Ray Peat On Donald Trump

jaguar43

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
1,310
You are quite possibly the sweetest most open-minded individual . . . [snicker]

How many unemployed Americans are there? I mean the ones looking for unskilled labor positions? In my area there are next to none. Unemployement, total unemployment is 3.4%. And of course many of those people are not seeking unskilled labor positions. But an unemployment rate below 4% is unsustainable. I advertise positions at $20/hr almost constantly and can't get decent applicants. I'd happily pay guest workers that rate if they are reliable and hard-working and at least average intelligence.

But that is the beauty of a legal guest worker program. If there are no unfilled jobs, then nobody gets a guest worker visa.

Do I still sound like a third-worldist? If you already read my mind, why are you reading my posts?

You advertise positions for 20 an hour and you can't find decent applicants ? What kind of jobs are those ? Sounds a lot like the arguments that libertarians make when they say that the reason why corporations offshore jobs is because Americans workers can't do math. A few years ago, Tim Cook went on National television and stated that the reason why they manufacture in China is because China has more tool and die makers than the U.S I had to laugh at that argument. It nothing but lousy argument.
 
Last edited:

jaguar43

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
1,310
Why the heck would we want any sort of unskilled guest worker program when there are unemployed americans? I'm pretty sure you're a Third Worldist, but I'm also realizing you're probably just greedy and you don't like paying people in whatever your line of business.

Do you even know what third wordlism is ? News flash, the soviet union collapse, if you are still stuck in the 1950's.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
You advertise positions for 20 an hour and you can't find decent applicants ? What kind of jobs are those ? Sounds a lot like the arguments that libertarians make when they say that the reason why corporations offshore jobs is because Americans workers can't do math. A few years ago, Tim Cook went on National television and stated that the reason why they manufacture in China is because China has more tool and die makers than the U.S I had to laugh at that argument. It nothing but lousy argument.
Unskilled labor. No education, skills or prior experience required. What's your point? Oh, its that you don't believe me. I so wish I were lying. You looking for a job?
 

jaguar43

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
1,310
Unskilled labor. No education, skills or prior experience required. What's your point? Oh, its that you don't believe me. I so wish I were lying. You looking for a job?

Unless it's located in a place where drug addiction is a huge problem, I don't really believe your argument. They tried to build a state prison in West Virginia but couldn't hire anyone because everyone would fail the drug test, since a large portion of the population is on drugs. Other than those specific states and areas I don't see what you say as truthful. Not in response to the pay ( though I have seen skilled labor make less than that but it depends on the location) , but in response to not finding "qualified" people.

But it's the same argument time and time again. Some how, the American people don't have this or that. Or they aren't "qualified" or "don't meet the requirements". Anyone can say pretty much anything on the internet. Unfortunately the real world doesn't reflect your story.
 
Last edited:

zztr

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
295
The solution to your problem (pretending that you're not full of it) is to pay more money. Try $40 per hour. Still no need for a guest program.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
The solution to your problem (pretending that you're not full of it) is to pay more money. Try $40 per hour. Still no need for a guest program.
If the jobs get filled, no guest worker visa. Easy how that works.

Pay $40? Dude, you do realize it all comes back to you, right? The more the person who assembles your Chevy makes, the more expensive the Chevy is. Its a simple concept. ANd, although you'd like it to be "greedy owners/managers", you are just looking for somebody to blame for your own misery. If its not the rich or the Mexicans, who is to blame?
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
Unless it's located in a place where drug addiction is a huge problem, I don't really believe your argument. They tried to build a state prison in West Virginia but couldn't hire anyone because everyone would fail the drug test, since a large portion of the population is on drugs. Other than those specific states and areas I don't see what you say as truthful. Not in response to the pay ( though I have seen skilled labor make less than that but it depends on the location) , but in response to not finding "qualified" people.

But it's the same argument time and time again. Some how, the American people don't have this or that. Or they aren't "qualified" or "don't meet the requirements". Anyone can say pretty much anything on the internet. Unfortunately the real world doesn't reflect your story.
You've learned well to just make stuff up when there is nothing you can refute. I never said ***t about deficiencies of Americans. Did I? C'mon, be man (or woman) enough to admit it. I said that unemployment is ridiculously low. I said there are not enough candidates. I do have a right not to hire the ones whose previous employers say they are a POS, or who have a suspended license (job requires driving), or who are overqualified (because they won't stay long enough to make training worthwhile). I mean I do don't I? Have the right to hire only the candidates whom I judge to be fit? I mean this is still America, right? Not a planned economy? We aren't headed THERE are we . . .
 

zztr

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
295
You have this odd misconception that the nation owes you a profitable business model. Raise wages until the positions are filled. If you can't do that, then shut down. Displacing Americans with imported slaves is not an option on the table.

I'm doing rather well for myself, but I am not OK with pigs like you undermining the nation and mooching off my tax money. I hope ICE raids you and you do a stint in the can.
 
Last edited:

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
You have this odd misconception that the nation owes you a profitable business model. Raise wages until the positions are filled. If you can't do that, then shut down. Displacing Americans with imported slaves is not an option on the table.

I'm doing rather well for myself, but I am not OK with pigs like you undermining the nation and mooching off my tax money. I hope ICE raids you and you do a stint in the can.
Oooh, the gloves come off :):. All I ever said is that I would be happy to hire legal guest workers. Slaves? C'mon man you can't be that ignorant. You're just angry. Reading Ray Peat's works may help you with that.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
Go do it in Dubai, or such a place. We don't do that here.
No? We don't do immigration here? I'm confused. I'm only a small % native american. Most of the rest is German and Irish. Should all of us immigrant descended people leave?
 

