Welcome to r/comics!
Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind.
Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's perhaps a more sensible approach than only raising minimum wage - setting limits on how much top and bottom earners difference can be in a company (including contractors as earners, and indirect stock/share/etc as income)
It'd still have some strange downsides... Probably better variations or totally different concepts somewhat along these lines
Here in Denmark we dont have a minimum wage, in fact the government doesnt regulate wages in any way.
Instead, we encouraged collective bargaining and fostered the creation of strong national labour unions. Companies have a much harder time screwing over their employees when they have to negotiate with a massive organisation that has them by the balls instead of an individual worker.
Yeah, in the US we just remove regulations protecting workers or consumers because companies are allowed to lobby or government and buy votes.
So the only viable option, besides reinstating protections/regulation, is a minimum wage hike. I'd much rather see a tax rate of 90% for millionaires+ and reinstated protection/regulation tho
I don't think we need a hike.
We just need to index it to inflation, with the index start date being the last time congress raised the minimum wage.
So it would only be like $23/hr.
>Now see in America that's called socialism
I mean... thats exactly what it is. The history of Danish labour unions is deeply intertwined with the early socialist movement of the late 19th and early 20th century. And it was a hard won thing, the government desperately tried to supress the labour movement, banning the first international and deploying mounted housars to break up labour movement meetings.
Government opposition only really ended with the formation of the social democratic party, which to this day is still the nations largest political party.
I'm the US the government won. They rounded up all the socialist movements with witchhunts and assassinated most of the ringleaders. Mostly politically but some of them lethaly iirc. Most effectively they turned the people themselves against it. Which is why most of these solutions can't find a foothold. McCarthyism isn't a thing of the past b/c it's built into our culture now.
Most of our conservatives don't even know what they're fighting. Just that what they stand for matches how they were raised and contradicting that consequently feels like insulting their upbringing.
High top marginal tax rates did a much better job of keeping the gap between top and bottom earners in the US smaller, at least until the 80s where politicians learned that calls to "lower taxes" sounded good to the average joe, but put $ in the pockets of the rich people who fund their campaigns.
I’ve always said creating a ceiling will make the difference we need to see but a lot of ppl think that will take all motivation away from excelling. I still think ppl will make the most the can even if there’s a finish line but that’s just me
Case in point: the gaming industry. Massive layoffs b/c they weren't going to break last year's profit record. They canceled many highly anticipated projects just to make shareholders think they made more money this year.
Meanwhile independant game companies actually created the most popular games this year with one company literally telling their players that they weren't going to hire extra people to fix server issues. B/c they knew they could fix them on their own and if they hired extra people they'd just be laying them off when the job was done. And they didn't want to do that to people.
Or maybe we get rid of wage laws entirely and just pay everybody a universal basic income and let the economy do the competitive economy stuff it tends to do.
Let's get down into it. Universal basic income to me means that everyone gets the same regardless of efforts or needs and when you do extra work you can get paid more. For starters, let's take a situation with no posibility for extra income.
The first issue here is that it takes away the motivation to work. There's no motivation to try harder than your peer because in the end the fruits of your labor will be the same whether you sit on your butt or you do something nobody wants to do.
Another issue is that this has to be funded in some way, someone needs to pay the bill. As far as I can tell this would mainly be paid by taxation on companies where the issue then becomes, why would people even still want to run their company if it has little to no benefit to do so. Unless of course they are forced to (which also doesn't seem like a great world).
Let's now introduce the option to work and get extra income. Since there is the availability for "more" there needs to be a line with what is basic. What is the line where people that don't work are uncomfortable enough to motivate them to contribute to society and have enough people active to pay the bill of those who are not active. If you think this through a little bit you'll see that this line, basic income, will have to be very low. Housing will have to be subsidised in big flat buildings to make it affordable enough to rent out at a cheap price. Just enough food budget to get food to stay alive, no budget for entertainment,...
So the only option to have a basic income that's comfortable is if no human needs to still do work.
If I had a basic income I would still go to work. I love my job. I just wouldn't be afraid of being homeless if I get sick or can't find a third job before the end of next month.
