Even the illegals in Oregon get $8/hr- below Oregon's minimum wage, but far above the federal minimum wage and above some neighboring states.
For my understanding talking to owners of agricultural and construction industry jobs, illegal wages are pretty much minimum wage rounded down to the nearest dollar, and even then some end up closing for lack of help (or at least, claim to). I tried claiming that at $20/hr, they'd have all the labor they need, but apparently in certain sectors of agriculture, profit is already razor thin.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
If it were not so serious I would find this list hilarious, but check out the questions (and asking for suggestions) to be asked at tomorrow's official Obama administration announcement for regulatory reform.
one thing I think people can do is move their money out of the big banks and into local credit unions.
I agree, this idea that the Federal Reserve should get more power when they act as an ind. body, no real oversight beyond the appointments is beyond scary.
The whole point of the Federal Reserve Transparency Act is to find out what the Fed did with that est. $12 trillion in commitments, who they gave the money to, etc.
The idea now they should expand as this ill defined systemic risk regulator is really scary.
I'm hoping all participants on EP start reviewing the past deregulation laws that got us into this mess.
I am wondering (without analysis) why we cannot simply just reinstate those regulatory laws which were ripped asunder?
do we need a systemic risk regulator? It seems like the systemic risk regulator is attempting to compensate for the size of the institutions.
Besides, the Fed as a systemic risk regulator is a joke. They grossly neglected any regulatory responsibilities under Greenspan and probably do it again. Even if they did their job it probably will be too late because any "too big to fail" institution will have already started the ball rolling down the hill before any regulator catches it partly because regulators are out gunned.
Out gunned not because of the number of personnel but because of the technology and sophistication and lack of transparency (shadow banking system).
In 1933, the total GDP of the United States was $56.4 Billion. Today it's $13.5 Trillion. Sure, we have computers now, but I don't think we were keeping up on hiring regulators.
Which is why I'm for using the antitrust laws to break up the FED.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
Sadly, the US seemed able to do that in the Great Depression. The provision of the securities laws of 1933 and 1934 were astute and durable. I wonder why devising good regulatory regimes has become a lost art.
my comment is from the actual labor economics theory, not the cheap labor lobby...and they do analyze other facts, such as increased wages cause increased consumer spending in a local region etc. in their analysis.
EPI did an analysis of the last min. wage increase in 1997 and showed that there was not the unemployment that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Rountable were predicting.
Yves is one of the few economics bloggers who is really pouring over every detail so can you give a link and a block quote on this?
I'll tell ya, this is so complex, we need everyone digging around, understand it but that obvservation is correct.
Those F@+#@ing lobbyists! They need to be banned from D.C. Simple as that. No more paid lobbyists.
Honestly, even if one is not corrupt, I have no idea how Congress gets anything done with those buzz flies swarming the halls and barging into offices, demanding meetings trying to write bills.
to go back through the deregulation which created derivatives in the first place. I need to go into further study frankly but my overall impression is they are trying to preserve the shadow banking system because it represents $500 trillion dollars in mythical money.
What bothers me so far is no one mentions that the actual models are flawed. The treasury has some of this in that they want "less reliance on credit ratings agencies" but no real mention of structured finance models.
that a derivative is a security. Then you would have your federal oversight. Oh wait, we had federal oversight and old Madoff got away with his deeds, big wirehouse's got away with their misdeeds, we have found that the SEC was a bit political.
Other than the insane deritive market, (which few insurance companies participate) how have the States not done their jobs?
Nah, I'd rather have the States take back more power.
I mean, how can I want the feds to have more power if the President can illegally fire the IG without any ramifications?
the massive illegal labor pool and underground economy in Oregon in their analysis?
Seriously, Oregon is one of those states which is owned, lock, stock, barrel by the illegal alien lobby, so one has a massive underground, cash under the table economy and a huge labor pool that is nothing but illegal labor.
Same is true in California, Nevada....
All of this is pretty much ignored and the size of that labor pool is so massive (something like 11M-22M illegals in the country at this point?, probably most of them are in the labor force (how many 2 yr olds and 80 yr olds border hop?),
The size of the U.S. labor force is 153 million, so illegal labor is a good 8%! That is large enough to affect overall wages.