Ahanu

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
432
I'm doing rather well for myself, but I am not OK with pigs like you undermining the nation and mooching off my tax mone
No need to be bring this debate to such a Low Level!
 

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
Look, you started out principled but now you are just repeating the same propaganda. So I am not going to waste time with most of this.
I’ll take that as a tap-out. The only thing unprincipled going on is to complain about being labeled and dehumanized while repeatedly labeling other people. Not admitting when you are proven wrong in an internet debate isn’t so principled either but not that surprising.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
I’ll take that as a tap-out. The only thing unprincipled going on is to complain about being labeled and dehumanized while repeatedly labeling other people. Not admitting when you are proven wrong in an internet debate isn’t so principled either but not that surprising.
Peace brother. We aren't going to agree, and the conversation devolved into . . . well, not conversation.
 

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191

thomas00

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
872
Gravity is a theory as well. Good luck with not accepting it as with basic economics.

In order for the theory you're talking about to be as immutable as the law of gravity you'd have to explain how it would occur regardless of the type of economic system in place. You haven't done that yet.
 

thomas00

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
872
Care to expand on this?

I agree in principle. Although I would qualify this to be primarily finance, insurance, natural resources, etc, ie, "crony capitalism". That is probably not a comprehensive list, but I think there are literally millions of small and mid-size businesses who's owners and managers are not part of the problem. Not saying there aren't abuses (and need for proper regulation) in these gray areas, but MOST business owners are not part of the 1% and not even all of the one percent are greedy and abusive. I reiterate what I've said before: business owners are entitled to profits. Socialism is not the answer.

I'm of the view that people should be paid according to the skills they bring to the table and the risk they are faced with while doing the job.

Business owners often make the argument they are entitled to more for two main reasons. The first being that they are taking more risk, having had to raise the capital and face the prospect of bankruptcy etc. I think that's a very weak argument when you take look at workplace deaths and injuries. It's always workers who make up those numbers and not CEOs and owners, so it's obvious who is taking the brunt of the risk. Most people would rather be bankrupt than dead or maimed. Also, when cuts need to made it's workers who are laid off not the upper management and owners so the risk of going without is higher for the worker.

The second argument usually pertains to the amount of effort put in. Owners will claim they worked harder starting the business and had the initiative to create it in the first place etc. I think that argument is also pretty dead in the water when you look at the figures on the enormous amount of unpaid overtime workers are putting in. Starting a business might take long hours but over the long run the bosses are putting in less because they've employed people specifically to do the work for them.

The gap between earnings for workers vs bosses might not be as bad in smaller businesses but I think that is purely a matter of the smaller revenue that's being generated by those businesses rather than a higher ethical standard. I think if you asked most people who has more power- the workers or the bosses, they would scoff at any suggestion that it was the former and not the latter. The only way workers were able to increase their workplace safety standards and pay has historically been through threat of strike or legally compelling bosses via the state, or by getting rid of both.
 

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
In order for the theory you're talking about to be as immutable as the law of gravity you'd have to explain how it would occur regardless of the type of economic system in place. You haven't done that yet.
Since you are the one challenging a basic economic principle, I think it is up to you to show where it doesn’t hold true. I don’t think even Karl Marx, as confused as he was, ever disavowed the laws of supply and demand.
 

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
I'm of the view that people should be paid according to the skills they bring to the table and the risk they are faced with while doing the job.

Business owners often make the argument they are entitled to more for two main reasons. The first being that they are taking more risk, having had to raise the capital and face the prospect of bankruptcy etc. I think that's a very weak argument when you take look at workplace deaths and injuries. It's always workers who make up those numbers and not CEOs and owners, so it's obvious who is taking the brunt of the risk. Most people would rather be bankrupt than dead or maimed. Also, when cuts need to made it's workers who are laid off not the upper management and owners so the risk of going without is higher for the worker.

The second argument usually pertains to the amount of effort put in. Owners will claim they worked harder starting the business and had the initiative to create it in the first place etc. I think that argument is also pretty dead in the water when you look at the figures on the enormous amount of unpaid overtime workers are putting in. Starting a business might take long hours but over the long run the bosses are putting in less because they've employed people specifically to do the work for them.

The gap between earnings for workers vs bosses might not be as bad in smaller businesses but I think that is purely a matter of the smaller revenue that's being generated by those businesses rather than a higher ethical standard. I think if you asked most people who has more power- the workers or the bosses, they would scoff at any suggestion that it was the former and not the latter. The only way workers were able to increase their workplace safety standards and pay has historically been through threat of strike or legally compelling bosses via the state, or by getting rid of both.
What if I don't want to pay 100 grand to re-roof my house? Roofing being in the top ten of most dangerous jobs. And how much should all the storm troopers be paid to enforce all of your utopian ideals and man the police state? Pure fantasy.
 
Last edited:

thomas00

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
872
Since you are the one challenging a basic economic principle, I think it is up to you to show where it doesn’t hold true. I don’t think even Karl Marx, as confused as he was, ever disavowed the laws of supply and demand.

It's pretty obvious that wages can increase if there is no longer a parasitic class hoovering up more than their fair share.

The principles you talk about are just dogmas and ideological impositions. There's a reason why economics is ridiculed as pseudoscience.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom