• MrVilliam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    133
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    29 days ago

    I was talking with a coworker the other day and they were talking about how raising minimum wage causes inflation because businesses will raise prices to offset to rise in labor costs. I asked if he thought inflation had gotten bad in the past 5ish years in particular. He said of course. I said well federal minimum wage hasn’t risen since 2009, which was 15 years ago, so it sounds like inflation is gonna happen regardless of wages and is based on the capitalistic goal of infinite growth, so maybe we should raise minimum wage so lower income people have a shot at affording basic necessities.

    He just said no, then inflation just would’ve been worse. It’s maddening.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      The response to this is that inflation is a market force working against the downward pressure of demand. There is a limit to the amount prices can go up before people stop buying altogether.

      Another inflationary force is greed, funneling additional profits into the pockets of the 0.1%.

      Let the inflation due to minimum wage be X, and the inflation due to greed be Y, and the maximum total inflation be Z. X+Y=Z

      Of course there are other variables, but in a general sense, if X goes up, Y must go down. If X does not go up, Y does.

      So yes there will be inflation, but increasing wages takes more money from the ownership and puts it into the pockets of the bottom 99.9% where it will do far more good.

      And in case it wasn’t clear, this is precisely why the oligarchy opposes increasing the minimum wage. It has nothing to do with inflation, and everything to do with they make less money.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        Except that they have studies that prove that they make more money when they increase wages. Tons of em since the '70s have shown that putting more money in the hands of the poor just means that the rich get to skim off even more money. They oppose thriving wages because they want suffering.

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          29 days ago

          It really is absurd… It’s like basic fucking logic… You have more money, so you have more money to SPEND. Who benefits from more spending? Those that own the things we’re buying!

          But no… I need more more more more and fuck you for wanting a normal life. Daddy needs another private island. Git Gud suckers, just be a CEO!

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          29 days ago

          You’re confusing a rising tide with a water hose. We absolutely know that increasing wages is good for the economy, but that helps everyone. Oligarchs benefit financially from poverty, even if the economy suffers. As you said, they want suffering, because it allows them to exploit people. Capitalism is the idea that one with means can leverage their position to capture disproportionate value from effort of others. Don’t confuse capitalism with the economy. Capitalists always make money, and they don’t necessarily make more money when the economy is thriving.

      • Adderbox76
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        There is a limit to the amount prices can go up before people stop buying altogether.

        Not when those items are necessities, like food. Damn us poor people and our need to…checks notes…eat.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          29 days ago

          McDonald’s is not a necessity. The price went up for one reason only: people will pay it. Is it that hard to make a hamburger or go to a basic deli? You can get a better sandwich and drink at the supermarket.

            • Asafum@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              29 days ago

              A desert full of food and it’s growing? Doesn’t sound like a problem to me!

              (I understand what it really is) :P

          • Adderbox76
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            29 days ago

            I’m not talking specifically about McDonalds.

            Up here in Canada, One of our largest retail grocery chains has been under fire recently for those same practices. That’s more what I’m referring to.

            • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              29 days ago

              They will charge what people are willing to pay, and not a dollar more. That number changes based on a wide variety of factors, but you’re right that there is a baseline necessity to eat. The thing is, food and shelter are the last lines, and we’re already seeing the strain on those.

              People aren’t going to the movies, they’re not buying cars, they’re not going on vacations, and small businesses everywhere are suffering. So now, finally, the grocers and restaurants are coming under fire because they have hit the upper limit of what people will accept.

              Watch as they all “find ways” to cut costs and improve their value proposition. They will try to convince you that they are in this with us, but there will be a trade off. Buy in bulk, offering the same prices that you used to get buying normal quantities. Join our discount club, with recurring fees and personalized advertising using your spending habits. Get the store brand, which is expected to be of lower quality so you can’t complain when your breakfast cereal is mostly pulped cellulose.

              • Adderbox76
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                29 days ago

                I am the laziest man on earth and even I gave serious thought to planting a garden this year…that’s where we’re at.

                • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  29 days ago

                  I have whatever the opposite of a green thumb is. We do a fair bit of cooking but rent a pretty small apartment. We started growing our herbs. The basil isn’t doing so hot (I think some asshole bugs were eating it while it was outside so we brought it in) but the rosemary is doing great! I also have a peace lily that I nursed back to health somewhat.

                  If I were in the position to start a garden, I would pick some pretty easy stuff to start with. A lot of vegetables are pretty set and forget so long as you defend them from critters at the start and keep bugs away. The most important factor is to grow stuff you actually want to cook and eat. Maybe make your very own vegetable tier list and then find out the difficulty level of everything that’s in your S, A, and B tiers. Then just make a solid attempt at one or two as a practice run (or proof of concept) before investing next year in what you wish you’d had this year. If dipshits could figure it out 300 years ago, then I’m sure you could do a passable job learning it and executing it in your spare time with the power of virtually all human knowledge in your pocket.

    • applepie@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      29 days ago

      Pathetic bootlicker won’t accept the facts when they hurt his master…

      Are we supposed treat these people as adults?

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        29 days ago

        Not for citizens in 20 states, and 2 territories. The cities may have something, but since those places are all regressive overall, I doubt it.

      • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        29 days ago

        That’s true, but the baseline should be able to afford food and housing somewhere. Currently it affords that precisely nowhere. As a result, multigenerational homes are becoming more prevalent, children are working to help support households more, and single income families are nigh extinct. My wife and I are DINKs in a 2 bedroom apartment because the cost of houses is absolutely insane here. It’s hard find even a fucking townhouse for less than $500k lol. Most single family homes are at least $700k. At this rate, we’ll see polyamory and polygamy become more accepted because it’s gonna get to a point where only working throuples can afford shit anymore.

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          29 days ago

          This is something that I actually interesting culturally. Here in the US multi generational family homes are essentially considered a bad thing, but down in Costa Rica where my family is Multi generational homes are maybe not a goal per se, but something expected as your parents age, or as your kids grow up. You’ll grow up, move out for school, to get a job, and as you get older you’ll try to stick next to your family, and eventually your parents move back in so you can take care of them.

          Obviously doing this out of necessity is bad, but a fun culture difference to observe.

    • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      29 days ago

      Honestly, I think there’s 2 ways to think through this. Way 1: Magically the minimum wage is increased, and everything about the legislators stays the same.

      This would increase inflation, as what’s causing inflation is the lack of legislation and enforcement. Thus allowing companies to raise prices and profits unchecked.

      Way 2: The legislators change in such a way that it’s logical and possible to raise the minimum wage. Also logically other legislation would be passed to reduce the unchecked greed.

      This would not increase inflation on it’s own, and likely would keep it to a healthy minimum.

      I think most who complain about the minimum wage talks can only imagine the first way.

      • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        I’m not entirely sure why minimum wage hasn’t been anchored to inflation, but I’m sure there must be a good reason because I’m not exactly an economist and there’s no way that smarter people than me haven’t thought of that.