Policy makers can't take their time with very important issues because lobbyists and their benefactors will tear it up or kill it. But if they rush it through they sacrifice well thought out policy. The rushed product in the end is just a patch work of existing problems with no real durable reform.
Yves Smith, this morning, was lamenting about why can't we have lasting durable legislation like the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 & 1934. The answer is because of big money special interests.
What I was thinking was a truly global universal wage. i.e. a wage leveler based on PPP, exchange rates of each nation.
That would blast out the entire global labor arbitrage agenda as multinational corporations hunt the globe for the cheapest, exploitable labor and where they can squeeze nation-states for everything they've got in order to lure that MNC to do business there.
The entire global wage arbitrage strategy keeps 3rd world countries in poverty (in order to be the cheapest labor market), significantly depresses U.S. wages, further encourages manipulation of domestic labor markets via national immigration policies (as well as efforts to claim people are something to trade)...
if we had something that simply knocked out the fact labor/wages have a ratio of 100:1, 50:1, 12:1, 6:1 around the globe to U.S. wages and forced a "raising up" of wages...
I think that's the ultimate brute force method to stop this race to the bottom on U.S. standards of living.
On the entire minimum wage issue, there are labor economists who will argue that decreases the number of available jobs and frankly by the labor economics law of supply/demand, that's in line...
but on the other hand, if someone is a wage slave, now the working poor instead of just the poor...what good is that job?
One can also offset the additional labor costs in other areas.
Led to lower unemployment for the first few years. Common Dreams has a nice writeup with the math on Oregon and Washington's highest in the nation minimum wage from a few years back.
I would say, however, that it's a roller coaster ride- in good times, higher minimum wage is good, but it leads to larger layoffs in bad times.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
Even the illegals in Oregon get $8/hr- below Oregon's minimum wage, but far above the federal minimum wage and above some neighboring states.
For my understanding talking to owners of agricultural and construction industry jobs, illegal wages are pretty much minimum wage rounded down to the nearest dollar, and even then some end up closing for lack of help (or at least, claim to). I tried claiming that at $20/hr, they'd have all the labor they need, but apparently in certain sectors of agriculture, profit is already razor thin.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
The only way to do it would be to legislate not a given amount, but a percentage of World Production.
A very small percentage.
If you did it as a certain amount, you'd need to keep upping it, because the minimum wage is inflationary in and of itself.
One way to escape this rule would be a maximum salary cap as well.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
If it were not so serious I would find this list hilarious, but check out the questions (and asking for suggestions) to be asked at tomorrow's official Obama administration announcement for regulatory reform.
one thing I think people can do is move their money out of the big banks and into local credit unions.
I agree, this idea that the Federal Reserve should get more power when they act as an ind. body, no real oversight beyond the appointments is beyond scary.
The whole point of the Federal Reserve Transparency Act is to find out what the Fed did with that est. $12 trillion in commitments, who they gave the money to, etc.
The idea now they should expand as this ill defined systemic risk regulator is really scary.
I'm hoping all participants on EP start reviewing the past deregulation laws that got us into this mess.
I am wondering (without analysis) why we cannot simply just reinstate those regulatory laws which were ripped asunder?
do we need a systemic risk regulator? It seems like the systemic risk regulator is attempting to compensate for the size of the institutions.
Besides, the Fed as a systemic risk regulator is a joke. They grossly neglected any regulatory responsibilities under Greenspan and probably do it again. Even if they did their job it probably will be too late because any "too big to fail" institution will have already started the ball rolling down the hill before any regulator catches it partly because regulators are out gunned.
Out gunned not because of the number of personnel but because of the technology and sophistication and lack of transparency (shadow banking system).
Too Big to Succeed.
In 1933, the total GDP of the United States was $56.4 Billion. Today it's $13.5 Trillion. Sure, we have computers now, but I don't think we were keeping up on hiring regulators.
Which is why I'm for using the antitrust laws to break up the FED.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
Link
my comment is from the actual labor economics theory, not the cheap labor lobby...and they do analyze other facts, such as increased wages cause increased consumer spending in a local region etc. in their analysis.
EPI did an analysis of the last min. wage increase in 1997 and showed that there was not the unemployment that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Rountable were predicting.
Remember to make a post go to the front page you must vote them up!
