of the time debating never mentioned other factors required to make its abolition viable.

Mr Benevolent

Gambas wrote: »

As for not working, have you seen an Irish bond yield chart in the past while? Plenty people who are prepared to fund the state believe it is working.

Well yes, based on bond rates alone it is working, we're now at pre-Celtic Tiger levels (@ 4%) for the 10 year bond, amazingly. We're not doing nearly as well as the UK of course, but a lot better than Greece.

Anynama141

Bullseye1 wrote: »

It appears the three people who thanked you are obsessed with the abolition of the minimum wage and yet for most of the time debating never mentioned other factors required to make its abolition viable.

I'm not quite sure how the minimum wage became the lightening rod on this thread, but I don't think anyone disagrees that all sides of this should be tackled as soon as possible. The sooner Ireland becomes more competitive, the sooner people will be back at work (albeit they may not be earning a small fortune for carrying hods around a site any more).

steddyeddy

Anynama141 wrote: »

I'm not quite sure how the minimum wage became the lightening rod on this thread, but I don't think anyone disagrees that all sides of this should be tackled as soon as possible. The sooner Ireland becomes more competitive, the sooner people will be back at work (albeit they may not be earning a small fortune for carrying hods around a site any more).

How would you rank the minimum wage as a problem compared to commercial rents? How come the minority of economists seem to think all economic problems can be solved by tackling the least well off first?

Anynama141

steddyeddy wrote: »

How would you rank the minimum wage as a problem compared to commercial rents? How come the minority of economists seem to think all economic problems can be solved by tackling the least well off first?

It would be impossible to answer the first question without huge amounts of study - years worth of work. The only thing that is clear is that there are many factors which are making Ireland uncompetitive and killing jobs, and they all need to be looked at.

As for the second, I don't know which economists you are referring to and I certainly wouldn't speak on anyone else's behalf. I certainly don't think that the MW issue should be given any priority over anything else, and I don't think I've suggested otherwise here.

steddyeddy

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Also, I would like to add, the banks aren't why we were in an 18b p.a. hole, the collapse of our property bubble was. You do remember that the construction sector made up 20% of our entire economy at it's peak, right?

This is true but the banks lending strategy was funding the property bubble. I would blame both sides to be honest.

steddyeddy

Anynama141 wrote: »

It would be impossible to answer the first question without huge amounts of study - years worth of work. The only thing that is clear is that there are many factors which are making Ireland uncompetitive and killing jobs, and they all need to be looked at.

As for the second, I don't know which economists you are referring to and I certainly wouldn't speak on anyone else's behalf. I certainly don't think that the MW issue should be given any priority over anything else, and I don't think I've suggested otherwise here.

Well it is brought up more than any other issue. Considering as a one off issue it is not a priority compared to commercial rents in Ireland I can only assume that it is the result of a contempt for people on a certain wage.

Anynama141

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well it is brought up more than any other issue. Considering as a one off issue it is not a priority compared to commercial rents in Ireland I can only assume that it is the result of a contempt for people on a certain wage.

I can't speak for how often it has been brought up, I only commented on it when someone else raised it. As I said, I don't know how it became the big issue on a thread about austerity that started quite well.

As for contempt - most of my jobs to date have paid less than the current minimum wage. I've no problem with anyone who does an honest day's work, and in fact hold in high regard people who prefer to do something useful when for a little less they could sit at home watching Jeremy Kyle all day.

Three Seasons

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

As a generic response let me repeat. Minimum wage debate is irrevant, off topic and I have zero interest in joining in. You kds play with that all you want. I gotta take my son to the park. Play nice.

You probably should have done that from the beginning, you never seemed to have much interest in engaging in discussion. Monologues are more your thing I'd say.

Three Seasons

Bullseye1 wrote: »

It appears the three people who thanked you are obsessed with the abolition of the minimum wage and yet for most of the time debating never mentioned other factors required to make its abolition viable.

It's one area people disagree in so it comes up more in conversation. Most seem to be agreed upward only rents are stupid.

KyussBishop

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Mostly because when someone makes a valid point they pass snide little remarks and attack the poster.

I welcome debate. This is not debate. It is a bunch of people talking about things they have no experience of beyond googling nonsense.

