Quoting these two pearls of wisdom for the swine of posterity:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
Taxing people into "living right" is a terrible idea.
z31maniac said:
You aren't paid for hard you work, you are paid for hard you are to replace.
Quoting these two pearls of wisdom for the swine of posterity:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
Taxing people into "living right" is a terrible idea.
z31maniac said:
You aren't paid for hard you work, you are paid for hard you are to replace.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:And there we have it - A landlord who will not be a landlord where there is too much government intervention.
Lets fix it by more government intervention!
Rent Control is poor solution to a problem that is much deeper. Local governments and cities are hamstringed into only having a few options to rectify housing costs for low wage workers.
Rent Control might be leveraged by cities to create more liquidity in the housing market, allowing public entities to buy up property at discounted rates.
I think the next big political movement is going to be "living wage" laws. Not just a minimum wage, but actually forcing employers to pay above poverty level in various cities. I don't think this any better.
Our cities and suburbs drastically need more density. Employers need to spread the eff out a little. It's crazy how freakin packed California is with the largest number of high paying employers.
Duke said:Quoting these two pearls of wisdom for the swine of posterity:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
Taxing people into "living right" is a terrible idea.
But fleecing people is ok?
What about creating a system where your wealth is protected, but only your wealth? Is that ok?
What about hoarding something necessary for human existence? Do you think rivers and lakes and freshwater should be able to be privately owned?
Marcus Crassus B. 115BC, the OG of Libertarian "Privatization" of public services:
"The first ever Roman fire brigade was created by Crassus. Fires were almost a daily occurrence in Rome, and Crassus took advantage of the fact that Rome had no fire department, by creating his own brigade—500 men strong (of mostly slaves)—which rushed to burning buildings at the first cry of alarm. Upon arriving at the scene, however, the firefighters did nothing while Crassus offered to buy the burning building from the distressed property owner, at a miserable price. If the owner agreed to sell the property, his men would put out the fire; if the owner refused, then they would simply let the structure burn to the ground. After buying many properties this way, he rebuilt them, and often leased the properties to their original owners or new tenants."
Oh, and he also would buy up neighboring properties too, by convincing the neighbors of the burnt properties that they didn't want to live next to that ugly burnt out house anymore.
He was the richest man in Rome.
Some of you sound like this is perfectly acceptable.
In reply to pheller :
You are chasing a lot of rabbits, and it's pretty hard to stay on track here.
"Living wage laws" are a bad idea. Honestly, I'm not a fan of minimum wage at all.
Minimum wage places people's value at exactly that- minimum. They are pieces of meat, they are ridiculously easy to replace. There's a long line of equally poorly qualified candidates that can replace anyone in a heartbeat because the existing workers don't bring value to the company.
I am paid well for what I do Because I have spent years making sure I am hard to replace.
I have a friend who was raised in the inner city of Chicago, but lived in the South. He went back for a visit. He said the minimum wage had been raised to $15 per hour, and now no one in his neighborhood could afford milk, because milk prices had skyrocketed and they had all lost their jobs. Living wage?? Doesn't sound so to me.
I told him I'd rather see no minimum wage. He said, "But then some sweathouse operator would want people to work for $2 per hour". I said "EXACTLY. And consumers then have an obligation to go down the street and buy from his competitor who pays their employees fair wages, and put the SOB out of business. His competition deserves his business, not him."
He agreed with me. He wanted his working relationship to be measured by what he contributed to the success of the company, not by the number of hours he clocked in.
Pushing minimum wage increases is committing people to a lifetime of servitude. It's supposed to be a stepping stone, not a life support system.
Ok, so we agree about wages.
Lets move to the ability of wealthy to hoard things crucial to society, like water, food, medicine, land and property?
Lets say your kids wanted to settle down someplace close to you, but because all the land had been bought up by Jeff Bezos, and he wanted ridiculous prices for it, your kids had to move to Kansas where they absolutely hated life. Would that be cool?
In reply to pheller :
I lived it. It worked out fine.
I was raised in a fairly wealthy area of central NJ. When we were married, we could not afford to live there. So we moved to a different area of the country.
We would have rather raised our kids near their grandparents. Not in the cards. But we still had a good life.
