This is not uncommon even in non-union private companies.
I'm often shocked at how bad some employees are and they still collect a check twice a month.
Economics Thread
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
This is not uncommon even in non-union private companies.
I'm often shocked at how bad some employees are and they still collect a check twice a month.
acesfull86
Well-known member
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-11-23/trump-and-sanders-are-wrong-to-want-to-cap-credit-card-interest-rates?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-view&utm_medium=social&utm_content=view&sref=htOHjx5Y
When Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump agree on something, it’s a sign that trouble is afoot. And last week, the senator from Vermont said that he would gladly work with the president-elect to cap credit card interest rates at 10%, a promise Trump made during the campaign.
Their complaint is simple: Americans who have to pay 20% or 30% interest on their credit card debt are being ripped off. Those rates do sound unjust, but imposing a cap would just make things worse — for borrowers more so than banks.
Consider the industry’s background. Competition among credit card issuers in the US is intense. A large number of banks and fintech companies offer cards, which compete along many dimensions — annual fees, payment services and options, travel rewards and points, and of course borrowing rates. If a consumer does not like these terms, they can go elsewhere. One recent survey counts 643 credit cards from 156 issuers.
With so many different suppliers, it is likely that the offered terms of trade reflect the costs of production — in this case, the costs of expected default or delayed payment.
...
If someone cannot borrow against his or her credit card, maybe payday loans will be the next option. Are they so much better? The logic of the Sanders-Trump proposal, pursued consistently, would choke off borrowing for people with high credit risk. Should the government close all the pawn shops as well? In the limiting case, there are loan sharks and other more desperate measures. Why give those businesses greater opportunities to expand?
It is a legitimate question, of course, whether so much consumer borrowing is productive and beneficial. Many people borrow money to engage in sports gambling, for example, a negative-sum and sometimes addictive pursuit. Yet productive uses of borrowing are legion. What if you are a recent immigrant who just got your first job, and want to buy your kids some sports equipment so they can play after school? Should the federal government be making this more difficult for you?
The right to borrow money is inextricably linked with other liberties.
...
Ultimately, freedom of choice is intertwined with the freedom not only to spend money, but also to borrow it. And since money is a general medium of exchange, there is no way to stop only the “bad uses” of borrowed money. Thus there arises a fundamental question: Who is more qualified to make the final decisions about how best to use their financial resources, US citizens or their government?
When Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump agree on something, it’s a sign that trouble is afoot. And last week, the senator from Vermont said that he would gladly work with the president-elect to cap credit card interest rates at 10%, a promise Trump made during the campaign.
Their complaint is simple: Americans who have to pay 20% or 30% interest on their credit card debt are being ripped off. Those rates do sound unjust, but imposing a cap would just make things worse — for borrowers more so than banks.
Consider the industry’s background. Competition among credit card issuers in the US is intense. A large number of banks and fintech companies offer cards, which compete along many dimensions — annual fees, payment services and options, travel rewards and points, and of course borrowing rates. If a consumer does not like these terms, they can go elsewhere. One recent survey counts 643 credit cards from 156 issuers.
With so many different suppliers, it is likely that the offered terms of trade reflect the costs of production — in this case, the costs of expected default or delayed payment.
...
If someone cannot borrow against his or her credit card, maybe payday loans will be the next option. Are they so much better? The logic of the Sanders-Trump proposal, pursued consistently, would choke off borrowing for people with high credit risk. Should the government close all the pawn shops as well? In the limiting case, there are loan sharks and other more desperate measures. Why give those businesses greater opportunities to expand?
It is a legitimate question, of course, whether so much consumer borrowing is productive and beneficial. Many people borrow money to engage in sports gambling, for example, a negative-sum and sometimes addictive pursuit. Yet productive uses of borrowing are legion. What if you are a recent immigrant who just got your first job, and want to buy your kids some sports equipment so they can play after school? Should the federal government be making this more difficult for you?
The right to borrow money is inextricably linked with other liberties.
...
Ultimately, freedom of choice is intertwined with the freedom not only to spend money, but also to borrow it. And since money is a general medium of exchange, there is no way to stop only the “bad uses” of borrowed money. Thus there arises a fundamental question: Who is more qualified to make the final decisions about how best to use their financial resources, US citizens or their government?
They offer those same jobs at the same rates to American citizens. So it’s going to be super wonderful when the price of things increase from the lack of labor supply.
OMG - increased prices while actual Ameicans get paid more because of supply/demand basics?
THE HORRORS!!!
You know what will also be wonderful - When the price of goods goes up in an almost unidentifiable real way to the everyday consumer while millions more Americans are employed and then spending that money infusing growth into the economy.
How do you feel about raising the minimum wage by chance?
I’d hesitate on giving green cards to low skilled labor. AI innovations the last six months have been incredible with agriculture. It’s only going to develop faster in time.
Let’s first figure out our needs the next 2 years and then adjust.
Fun fact: Equilibrium isn’t some magical force with a defined amount. If you legislate to get rid of the cheap labor market, you are indeed changing wages through legislation. It’s not entirely apples to apples, but it’s a similar concept.
acesfull86
Well-known member
Who tf is Jessie memer?
Tapate50
Well-known member
Who cares
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Farmers cannot afford that. I understand that long term machinery can replace low skilled labor in the farming world, but I can tell you no farmer can afford it.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
I'm aware how legal farm work happens. My grandfather was a farmer who hired migrants from Americans to immigrants.
I'm not arguing that farmers cannot get labor and I'm very much pro-legal immigration as legal immigrants do tons of work that Americans don't want to because it's entry level **** but the money they make here goes a long way in their home countries.
I'm arguing that it's stupid to act like in a few years we'll be able to fully automate our farms and understand all the logistical issues of it (poor picking, dealing with waste, dealing with variety of other issues)
Like I'm super pro-automationa nd futurization of farming. But I'm aware those changes happen generationally, not annually. FOr example, the Maple Sapling draw technique I'm all for if it's tenable. Could allow us to produce maple syrup at massive volumes lowering the cost. That would be great.
Who is saying that? I'm saying there are more than enough hands (paid at market going rates) to get us to where we have more fully automated family farms. That future is coming....
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
You do realize many workers who come here don't stay long term.
Yes I’m sure this is based on super reliable data.
These people will not be needed in less than five years. We can make do in the interim.