We want the in depth pieces to go to the front page, the most detailed posts, etc. to get more visibility.
Also, well done ones and then if an instapopulist is more in depth piece, it too can go on the front page.
You can also vote things off of the front page, but please, only consider the depth,quality, accuracy of a piece.
Let's not turn this into a popularity contest but a quality of material/content contest instead.
Yves is one of the few economics bloggers who is really pouring over every detail so can you give a link and a block quote on this?
I'll tell ya, this is so complex, we need everyone digging around, understand it but that obvservation is correct.
Those F@+#@ing lobbyists! They need to be banned from D.C. Simple as that. No more paid lobbyists.
Honestly, even if one is not corrupt, I have no idea how Congress gets anything done with those buzz flies swarming the halls and barging into offices, demanding meetings trying to write bills.
to go back through the deregulation which created derivatives in the first place. I need to go into further study frankly but my overall impression is they are trying to preserve the shadow banking system because it represents $500 trillion dollars in mythical money.
What bothers me so far is no one mentions that the actual models are flawed. The treasury has some of this in that they want "less reliance on credit ratings agencies" but no real mention of structured finance models.
Remind us of what IG is again?
that a derivative is a security. Then you would have your federal oversight. Oh wait, we had federal oversight and old Madoff got away with his deeds, big wirehouse's got away with their misdeeds, we have found that the SEC was a bit political.
Other than the insane deritive market, (which few insurance companies participate) how have the States not done their jobs?
Nah, I'd rather have the States take back more power.
I mean, how can I want the feds to have more power if the President can illegally fire the IG without any ramifications?
the massive illegal labor pool and underground economy in Oregon in their analysis?
Seriously, Oregon is one of those states which is owned, lock, stock, barrel by the illegal alien lobby, so one has a massive underground, cash under the table economy and a huge labor pool that is nothing but illegal labor.
Same is true in California, Nevada....
All of this is pretty much ignored and the size of that labor pool is so massive (something like 11M-22M illegals in the country at this point?, probably most of them are in the labor force (how many 2 yr olds and 80 yr olds border hop?),
The size of the U.S. labor force is 153 million, so illegal labor is a good 8%! That is large enough to affect overall wages.
Policy makers can't take their time with very important issues because lobbyists and their benefactors will tear it up or kill it. But if they rush it through they sacrifice well thought out policy. The rushed product in the end is just a patch work of existing problems with no real durable reform.
Yves Smith, this morning, was lamenting about why can't we have lasting durable legislation like the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 & 1934. The answer is because of big money special interests.
What I was thinking was a truly global universal wage. i.e. a wage leveler based on PPP, exchange rates of each nation.
That would blast out the entire global labor arbitrage agenda as multinational corporations hunt the globe for the cheapest, exploitable labor and where they can squeeze nation-states for everything they've got in order to lure that MNC to do business there.
The entire global wage arbitrage strategy keeps 3rd world countries in poverty (in order to be the cheapest labor market), significantly depresses U.S. wages, further encourages manipulation of domestic labor markets via national immigration policies (as well as efforts to claim people are something to trade)...
if we had something that simply knocked out the fact labor/wages have a ratio of 100:1, 50:1, 12:1, 6:1 around the globe to U.S. wages and forced a "raising up" of wages...
I think that's the ultimate brute force method to stop this race to the bottom on U.S. standards of living.
On the entire minimum wage issue, there are labor economists who will argue that decreases the number of available jobs and frankly by the labor economics law of supply/demand, that's in line...
but on the other hand, if someone is a wage slave, now the working poor instead of just the poor...what good is that job?
One can also offset the additional labor costs in other areas.
Led to lower unemployment for the first few years.
Common Dreams has a nice writeup with the math on Oregon and Washington's highest in the nation minimum wage from a few years back.
I would say, however, that it's a roller coaster ride- in good times, higher minimum wage is good, but it leads to larger layoffs in bad times.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
Gee wiz, couldn't they have outsourced that to death row inmates for ten cents a year and come up with the same techniques?
Almost any economic system or governmental system works if you keep it small enough that people have to meet each other socially.
Federal is too large.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
On The Economic Populist, that's an example of Economic Fiction.
-------------------------------------
Maximum jobs, not maximum profits.
Pages