Having been born in an area does not give me a birth right to expect the government to intervene on my behalf so I can live the way I chose on someone else's nickel.
pheller said:Marcus Crassus B. 115BC, the OG of Libertarian "Privatization" of public services:
"The first ever Roman fire brigade was created by Crassus. Fires were almost a daily occurrence in Rome, and Crassus took advantage of the fact that Rome had no fire department, by creating his own brigade—500 men strong (of mostly slaves)—which rushed to burning buildings at the first cry of alarm. Upon arriving at the scene, however, the firefighters did nothing while Crassus offered to buy the burning building from the distressed property owner, at a miserable price. If the owner agreed to sell the property, his men would put out the fire; if the owner refused, then they would simply let the structure burn to the ground. After buying many properties this way, he rebuilt them, and often leased the properties to their original owners or new tenants."
Oh, and he also would buy up neighboring properties too, by convincing the neighbors of the burnt properties that they didn't want to live next to that ugly burnt out house anymore.
He was the richest man in Rome.
Some of you sound like this is perfectly acceptable.
It is perfectly acceptable. It's kind of douchey, but it's perfectly acceptable, at least so long as it wasn't him setting the fires. If it was me I would have just charged the owners a lot of money to put them out rather than trying to buy them, but I get his point. That's leaving aside the whole slavery thing, of course, which invalidates the business model. But it could have worked with paid fire fighters.
Crassus built a private fire brigade. If he hadn't shown up to buy the building, what would have happened? It would have burned flat and the owner would have been out 100% of the value of the building, instead of salvaging some capital by selling it to Crassus. That option remained open to each owner.
What was stopping the Roman government from building a public one?
What was stopping each neighborhood from building a local one?
What was stopping the people from developing their own cooperative brigade?
Nothing. Crassus just happened to see an unserved need.
Firefighting in the United States (and possibly elsewhere, I don't know) started with insurance companies building private fire brigades to protect their insured's property in order to limit their own losses. Nothing wrong with that. Our local fire company is called Aetna Hose, Hook, and Ladder - and yes, it's from that Aetna.
pheller said:Ok, so we agree about wages.
Lets move to the ability of wealthy to hoard things crucial to society, like water, food, medicine, land and property?
Lets say your kids wanted to settle down someplace close to you, but because all the land had been bought up by Jeff Bezos, and he wanted ridiculous prices for it, your kids had to move to Kansas where they absolutely hated life. Would that be cool?
You seem to think that things people LIKE or WANT should be accommodated just because people like or want them, or for their convenience.
If economics dictates the family has to move to Kansas, then they move. Maybe grandparents move with them so they can stay near.
Or, if they hate Kansas, they could try Minnesota or South Dakota, instead. Or Arkansas. There are plenty of options once you understand the reality that you don't get scarce, popular X for the same price as common, ordinary Y just because you want it.
Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:If you want to know more about macro-economic inputs and the residential real estate market in the US, I can suggest a book called "reckless endangerment". It's focused on the people and policies who created and profited from the 2008 housing event.
I'm bringing this to the current page since you guys really seem interested. Seriously, take a look at the book.
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business and the comsumer would still buy from them because they will pretty much always chose the lowest cost option.
93EXCivic said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business.
I don't call BS.
Many business owners already pay more than minimum wage for any job that requires even the slightest skill or intelligence. It's the best way to keep good workers and avoid having to train new ones.
Duke said:93EXCivic said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business.
I don't call BS.
Many business owners already pay more than minimum wage. It's the best way to keep good workers.
But a whole lot of businesses dont.
I don't know what the answer is but I do know the current system is sustainable and I don't for a second believe in a free market free for all.
93EXCivic said:Duke said:93EXCivic said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business.
I don't call BS.
Many business owners already pay more than minimum wage. It's the best way to keep good workers.
But a whole lot of businesses dont.
...and those are the businesses that are going to lose business and employees to owners who do, for any product or service that requires the smallest amount of skill or intelligence.
93EXCivic said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business and the comsumer would still buy from them because they will pretty much always chose the lowest cost option.
Look at it this way - is china's minimum wage the same as ours? No?
Why have the lowest common denominator employers moved to China?
I'm not saying minumum wage is right or wrong (I don't know). but increasing the minimum wage does exactly the opposite of discouraging the off-shoring of low end jobs.
In reply to pheller:
I think it would be really good for you to not view this as a societal problem that can be fixed somehow with governmental intervention. That may or may not be true, but it would take an enormous amount of time, and the clock is ticking on the personal well-being of your family.
It would be much better for your to view this as a solvable problem that you can take into your own hands right now and make decisions that will positively impact your family for the rest of their lives. It's on you.
