Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 354 posts

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#211

Post by rester324 »

refurb wrote: post #202
einrealist wrote: post #135

That's the myth of Trickle-down economics in action.

But it’s not. The error people make all the time is assuming these groups are static and always have the same people in them over time. They don’t. A great example were the people in the 0.1% percentile of income. Evil rich people! Turns out people who end up in that group, only do so for a single year in their entire life . Things like selling a company or getting a large windfall propels them into the 0.1%, then af…

Sorry but I don't understand your comment. Are you sure you are responding to the right message?

The OP specifically called out trickle-down economics. Which is a myth, a false belief that somehow not taxing rich companies and not redistributing a country's wealth through taxes and other means, companies will do the right thing eventually, and they will raise the wages instead by their own incentives.

Which they never do, and only raise wages as a very last resort. They do instead coordinated wage suppression, lobbying governments to take away labor rights from the labor force, outsource their operations, set up new offshore offices to escape paying taxes, etc

So what does your comment to do with that? I think your message doesn't address any of that

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#212

Post by Hikikomori »

reliabilityguy wrote: post #173
Hikikomori wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long term stable tariffs yes. But you can't pretend like trumps tariffs were not done in the worst way possible?

Trump uses wild % amounts as a negotiation tactic. Is it the best way to do it? I don’t know. You can’t argue though that it does force the other side to come quickly to negotiation table to talk about the deal. So, if the goal is to get the deal now, then it’s effective. If the goal is something else, then it’s not a good tactic. I do not have enough information to definitely say whether it’s good or bad. Most of th…

Negotiate what? You realize they can just set it right?

If it was a long term strategy they would just set a fixed % and leave it at that, otherwise companies cannot make any plans.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#213

Post by wat10000 »

ryanjshaw wrote: post #174
wat10000 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said it’s bad for one group and neutral for another. How is that not an argument against it?

If I make the observation that some vaccines can have anaphylaxis as a side effect, am I making an argument against vaccinations? Obviously not. In that case, you’d take precautions at vaccination sites: have EpiPens available, make people wait 15min after taking the shot before leaving. In this case, I’m sure you can apply yourself and think of ways we can counter the effects of wage compression now that we’ve unemo…

The analogous argument would be that vaccines cause anaphylaxis and don’t prevent disease. If you made those statements then that’s clearly an argument against using them.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#214

Post by viraptor »

refurb wrote: post #202
einrealist wrote: post #135

That's the myth of Trickle-down economics in action.

But it’s not. The error people make all the time is assuming these groups are static and always have the same people in them over time. They don’t. A great example were the people in the 0.1% percentile of income. Evil rich people! Turns out people who end up in that group, only do so for a single year in their entire life . Things like selling a company or getting a large windfall propels them into the 0.1%, then af…

> The error people make all the time is assuming these groups are static and always have the same people in them over time.

I believe people actually involved in being active against top percentiles understand the difference between ongoing millions of annual income and one off inheritance. Have you got a some reason to think otherwise? I mean it was "occupy wall street", not "occupy people visiting retirement homes".

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#215

Post by amanaplanacanal »

reliabilityguy wrote: post #173
Hikikomori wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long term stable tariffs yes. But you can't pretend like trumps tariffs were not done in the worst way possible?

Trump uses wild % amounts as a negotiation tactic. Is it the best way to do it? I don’t know. You can’t argue though that it does force the other side to come quickly to negotiation table to talk about the deal. So, if the goal is to get the deal now, then it’s effective. If the goal is something else, then it’s not a good tactic. I do not have enough information to definitely say whether it’s good or bad. Most of th…

I'm confused. Is the goal the get manufacturing back in the US, or to make new trade deals? I've heard both things. Oh, and something about fentanyl coming in from Canada? Alright I'm not sure how tariffs would stop that.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#216

Post by chiefalchemist »

Tadpole9181 wrote: post #195
actionfromafar wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Including tariffs. (Blanket) tariffs are almost like a special tax on poor people. Explanation: to a well off person, 25% higher gas or food prices is just an annoyance. Nothing in their day to day life will change because of that. To a poor person it's brutal.

And, importantly, tariffs are payed by the importing party. This means they affect the base price of the product and cannot be made progressive. You could set up a deduction system... But that's retroactive (poor people still don't have that money for a whole year) and dramatically complicates their tax filing burden and financial record keeping requirements. The rich can afford lawyers and accountants, so the IRS ha…

And, importantly, tariffs are payed by the importing party. This means they affect the base price of the product and cannot be made progressive

Yes. But that cost can be absorbed across the board. The manufacturer can lower their margins. The importer / distributor / wholesaler can do the same. The B2B / B2C seller can do the same.

It doesn’t all necessarily get directly passed to the buyer.

Another question that few are asking is: what has the off shoring of so much manufacturing cost the USA? Looking at the resident of the WH, it appears to be quite a bit.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#217

Post by pindab0ter »

Yeul wrote: post #199
rr808 wrote: post #25

> Pay for the top 25 per cent of workers is up by 4.7 per cent in the year to June Wait what? Anyone here getting 4.7% pay rises?

Ofcourse. That's what unions do. It's also why inflation is so damn nefarious because unions ALWAYS negotiate a pay rise to match it. Which as you can imagine gets very ugly fast.

The wage-price spiral is heavily criticised: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage%E2%80%93price_spiral#Crit...

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#218

Post by amanaplanacanal »

reliabilityguy wrote: post #176
watwut wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That particular outcome is possible when you make tariffs in a smart and predictable way. Trumps tariffs are unpredictable and also make local producers pay more for raw material they need.

> That particular outcome is possible when you make tariffs in a smart and predictable way. You would have to prove that claim. There is more than one way to achieve a specific goal. > Trumps tariffs are unpredictable and also make local producers pay more for raw material they need. It’s one of the consequences. There are other ones. Is your only objective is to ensure that local manufacturers pay the least amount p…

This isn't rocket science. If you want somebody to spend a lot of money and time setting up production in the US, tariffs have to be stable and predictable. If that doesn't make sense to you, I didn't know what to say.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#219

Post by amanaplanacanal »

wat10000 wrote: post #154
WalterBright wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bills are not due in advance. The analogy is inapt. The taxes were cut 8 years ago. There aren't further "cuts". Billionare tax rates have been the same for the last 8 years, and will continue at the same rate at least into next year.

Weren’t those cuts set to expire?

Yes. They were temporary cuts so that they could claim they didn't raise the deficit. Now they are claiming that everybody knew they were going to be permanent. So they either raised the deficit in that cut, or the current one. It's the same party, claiming they didn't raise the deficit either time. And Americans put up with this shit.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#220

Post by TimorousBestie »

xienze wrote: post #151
agent_turtle wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got my first job as a grocer in 2010 which paid a minimum wage of $7.25/hr. That was 15 years ago and the minimum wage is still $7.25/hr.

But is anyone _actually_ getting paid the minimum wage these days? Might want to check what the grocery store you worked at in 2010 is really paying these days. I’d bet good money it’s significantly more than $7.25/hour.

https://usafacts.org/articles/minimum-wage-america-how-many-...

869k workers. The size of a country larger than Luxembourg.

Post reply on HN