|
|
|
The true face of free market fundamentalism. This is why we need basic incomes, decent minimum wages AND decent social security.
People like this will make other people work for a dollar an hour. Advocating slavery!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributed:
|
|
Added by:
|
|
Viewed:
|
|
|
On february 07 2010
|
|
Dagonweb
|
|
591 times
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Community Comments:
Have something to say about this video? Signup and
login to share your thoughts with the community.
|
Friedman is not advocating slavery, he is promoting a more efficient use of resources.
Problem with minimum wage is that people who would be willing to work for less than the minimum wage don't get jobs because the minimum wage law prevents companies from hiring them. To clarify, this is because companies ability to hire more people is limited by how much money they make in their business and how much their operating costs are (i.e. how much workforce costs to them). A law that prevents hiring more workers cheaper means artificial limits to how efficient the company can be and that way constrains it's ability to grow, have more income and hire more workers.
In other perspective, if there would not be a minimum wage, then companies could get more people that with properly managed business would lead to faster growth and wealth generation.
But doesn't that mean that those willing to work for less would end up in a permanent wage slavery because of their low income effectively prevents them from getting a better position financially (able to afford a house for example)? Not if they are free to ask for more pay from the company or rise to higher paying positions in the company. In free job markets they can also decide to find a better paying jobs from other companies or start their own. In essence it supply and demand in job markets.
In summary: demanding artificial limits creates unefficient markets and this hinders growth. By having a minimum wage you keep part of the potential workforce out of jobs because businesses can't afford to hire them. Those that do get jobs in economies that have minimum wage laws do get paid better wages but doing so they also hinder growth on how fast businesses can afford to hire those that get left out of jobs. Thats just a waste of brain power.
---
So what about basic incomes and social security? One must first understand that for a society to be able to give basic income means that it first have to get that money from somewhere, and taxes are the way society does that. Problem with higher taxes is again unefficient use of resources. By taking more of the fruits of labour from those that are working to those that have done nothing to earn it doesn't endorse more work to be done to sustain this cycle, just the opposite. More efficient way for sustainability and growth is to take less from those that are able as that gives them more power to continue doing more useful things in their own life and that way they can also enrich other people's lifes with jobs, products etc.
Now is basic income all bad? Wouldn't it provide better stepping stones for the youth and behave as a safety net for those with misfortunes? Yes it would, and it's a good objective to have as it will clearly lead to a more stable society. Just don't try to build this on other people shoulders.
So how to get a sustainable basic income? By building a highly automated infrastructure that is capable in providing atleast energy and food and in which everyone has a share in. In practice this could be done with advanced enough technology.
|
I don't see why you're making the elitist and condescending assumption that a BI would necessarily be paid to those who "have done nothing to earn it". Models could be proposed where one would only be paid a BI after a number of years of work and in some kind of proportion to their duration (say, 1 year of BI for 2 years of actual work). Then people who ended up in the wrong job could take the time off to respecialize or people who can come up with awesome ideas can take the time to create a new business for themselves without the drain of 8 hours of their working potential everyday etc. etc.
Why must you assume that a BIG will necessarily be highway robbery of the rich? It could be formulated as an investment. Solutions can be found if there's a willingness to find them.
|
Donjoe,
in previous post I based the thought process to model where BI would be guaranteed to everyone without additional restrictions for accessing it. That would include also the less productive portion of the population like the youth just starting to get to job market. I'll admit that the wording is a bit condescending, so thanks for pointing that out. But still, the wording is a part of the overall view that its better that people have the right to choose how to use their products instead of the society taking part of their products to sustain itself.
As far as I know many societies already have some models in use for retirement, basic social security and trade unions have unemployment securities that are sustained with payments from the membership. It may be a bit difficult to talk about this on details without taking into account what counties we are thinking about.
As for people having the opportunity to take time off to search new opportunities I don't see why this sould be based on a forced taxing instead of people being free to save the money they earn and use those saving for taking the time off. This way only those that want to look for new opportunities have to make choises on where to spend their time and money. For those that are not likely to create businesses this would mean that they still have more money to spend on the things that they care of instead of being forced to support other's businesses that they likely don't even know about. And if they choose to support some business then they have more power to do so, free and willing.
Investment in the future is of course a smart thing to to, I just don't think that innovation throught taxing and government intervention is an efficient way to do it.
Just on the side, Slavoj Žižek has an interesting talk on charities linked here. (just as long as you get pass the presentation that sadly dents the message a bit)
|
"As for people having the opportunity to take time off to search new opportunities I don't see why this sould be based on a forced taxing"
Of course, my own preference as well as yours is to tax human effort less and other things more, like robotic work or pre-existing natural resources (e.g. Alaskan oil).
What Slavoj doesn't talk about, sadly, is how exactly we could go about "making poverty impossible" (instead of just a thing to be managed within the confines of the current - unchanged - economic model).
|
|
|
Add Videos