That's pretty much exactly what it is, and you notice that the level of argument they bring, is always chock full of deliberately fallacious and dishonest argument, with a constant undertone of condescension; it amounts to endless setting up of and knocking down of straw-men, and trying to edge out anyone who brings forward successful counterargument as 'unserious' (usually with the labels Marxist or Socialist), so they don't have to engage with their arguments.

Not only that, but in this case many are obvious re-regs as well.

It's a level of soapboxing and trolling, done just subtle enough to evade banning, that is aimed at framing and controlling debate; they are well aware of it themselves too, as the disingenuousness is so unconcealed, that it takes the most extreme level of obtuseness to miss it (and you can tell who supports it due to the shared thanks).

Anynama141

KyussBishop wrote: »

That's pretty much exactly what it is, and you notice that the level of argument they bring, is always chock full of deliberately fallacious and dishonest argument, with a constant undertone of condescension; it amounts to endless setting up of and knocking down of straw-men, and trying to edge out anyone who brings forward successful counterargument as 'unserious' (usually with the labels Marxist or Socialist), so they don't have to engage with their arguments.

There is only one side in this discussion not addressing arguments.

I asked repeatedly for anyone to address 5 points I made about the minimum wage - nobody did. Perhaps you would like to?

Or perhaps you would prefer to revert to discussing the hole that Ireland finds itself in, as the minimum wage discussion seems to be a bit of a side track? Because, either way, I'm pretty sure nobody is interested in discussing your attack on me and other posters here.

KyussBishop

You simply steadfastly ignored the request for proof of your claims, that abolishing minimum wage would reduce the price of goods (still waiting for that btw); then when your attempt to use obfuscatory economic theory to support your view failed, because I knew it well enough to debunk, you resort to the truly lazy level of argument, of just trying to label me a socialist.

If people have lost interest in debating with you, it's because they can see that you are not debating, but are deliberately making every effort you can to wrangle your way around having to engage in honest argument.

Anynama141

The questions are here if you get tired of bitching and want to talk about the issues.

Three Seasons

KyussBishop wrote: »

You simply steadfastly ignored the request for proof of your claims, that abolishing minimum wage would reduce the price of goods (still waiting for that btw); then when your attempt to use obfuscatory economic theory to support your view failed, because I knew it well enough to debunk, you resort to the truly lazy level of argument, of just trying to label me a socialist.

If people have lost interest in debating with you, it's because they can see that you are not debating, but are deliberately making every effort you can to wrangle your way around having to engage in honest argument.

How about just agree from here on in everyone simply makes points and people address them.

The rationale for the removal of the minimum wage has been put forward. If you feel their are holes in the logic we will discuss them. How about that?

Indon't know of anywhere where there isn't a minimum wage so I can't discuss that with you.

steddyeddy

Three Seasons wrote: »

How about just agree from here on in everyone simply makes points and people address them.

The rationale for the removal of the minimum wage has been put forward. If you feel their are holes in the logic we will discuss them. How about that?

Indon't know of anywhere where there isn't a minimum wage so I can't discuss that with you.

Yes but why hone in on the minimum wage as a major issue in the recession? It seems to be not something based on a serious economical suggestion rather a lazy attack on those of fairly low incomes.

KyussBishop

There's no 'clean slate' to be had here, when people have already shown the level of argument they are willing to engage in; it is clear how many are simply arguing in bad faith, and are likely to keep doing so.


Where it comes to the minimum wage:
The main argument in support of abolition of the minimum wage, is that it reduces unemployment, and this argument is only really tenable in times of high-unemployment when that is an issue.

In good economic times, where there is low-unemployment, these arguments don't apply since new jobs are being made available all the time, so unless it is argued that minimum wage permanently reduces the stock of available jobs (which is a tall order to demonstrate), then unemployment argument does not apply here, in low-unemployment times.

So, given this, if unemployment is the main concern then posters would argue for a falloff in minimum wage as unemployment rises (with a gradual return to full minimum wage in low-unemployment times), but instead complete abolition is argued, which implies unemployment isn't the real reason abolition is being promoted.

Three Seasons

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes but why hone in on the minimum wage as a major issue in the recession? It seems to be not something based on a serious economical suggestion rather a lazy attack on those of fairly low incomes.

I mentioned it and people kept replying and I replied to their replies and so on.

There are many other aspects that are more important than minimum wage such as inefficiency of resources in the public sector. The conversation just went we're it went.