I was in my mid-30's when I made the decision to move away from my parents and raise my family in an area I could better afford. Now I am facing retirement. I have a solid retirement to depend on, all of my kids have gotten good educations and have successful lives, my grandkids are healthy and live in good homes. My children have ALL had good relationships with their grandparents. We are blessed, and lack for nothing.
And it is almost entirely because I decided in my mid-30's to take control of our lives, make the tough decisions, and live the life we could afford. We sacrificed a lot, but enjoyed the things that mattered the most to us.
You live in one of the highest cost/ lowest wage cities in the country. It's not just because government could make your life better- there is a myriad of contributing factors. But the bottom line is a master's degree in Flagstaff is worth $36-40,000 per year with no health insurance. And your $370K house is nearly 40% higher than the national average. (I live in a $190K house which is just lovely).
I know this feels hard and out of your control. I know you'd like the government to fix this problem for you. But you are making your own choices. Enjoy them. And if you are not enjoying them, make some changes while you can.
93EXCivic said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business.
I call BS on this.
I've owned and operated a business for 15 years. I have never paid anyone minimum wage. If you pay E36 M3, you get E36 M3.
I've also been in the work force for over 30 years. I've never once worked for minimum wage. Even when it was $3/hr.
If you are over the age of 20 and still making minimum wage, look to yourself for the problem.
A friend of mine got this offer when he worked for IBM. We will either lay you off or you can move to Bangalore, India where we moved your job. We will pay you the going rate for programmers there which is 20K a year or about 1/3rd of what you are making now.
If you think that having to move to Kansas is bad...
93EXCivic said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I call bs on that. If there was no minimum wage, every business would push their minimum wage workers down to basically nothing. It wouldn't be just the occasional business and the comsumer would still buy from them because they will pretty much always chose the lowest cost option.
So, your OPINION is that it wouldn't work. That doesn't make it BS. That makes it a difference of opinion.
Provide a few facts, and I will consider them. Seems pretty easy to prove. How about showing increased employment percentages in areas that have enacted higher minimum wages?
Feel free to work for minimum wage if you want. I refuse to work for ANYTHING hourly. My value is not based on how many hours I work. My value is based on how much value I bring to the company, and how much future business I bring them.
It's 1.2% of the population. It's a red herring.
pheller said:Lets say your kids wanted to settle down someplace close to you, but because all the land had been bought up by Jeff Bezos, and he wanted ridiculous prices for it, your kids had to move to Kansas where they absolutely hated life. Would that be cool?
BOOM: here it is.
infinitenexus said:
We'll probably be breaking the lease and moving in about 2 months to move to Cleveland, at least that's our goal. We have some good friends that live there and the cost of living is right, and Cleveland is getting lots of new IT jobs so it'll be great for that.
We know of a great apartment opening up in Cleveland here soon, so our goal is to get into there, and then from there I'll start working an entry level IT job, or whatever I'm able to get initially. Probably how it'll work out is we'll have most things packed up and ready to move and I'll start applying for jobs in Cleveland, and once I get one we'll finish packing up and move immediately and grab a place and start our new life.
In reply to Toyman01 (Moderately Supportive Dude) :
Very true.
Though I have not owned my own business for the last 10 years, I owned my own for over 30 years prior to that.
I NEVER paid minimum wage. I would not have anyone working for me who thought that was an acceptable standard. They think they have minimum value. They don't bring anything to my company.
I started receiving minimum wage. When it was $2.50 per hour.
I did it for exactly 3 months. Then I made the changes I needed to. It was a stepping stone. I'm glad I did it, but I certainly had no reason to stay. I'm still shocked by people who don't make the changes they need to to get out of that.
Low end housing is a mess. There is no question that every location requires a certain number of unskilled labor, and that those jobs don't usually pay top dollar, and having to live 50 miles away in order to afford your lodging is a huge impact to the quality of life.
One of the previous solutions to that was company housing and dorming, which has largely disappeared.
I don't have any solutions, and people much more informed about issues like this don't, either.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:And there we have it - A landlord who will not be a landlord where there is too much government intervention.
Lets fix it by more government intervention!
I'll agree to fix government intervention when it is no longer needed. Too many landlords don't care. Take advantage of tenants.
The only reason for big government is big Jerks.
In reply to frenchyd :
...and LOTS of landlords DO CARE.
As a person who has spent most of my adult life giving my tenants the absolute best I was able to at the absolute lowest price I could afford, you have no idea how offensive that comment is.
You'll need to log in to post.