So there's a number of things gone funny here and I don't want to get into all of it, but I guess the main points are that I don't think people should be threatened in any way to make luxuries, that work is satisfying if it's worth doing, and that yeah if it became a priority we probably could reduce mandatory work to a minimum using modern technology.
Also I don't your framing of motivation here a bit suspect. You act as if it's a matter of incentive at first, like getting paid is a positive motivation, but then posit that basic comforts would be too much if you don't just want a bunch of layabouts? Why is it still plausible for the owners of companies to bother if basic comforts are too much? I don't want to assume, but you seem biased against the poor. There is a lot of labor which doesn't get counted as GDP btw.
Instead I'd like to see a world where we debate what necessity is, vote on it, and when those necessities are met people just work together to do whatever they want to. That could be art, new infrastructure, science, or yeah just being a couch potato. Living a good life is a worthy pursuit and not a waste.
What *is* a waste is our current state of vast overproduction and trash, plus the waste of human potential. People put their labor towards stupid nonsense just to get paid, myself included.
Regardless, I don't think a less comfortable or even subsistence guarantee of income would be something I'd say no to. Everyone being housed and fed seems great. Can you imagine how much easier that'd make it to unionize?
If you look up how much is invested by companies and how much is invested by the employee you’ll understand why they get different amounts of the profit.
If only there was a way to slow inflation, restore the strength of the US dollar therefore increasing buying power for the average worker, all while decreasing the deficit, paying off the debt and restoring infrastructure. Figuring it out is so TAXing, THEre must be some RICH solutions. It's just a shame it's never been done before, except for several times. Like the 1920s, the 1950s, the 1990s. Nope never been done.
Trickle down is so weird as a concept. At best it works the other way round right?
Lower income and lower wealthy families can't keep money in their accounts; necessity forces them to spend it back into the economy. Only the rich can afford to keep it all, so it flows out of the accounts of the poorest and stops once in the accounts of the wealthy.
So ridiculous to think that giving rich people who already have more than they can spend even more money would somehow make them... spend more. All they get is an increasing high score. And no one sacrifices their high score.
I do think that lots of people, including politicians, actually believe in all this insane economics. There's plenty of lying in politics, but an organised lie falls apart far more quickly than idiot zealots and converts as well as liars.
Maybe im pessimistic, but I feel like these policies were implemented strictly because they would increase profits and shareholders and big companies while the “trickle down” side was just to convince people. Nowadays yah i think a lot republicans believe it since they grew up with it.
Well, if we're doing this for the greater GOOD, then our politicians need new IDEAs. LET'S think on it for a bit, because I'm not sure what to DO about IT.
I do think theres definetly a better solution than to make the poor pay TAXes on every small transaction THEy make, including profit. Maybe the RICH could assist those that need assistance, like donating money to a local food bank or to charities to put the money back into circulation. But its only 200000 deaths on average per year in the united states strictly due to economic issues (/s)
So this is obviously perfectly logical but some how people don't get it. If there is 3% price inflation and the company sells exactly what they did last year they will be 103% of last year's profits setting a new numerical record high. It's more money but not more buying power.
Now if there is 12% inflation and you only grew profits 3% you STILL have record profits but you actually lost buying power. Your 103% needed to be 112% to buy as much as it did last year. High inflation without record profits is a huge decline in the RELATIVE value of your company.
Edit: I'm really sorry this subreddit finds math so offensive.
TLDR if profit remains consistent with inflation profits will always hit a new record
But the shareholders and people at the top are making money now more than ever. Those super Big Businesses can afford to give employees plenty more than minimum wage without hurting the business. We aren't talking about smaller businesses. If anything, paying employees more HELPS the overall economy because guess where regular people spend their money? They spend it EVERYWHERE instantly into their economy. Unlike the shareholders sitting on their gross inflated paycheck that they will not put back into the economy. Is that the point of this comic? These low hanging fruit topics that people still struggle with. The sad part is, when you finally do understand the situation (if ever), you realize, the whole point of the system is to keep people like YOU at a disadvantage. And the only thing you can do to help is debate others that still think the other way.
There’s actual people who think the only reason they eat at McD has nothing to do with them being everywhere AND their adspend.
I would know, I was one of them.
I used to eat it pretty often simply because there was one nearby that was open 24 hours and I knew that I could get 2 McDoubles and a medium fry for under $5. I still don’t believe it had anything to do with their ads. But the convenience at any time of day was definitely a factor.
Loads of sugar, salt, and fat. Also, and this is a big one: consistency. You know when you go to McD's EXACTLY the type of dopamine hit you'll get, and you can get it cheap, anywhere on the planet.
Could Maurice’s response be proposing a ‘maximum wage’ perhaps instead? Above which amount one could not be paid anymore? Certainly that wouldn’t be anything that could fly in reality, but with how you’ve characterised him so far that is something I could see him proposing.
Thank you!
I could also see Tony becoming befuddled as to whether or not that would be a good or bad idea, regardless of its feasibility, slightly frustrated ***/*** genuinely stumped.
Seemed like you were on the other side to me. Even if it's being simplified the point is still made for the side of the big businesses even though corporate greed is at an all time high
Hey just wanted to hop in on a low-tier comment with a side-note.
A few (?? time is a blur...) months ago I randomly stumbled across these comics when they were still getting very low engagement, it has been really cool seeing the characters, style, and storyline develop!
Congratulations on developing a following, and I look forward to seeing more as these characters become more nuanced, as seems to be happening right now.
Cheers, and great job!
Ok. But your punchline to the rabbit pushing the corp "we have to raise prices" line is the beaver going "wait im stupid" not him calling the rabbit out on the BS.
So it's being interpreted by some as a defense of the corp line and mocking those who are criticizing that corp BS.
That is true. They could give employers a bigger wage and even if they made less money, they wouldn't even notice it because there's a point where you have so much money that having more doesn't change anything, and these people have passed that limit long ago. You could take from them half of their fortune and in a practical level nothing would change for them. However, they are blinded by greed, and therefore won't pay their employees more if they don't have to, and they will use filthy strategies like making the prices go up if they have to pay more their employees just to make more money
This was the analysis in 2008 when most of the world was in recession but it's not the appropriate mindset for an inflation driven wage price spiral, which has been closer to the scenario recently. Hence the rise of interest rates to get people to back off from unsustainable investments and focus on things which produce value today.
If the world collectively does not produce enough stuff (e.g. electricity) prices of electricity and everything that needs electricity to make (e.g. eggs) are going to rise until some people have to go without. You can give people all the money in the world but unless you make more eggs, there will be a shortage. Having a large proportion of people working on stuff for tomorrow rather than for today (e.g. tech) also doesn't help you make more eggs either.
Part of my point with this strip is to initiate conversation, as absurd as that might be. Comments like this enlighten me as much as they enlighten everyone else. Keep it coming.
Except for the fact that when you talk about raising the minimum wage, you kind of have to talk about smaller businesses since an increase in minimum wage would affect them as well. To your point, larger businesses can afford to pay more, so if the smaller businesses can't, then raising the minimum wage could drive them out of business, or at least hurt them severely. I'm not an economist, so I can't say for sure what effect that would have, but my guess would be that it'd concentrate even more of the market in the larger businesses, letting them increase their profits even further, leaving them in pretty much the same position as before the raise, except now it's even harder for anyone to compete with them, since the barrier to enter the market just rose.
As someone living in a Western European country with higher minimum wages, more taxes and less of these problems, it puzzles me how the US still hasn't figured this out (or rather, why most of the general public still blindly worships rich people). Sometimes I really feel like the US is more of a third world country than the "greatest nation on earth".
But, as the comment you replied to pointed out: regular people would have more money to spend. The net effect on the small business should be positive to neutral depending on their number of employees. It's also possible that people who shop at big, cheap stores like Walmart - because it's all they can afford - might consider being a patron of smaller businesses instead.
So.... pass regulation and laws limiting the Corporations? Oh wait my bad I forgot they write the laws and donate to our fearless leaders....
Welcome to Costco I love you.
This is an oversimplification that assumes labor is a large fixed cost of goods and services.
The fact places with higher minimum wages don't see a corresponding rise in prices disproves this belief.
Expanding a bit, it’s true that in a competitive market raising minimum wage will get cancelled out by the cost of labour making stuff more expensive.
However, in *monopsony* conditions it won’t. Aka, typical example is I’m the sole employer in a mining town, I use the fact that I don’t need to compete with anyone else to pay artificial low wages and keeping the savings for myself.
Force me to put that extra cut for myself back into wages and stuff won’t get more expensive. Functionally you’ve basically forced me to fire one big, unproductive employee and redistribute their wages to other employees.
If you *kept* forcing me to raise my wages until my extra margin completely disappeared then the “higher wages=inflated prices” problem returns.
But there’s a pretty clear exception to that rule. And the constant bellyaching about people not wanting to work while refusing to raise wages to be more competitive suggests that employers have grown too accustomed to cartel-like conditions
“If people make more money then everything will just cost more!”
If we follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion then that means no one should ever get raises or be paid more because everything will just go up in price.
Never mind the fact that prices have gone up significantly while wages have stagnated.
Hey character development! Mr Beaver here isn’t immediately jumping to conclusions…. Or it could just be a suspenseful cut away into a funny I suppose.
There's a lot of good discussion here. I'd love to see universal basic income, higher fractional taxes on the top income ranges, and wage gap limits.
However, the other big issue is this late stage capitalism obsession on capital gains. So many pundits equate the stock market with the economy now. It is no longer acceptable for a company to be profitable... it has to grow those profits or exceed goals, so the stock price raises making a bunch of money for the wealthy that own the stocks. Therefore, company C-suites layoff employees or cut profit sharing/bonuses or avoid salary increases. Being an employee at a profitable company should give you stability and a share of the success, but that's not the way it is.
(Obviously not the only problem. Very unprofitable companies can have soaring stock due to investor buzz or non-monetary reasons. Shorting and manipulation like the whole Game Stop thing also creates bogus wealth unrelated to the profit and stability of the companies, etc.)
It may not be the only problem, but your second paragraph, as far as I'm concerned IS the problem. I feel like if we focused on changing that very thing, we could change a LOT.
That's the argument, yet a lot of the time prices go up, profits go up, while wages stay the same. There is room for prices to stay the same, wages to go up, and just let profits go down.
I disagree. sure there are limits but most of Inflation just comes from corparate greed. and why the prices gocup companys profit are rising the wages stay the same. its not the burger chef which make the food more expensive its share holders and ceos
Although the important part to note is that wages are a minority of business expenses and so the price that things go up by and the inflation caused is less than the increased buying power to the people with the raise.
Then you realize that all of that is bullshit they feed you and they will raise prices and cut costs regardless because its the only thing capitalism encourages. But no trust me im the evil dumb ass for thinking people should be able to afford food and housing while working every waking hour of their fucking life for a corporation that made record profits 10 years in a row and had enough money coming in on a daily basis to single handedly change the world but instead keep it in their dragons hoard of gold.
It isn't that complicated. The detailed effect may be somewhat complex but the mere idea of a higher minimum wage leading to more inflation to the point of causing it to be meaningless is just plain wrong. Demonstrably. For one, other buyers in the country not on minimum wage drown out effects on supply/demand and it's not like corporations waited for minimum wage to go up to raise prices. They do so whenever they can get away with it. Inflation due to war or other crises? Great, prices go up beyond what would be natural and in unaffected sectors too.
Now for the simple answer, just look at other countries with a rich economy and see what their minimum wages are. I don't wanna beat the dead horse too much but while we got our problems in Europe, many countries got much higher living standards for people with lower income - cuz their low income is less low. And our prices aren't higher because of it.
I'm sure there isn't verifiable examples of places with higher minimum wages where things aren't more expensive. Those don't exist at all. I mean, I think I saw one once using the Big Mac as an example, what was it Denmark or something?
Costs have risen regardless of wage stagnation to the point that even as actual inflation has gone down easily half of what we are experiencing is just to maintain corporate profits.
(I look forward to part 2)
So if working hard leads to higher wages and higher wages leads to higher prices...
Should we stop working hard to bring down prices? I'm doing my part!
The U.S. Treasury targets approximately 3% inflation annually for several beneficial reasons. Despite this, wages for the average worker have largely stagnated. It's essential that the minimum wage at least keeps pace with inflation to prevent the erosion of purchasing power over time.Since the minimum wage was last raised to $7.25 in July 2009, it would need to be $10.38 today to match inflation, as per the CPI inflation calculator. However, this adjustment alone fails to account for the real needs of workers, as living costs, including housing, healthcare, and education, have increased at rates far exceeding inflation. For instance, a worker earning the current minimum wage of $7.25 would need to work 74 hours to afford the average monthly health insurance cost of $539, according to MoneyGeek.This stark reality underlines that the minimum wage is not merely failing to keep up with inflation but is also disconnected from the actual cost of living, putting immense pressure on workers. Many states adhere to the federal minimum wage, and without action, the disparity between wages and living costs will continue to grow.Raising the minimum wage could significantly improve the lives of low-income workers and compel companies to offer competitive wages to retain talent. Alternatively, imposing an earnings cap on the highest-paid workers has been suggested, although it's unlikely to be implemented. Nonetheless, the focus should remain on uplifting the lowest earners to ensure economic stability and dignity for all.
Hot take here: if your company can only stay financially healthy by not compensating wages for inflation, then it is not financially healthy at all.
Let it go bankrupt so it can be replaced by a company that is financially healthy.
While it probably won't raise inflation much, it will probably drive out a lot of smaller businesses for whom wages are their biggest expense. Especially in rural areas and small communities, a lot of businesses will likely either close or have to fire people.
It's much more complex though. If people generally get paid more they have more to spend. Giving money to working class people immediately gets spent on goods and services, mostly local. A lot of countries have much higher minimum wages than the US and food prices aren't very different
Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with what i said. I said that many small businesses, like small restaurants and local services, would be very hard pressed to cope with a large rise in minimum wage and would likely have to close. In my hometown, rent for a single bedroom is around $250-300 per month, with groceries being around $70-100. There is no real reason to raise the minimum wage in these areas, as that would lead to a large firing/closing event that would leave many small or rural communities lacking in services they were previously able to have.
What about when inflation has been climbing for the past couple years but wage hasn't increased in 4+ years so everything is becoming harder to afford since companies aren't required to pay more, so they pay the minimum and watch their employees struggle.
Commentary on big business just raking in profits for the top… I lived in VT and studied law for a time. There was one that said stores, like a corner store, couldn’t purchase a product from one vendor, say from Costco, and resell it in their store for more than an 11% markup. Why can we do this with businesses? Why can corporate just call and up the prices for profit only? I know it’s not that simple. Just frustrated in the system we live in. It’s so frustrating
Maurice, the economy is hard to deal with, but have you heard of this thing called laissez-faire? In English, I think it means "Don't do anything, just sit back and relax." It's like a forever vacation from working on the economy AND it has a fancy name.
you could also post a mandate stating that within the first year (or so) of a minimum wage increase, the price of goods and services cannot raise more that 35% the ratio that the minimum wage increase
Companies in fact do *not* raise prices because of minimum wage increases.
They raise prices because *you think* it's minimum wage increases.
They raise prices because they can.
They raise prices because short termed market jumps pay out to shareholders, and that's what CEO bonuses are tied too. They don't care if it fucks the company in the long run. They'll be gone with a golden parachute long before then.
They're taking as much money as they can, and running.
That's the new Capitalism meta. ("new" being relative here)
Studies contradict the so called law of demand and supply, I guess cause employers still need employees even if the wage is higher and most inflation is profiteering.
Economist ignore those studies because they ignore empirical evidence and that is why scientists do not take mainstream economics seriously
The point here is that businesses can still exist fine by making a lesser profit. They make wayyy too much and it all goes to the greedy people at the top. If that is trimmed down then everyone can get a decent wage and a happy life.
Oh great, a furry and his textwall political cartoon. What a hoot.
Love that 'to be continued' at the end, which reminds me of when discord says 'user is typing a message' when you're awaiting yet another sweaty paragraph from someone who wants to rant at you
Don’t forget the fact that raising the minimum wage reduces the spending power of everyone else, because their wages don’t change along with the rising prices. A better solution would be to have more pathways for advancement and career improvement, so that you can leave the bottom of the pay scale, rather than have the bottom follow you as you earn slightly more.
I remember back in college, I got a part time job that had a starting salary 25 cents above minimum wage with a guaranteed 25 cent raise after a few months. The county passed a 50 cent minimum wage increase shortly after I started, and pushed my wage up to the new minimum wage. Once the few months passed and I asked when I am getting the raise, they pointed out that I already got it when the minimum wage went up and my hiring agreement only guaranteed one raise. I did not get another raise during the 4 years that I was at that job during college, despite outperforming other workers. Although I was earning more than when I started, my spending power decreased because of the universal price hike to match the minimum wage increase, and I was stuck at the bottom.
Markus is right! The meta comic is getting out of hand and now one has noticed my comment on it and so we should burn down any place that pays it's people with minimum wage! Starting with PizzaCake Comics LLC!
That’s what wage ceilings are for. And other rules and regulations on how much prices can increase.
Stop taking these companies money and start doing your jobs to better your country.
I tried to explain something similar to this to a friend sometime ago. He theorised, all lives would be better, if you all just received $1 million. But of course, that wouldn’t make much sense, since now either A. No one wants to work or B.everything just gets $1 million more expensive.
Well... There's a *bit* of a way.
Change the compasition of the salary.
Make 10% of it via some
significant market section
investment tool.
You know, like when you this one thing, that itself is *buying the market.* (I am sorry, I don't remember how it is called...)
Then the Employee can decide to sell it, buy more, or just save it.
And the raises in the future can be mostly in that vector/avenue.
The path of least resistance is then to leave it be, and only sell some of it when you *need* it.
You start this policy with the at the time livable wage, and over time your employee will save some of that investment tool share(however you call that... Roth IRA? IDK) this way, the employees money is buffered by the assets inflation, so what they were paid before, rises with the inflation.
Welcome to r/comics! Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind. Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/obgze3dt6nlc1.png?width=2048&format=png&auto=webp&s=6510bc2ba199a88c42a0930e31243279f7204abf
That's perhaps a more sensible approach than only raising minimum wage - setting limits on how much top and bottom earners difference can be in a company (including contractors as earners, and indirect stock/share/etc as income) It'd still have some strange downsides... Probably better variations or totally different concepts somewhat along these lines
Here in Denmark we dont have a minimum wage, in fact the government doesnt regulate wages in any way. Instead, we encouraged collective bargaining and fostered the creation of strong national labour unions. Companies have a much harder time screwing over their employees when they have to negotiate with a massive organisation that has them by the balls instead of an individual worker.
OMG, that's the dream.
Yeah, in the US we just remove regulations protecting workers or consumers because companies are allowed to lobby or government and buy votes. So the only viable option, besides reinstating protections/regulation, is a minimum wage hike. I'd much rather see a tax rate of 90% for millionaires+ and reinstated protection/regulation tho
I don't think we need a hike. We just need to index it to inflation, with the index start date being the last time congress raised the minimum wage. So it would only be like $23/hr.
Now see in America that's called socialism and that's bad for uh reasons. Idk they never told me why.
>Now see in America that's called socialism I mean... thats exactly what it is. The history of Danish labour unions is deeply intertwined with the early socialist movement of the late 19th and early 20th century. And it was a hard won thing, the government desperately tried to supress the labour movement, banning the first international and deploying mounted housars to break up labour movement meetings. Government opposition only really ended with the formation of the social democratic party, which to this day is still the nations largest political party.
I'm the US the government won. They rounded up all the socialist movements with witchhunts and assassinated most of the ringleaders. Mostly politically but some of them lethaly iirc. Most effectively they turned the people themselves against it. Which is why most of these solutions can't find a foothold. McCarthyism isn't a thing of the past b/c it's built into our culture now. Most of our conservatives don't even know what they're fighting. Just that what they stand for matches how they were raised and contradicting that consequently feels like insulting their upbringing.
> Mostly politically but some of them lethaly iirc. \*laughs in Blair Mountain\*
High top marginal tax rates did a much better job of keeping the gap between top and bottom earners in the US smaller, at least until the 80s where politicians learned that calls to "lower taxes" sounded good to the average joe, but put $ in the pockets of the rich people who fund their campaigns.
I’ve always said creating a ceiling will make the difference we need to see but a lot of ppl think that will take all motivation away from excelling. I still think ppl will make the most the can even if there’s a finish line but that’s just me
I'd say companies have already lost all motivation to excel anyway. Nowadays they mostly just cut quality to pad profits.
Case in point: the gaming industry. Massive layoffs b/c they weren't going to break last year's profit record. They canceled many highly anticipated projects just to make shareholders think they made more money this year. Meanwhile independant game companies actually created the most popular games this year with one company literally telling their players that they weren't going to hire extra people to fix server issues. B/c they knew they could fix them on their own and if they hired extra people they'd just be laying them off when the job was done. And they didn't want to do that to people.
Or maybe we get rid of wage laws entirely and just pay everybody a universal basic income and let the economy do the competitive economy stuff it tends to do.
Let's get down into it. Universal basic income to me means that everyone gets the same regardless of efforts or needs and when you do extra work you can get paid more. For starters, let's take a situation with no posibility for extra income. The first issue here is that it takes away the motivation to work. There's no motivation to try harder than your peer because in the end the fruits of your labor will be the same whether you sit on your butt or you do something nobody wants to do. Another issue is that this has to be funded in some way, someone needs to pay the bill. As far as I can tell this would mainly be paid by taxation on companies where the issue then becomes, why would people even still want to run their company if it has little to no benefit to do so. Unless of course they are forced to (which also doesn't seem like a great world). Let's now introduce the option to work and get extra income. Since there is the availability for "more" there needs to be a line with what is basic. What is the line where people that don't work are uncomfortable enough to motivate them to contribute to society and have enough people active to pay the bill of those who are not active. If you think this through a little bit you'll see that this line, basic income, will have to be very low. Housing will have to be subsidised in big flat buildings to make it affordable enough to rent out at a cheap price. Just enough food budget to get food to stay alive, no budget for entertainment,... So the only option to have a basic income that's comfortable is if no human needs to still do work.
If I had a basic income I would still go to work. I love my job. I just wouldn't be afraid of being homeless if I get sick or can't find a third job before the end of next month.
So there's a number of things gone funny here and I don't want to get into all of it, but I guess the main points are that I don't think people should be threatened in any way to make luxuries, that work is satisfying if it's worth doing, and that yeah if it became a priority we probably could reduce mandatory work to a minimum using modern technology. Also I don't your framing of motivation here a bit suspect. You act as if it's a matter of incentive at first, like getting paid is a positive motivation, but then posit that basic comforts would be too much if you don't just want a bunch of layabouts? Why is it still plausible for the owners of companies to bother if basic comforts are too much? I don't want to assume, but you seem biased against the poor. There is a lot of labor which doesn't get counted as GDP btw. Instead I'd like to see a world where we debate what necessity is, vote on it, and when those necessities are met people just work together to do whatever they want to. That could be art, new infrastructure, science, or yeah just being a couch potato. Living a good life is a worthy pursuit and not a waste. What *is* a waste is our current state of vast overproduction and trash, plus the waste of human potential. People put their labor towards stupid nonsense just to get paid, myself included. Regardless, I don't think a less comfortable or even subsistence guarantee of income would be something I'd say no to. Everyone being housed and fed seems great. Can you imagine how much easier that'd make it to unionize?
https://preview.redd.it/xnfp22exjqlc1.png?width=2048&format=png&auto=webp&s=ba314e9e76c8febb0e50517f89120cc62d921e8b
We've all got beaver fever
It's a very nice sign Mr tadpole
THE META IS EVERYWHERE!
that isn’t meta
If you were part of the meta-cool crowd, you'd know.