Anynama141

Just on the off-chance that someone will actually address these points:

1. Minimum wages make it more expensive to hire people on average.
2. Making something more expensive reduces demand for it.
3. Some jobs will never produce enough value to justify paying the minimum wage - although they might do if it were possible to hire someone for slightly less.
4. From the supply side perspective, the cost of goods and services is a function of the cost of inputs to provide those. If the cost of these fall, prices will fall.
5. The people whose jobs have been eliminated due to a minimum wage (due to replacement by machinery or simply by society forgoing their service) have to be subsidised by taxing others. If those people were at work, those taxes would not be needed and instead the money would be spent on more goods and services, creating more work again.

If you can't address them, then just acknowledge that they are correct.

And of course the main subject of the thread is the 'policy' (is it a policy if you have no choice?) of austerity, happy to discuss that too.

steddyeddy

Wait guys I thought you both acknowledged that minimum wage wasn't the important aspect in the economy and that is other people bringing it up? Why keep bringing it up?

Anynama141

steddyeddy wrote: »

Wait guys I thought you both acknowledged that minimum wage wasn't the important aspect in the economy and that is other people bringing it up? Why keep bringing it up?

Because both you and Kyussbishop have brought it up repeatedly since then? Have you forgotten?
Here, here, and here

steddyeddy

Anynama141 wrote: »

Because both you and Kyussbishop have brought it up repeatedly since then? Have you forgotten?

Eh no I brought it up in the context of asking why others where talking about it. I think there are far more important issues and I seem to remember being agreed with?

Have you any problem with dropping it as an issue?

Anynama141

steddyeddy wrote: »

Eh no I brought it up in the context of asking why others where talking about it. I think there are far more important issues and I seem to remember being agreed with?

Have you any problem with dropping it as an issue?

No particular problem, but I'm just pointing out in reply to a rant from KyussBishop that I have made concrete arguments which nobody - including him - has even tried to refute.

If people are going to accuse me of not supporting my position, I'm obliged to direct them to my arguments and point out that they have been ignored (presumably because they cannot be refuted).

I'm happy to move on otherwise.

darkhorse

Three Seasons wrote: »

The cost of living will come down following the abolition of the minimum wage. People will be better off, especially the poorer people in society.

So, if the minimum wage was to be abolished to-morrow, what's to stop employer's who pay the now minimum wage, from slashing the wage of the employee to, lets say, €4.00 an hour. Tell me, what people will be better off.

steddyeddy

darkhorse wrote: »

So, if the minimum wage was to be abolished to-morrow, what's to stop employer's who pay the now minimum wage, from slashing the wage of the employee to, lets say, €4.00 an hour. Tell me, what people will be better off.

Plus minimum wage is only one aspect of employer cost that is an issue. Retailers say that biggest reason for a business going bust is commercial rents. Yet there doesn't seem to be the same passion to deal with these. Maybe because people only get satisfaction from dealing with issues that will affect those on lower incomes.

Phoebas

darkhorse wrote: »

So, if the minimum wage was to be abolished to-morrow, what's to stop employer's who pay the now minimum wage, from slashing the wage of the employee to, lets say, €4.00 an hour. Tell me, what people will be better off.

He most likely wouldn't be able to attract staff at that level of pay.

But it does raise a question. If he could get people to work for €4 an hour, why should the employer bear the full cost of what is basically a social support? Surely the state should be picking up at least some of this tab?

Three Seasons

steddyeddy wrote: »

Plus minimum wage is only one aspect of employer cost that is an issue. Retailers say that biggest reason for a business going bust is commercial rents. Yet there doesn't seem to be the same passion to deal with these. Maybe because people only get satisfaction from dealing with issues that will affect those on lower incomes.

Rents should be determined by supply and demand just like labour.

steddyeddy

Three Seasons wrote: »

Rents should be determined by supply and demand just like labour.

Well then you can say goodbye to any real reduction of the cost of living in line with a drop in minimum wage. Dealing with a small issue and ignoring the big ones is a bad way of doing things.

Three Seasons

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well then you can say goodbye to any real reduction of the cost of living in line with a drop in minimum wage. Dealing with a small issue and ignoring the big ones is a bad way of doing things.

Who's dealing with small issues and ignoring big ones?