Oklahoma Gov. Signs Bill Banning Cities From Raising Minimum Wage

[Refugee]

It's a cliche, but you talk as if everyone' born on a level playing field. They're not, by any stretch of the term. A level playing field is, of course, an impossibility. But much, much better than what we have now is entirely possible, if a significant enough number of people stopped buying the illusion.

The clichés are pure outdated Marxism. Equal pay, equal conditions, equal everything for all.

We do all have equal opportunities, but you seem amazed that the outcomes don’t match? Of course capitalism has its faults, but they’ve never been replaced by trying to introduce warped ideas of equality. The “significant enough number” don’t want it to change, it’s the minority, the ones that didn’t get equal outcomes that do. You design this equality based society where others don’t have to pay for it and I’m with you 100%.

[patrickt]

Bob: "Wait, are you saying the city has the right to rule the employer as government so long as the state and feds butt out?

What is the difference in the Feds doing it vs the State or the city?"

A. A minimum wage law is legal. It is not a good idea but the government is not short of stupid things to do especially if it will buy a vote.
B. The federal government can pass a minimum wage, a state can pass a minimum wage as long as it's higher than the federal minimum wage and a city can pass a minimum wage.

I didn't say there was any difference. I said that when West Virginia raised their minimum wage it was the business of West Virginians. I think the minimum wage is a vote-buying gimmick and a bad idea but if the state wishes to do it and suffer the consequences, that's their business. If a state doesn't want to do it, that's their business, too, and a smarter move.

But, if a city wants to do something stupid and pass a higher minimum wage, should the state have the right to stop them? I not sure they should. I think the cities have as much right to be stupid as the state does and the state has as much right to be stupid as the feds do. Perhaps we should quit electing people--or stop the fraud that gets them elected--who want to do stupid things.

Do I lose any sleep over the stupid things Chicago does? I don't sleep well in general but I don't blame it on Chicago. I feel sympathy for the thousands of friends and relatives mourning the dead that Chicago doesn't care about but that's Chicago. If Chicago wants to drive business out, fine. Eventually they'll be Detroit with a really big lake. And Illinois? It's pretty much the same. They're broke and want to talk about funding the Barack Obama Presidential Library. Go figure.

[Gerrard Winstanley]

The clichés are pure outdated Marxism. Equal pay, equal conditions, equal everything for all.

This has nothing to do with Marxism.

We do all have equal opportunities, but you seem amazed that the outcomes don’t match?

Do we? Is it not true that accident of birth and geographical proximity continue to near-universally dictate one's chances in life?

Of course capitalism has its faults, but they’ve never been replaced by trying to introduce warped ideas of equality. The “significant enough number” don’t want it to change, it’s the minority, the ones that didn’t get equal outcomes that do. You design this equality based society where others don’t have to pay for it and I’m with you 100%.

The key is the elimination of inequity's proliferators - namely the state - and all coercive functions that come with it. As taxes would then be naturally out of the window, nobody's going to be paying for anything.

[Gerrard Winstanley]

Where do people work for free? People work. They get paid. That's reality.

Correct, so let's turn the workplaces over to the wage-earners themselves.

Speculation.....I speculate that the caveman who went hunting and brought food to the tribe received more in compensation than the caveman who didn't.

It's not speculation, it's anthropology. What you describe - correctly - is a truly meritocratic hierarchy, something we don't have today.

Oh, "expensive" is the key now instead of "hazardous"..ok..I'll continue to follow you as you dodge...
Why are these ingredients more "expensive", then? Are you now admitting that things DO have different values?

Yes. They were harder to obtain. It ain't rocket science.

The same reason a ferrari costs more than a toyota..."More expensive ingredients"...is (essentially) the same reason a doctor makes more than a janitor.

Sound about right. What are you expecting me to say?