• grte@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Low income low skill people are still a net gain to society because they provide the secret ingredient that makes our economy function and grow: Demand. If their income is not enough to stimulate demand, that is because the minimum wage is too low.

    • Foxer@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Market economies are not built on demand. If all you have is demand then you have a failed economy because you will have runaway inflation the vast majority won’t be able to afford the things they need

      Which is precisely what’s happening in Canada. The housing market has exploded because there’s demand but not a sufficient supply. The strain on the medical systems is similar, demand increase faster than supply

      Essentially you got it backwards. The magic in a market economy is the supply, and it is the nature of section economy that supply will appear to try and fill in demand. Loweskilled glow paid workers artificially ruin that dynamic and demand winds up outpacing supply with disastrous results

      And their wages are too low because they’re not worth anything. The system operates on the concept of being paid a dollar for the creation of a dollar’s worth of value. To create higher value you need to have skills and abilities or assets which allow for that and that is exactly what is leaving Canada

      • grte@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        Yes, market economies are built on demand. Neoclassical, supply side economics is a joke that centralizes wealth and destabilizes societies. It’s a failure.

        • Foxer@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          No they are not. And as the reality of the situation proves that I’m right and you are wrong. So there you go

          • grte@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            Yes they are, and the last 40 years of ever increasing wealth inequality totally discredits your economic philosophy. So there you go. Milton Friedman was a dumbass, make your peace with that fact.

            • Foxer@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              The last 40 years proves I’m right even more 😆😆😆

              Sorry kid. Try reading a book instead of getting her education from Facebook. Demand exist in every economic model, capitalism addresses the supply sideit is that effort that makes things work. The ability to create products and services including ones that didn’t even exist before which creates new demand is what drives us. Demand is not what drives us immigrants don’t produce the supply necessary to meet the demand and that creates inflation and weakens the economy

              • grte@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                22 hours ago

                The last 40 years proves I’m right even more 😆😆😆

                If you think extreme wealth inequality, stagnating wages, decreasing purchasing power for the average person, and the rise of reactionary politics is success. If, on the other hand, you are a reasonable person, you would think that’s a really pathetic failure. Kid.

                • Foxer@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  I didn’t say whether or not it was a success I said it proved me right. Wealth inequality is something that people that don’t understand how money works talk about. Whether or not someone else is richer than you has nothing to do with how rich you are. It’s not a measure that has any particular value. Reactionary politics has nothing to do with our financial system that’s something else.

                  And most of that is a product of the last 12 years or so. And much of that problem was created by an imbalance between the growth of our population and our lack of ability to supply the needs of that population. As I have already pointed out with regards to housing, medicine, education, etc.

                  And that becomes a cycle or death spiral where are inability to supply leads to inflationary pressure and low wages which leads to our inability to supply etc

                  So bringing in low-wage people in any way shape or form make the economy stronger. At best it can mask weaknesses and cover them up for a short time until they kind of blow up in your face.

                  • grte@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    21 hours ago

                    Wealth inequality is something that people that don’t understand how money works talk about. Whether or not someone else is richer than you has nothing to do with how rich you are. It’s not a measure that has any particular value.

                    Absolutely insane, ridiculous thing to believe. Obviously increasing wealth inequality matters a lot because it allows for those holding onto large amounts of wealth to outcompete greater and greater swathes of the population for resources. Which they are clearly doing as the average person’s purchasing power goes down. Pretending like it doesn’t matter is the most obvious propaganda from those benefiting from the status quo that one wonders how anyone could fall for it.

                    And reactionary politics absolutely follows from our financial system because that same wealth inequality and lowered purchasing power makes people, unsurprisingly, mad. And a lot of those mad people start looking for answers, many in reactionary places. I’ll point to the MAGA movement in the US as a pretty obvious ongoing example.