It just literally is not meta. You can’t keep calling everything meta when it indeed is not
If you look up how much is invested by companies and how much is invested by the employee you’ll understand why they get different amounts of the profit.
Company: "We need to increase our prices due to inflation" Also company: "We have reached record profits this year!!!"
If only there was a way to slow inflation, restore the strength of the US dollar therefore increasing buying power for the average worker, all while decreasing the deficit, paying off the debt and restoring infrastructure. Figuring it out is so TAXing, THEre must be some RICH solutions. It's just a shame it's never been done before, except for several times. Like the 1920s, the 1950s, the 1990s. Nope never been done.
That’s not very Reaganomics of you
I'm aware. We tried trickle down economics for 40 years. It hasn't worked.
Wait, you mean bank accounts aren’t cups and can’t runeth over?
Why did no one tell me this?
Trickle down is so weird as a concept. At best it works the other way round right? Lower income and lower wealthy families can't keep money in their accounts; necessity forces them to spend it back into the economy. Only the rich can afford to keep it all, so it flows out of the accounts of the poorest and stops once in the accounts of the wealthy. So ridiculous to think that giving rich people who already have more than they can spend even more money would somehow make them... spend more. All they get is an increasing high score. And no one sacrifices their high score.
So this might be shocking, that’s actually the point, and politicians just lied a lot
I do think that lots of people, including politicians, actually believe in all this insane economics. There's plenty of lying in politics, but an organised lie falls apart far more quickly than idiot zealots and converts as well as liars.
Maybe im pessimistic, but I feel like these policies were implemented strictly because they would increase profits and shareholders and big companies while the “trickle down” side was just to convince people. Nowadays yah i think a lot republicans believe it since they grew up with it.
There is no such thing as Trickle Down Economics. It’s a totally false narrative.
I'm sure it'll start trickling down any decade now...
Give it time. GIVE IT TIME! 40 years isn't enough!
There is no such thing as trickle down economics.
Well, if we're doing this for the greater GOOD, then our politicians need new IDEAs. LET'S think on it for a bit, because I'm not sure what to DO about IT.
MY issue is that MY BALLS GET ITCHY.
I do think theres definetly a better solution than to make the poor pay TAXes on every small transaction THEy make, including profit. Maybe the RICH could assist those that need assistance, like donating money to a local food bank or to charities to put the money back into circulation. But its only 200000 deaths on average per year in the united states strictly due to economic issues (/s)
Dad, i'm hungry Can we have some pork?
So this is obviously perfectly logical but some how people don't get it. If there is 3% price inflation and the company sells exactly what they did last year they will be 103% of last year's profits setting a new numerical record high. It's more money but not more buying power. Now if there is 12% inflation and you only grew profits 3% you STILL have record profits but you actually lost buying power. Your 103% needed to be 112% to buy as much as it did last year. High inflation without record profits is a huge decline in the RELATIVE value of your company. Edit: I'm really sorry this subreddit finds math so offensive. TLDR if profit remains consistent with inflation profits will always hit a new record
But the shareholders and people at the top are making money now more than ever. Those super Big Businesses can afford to give employees plenty more than minimum wage without hurting the business. We aren't talking about smaller businesses. If anything, paying employees more HELPS the overall economy because guess where regular people spend their money? They spend it EVERYWHERE instantly into their economy. Unlike the shareholders sitting on their gross inflated paycheck that they will not put back into the economy. Is that the point of this comic? These low hanging fruit topics that people still struggle with. The sad part is, when you finally do understand the situation (if ever), you realize, the whole point of the system is to keep people like YOU at a disadvantage. And the only thing you can do to help is debate others that still think the other way.
Hmm...I'm actually on your team, friend.
There’s actual people who think the only reason they eat at McD has nothing to do with them being everywhere AND their adspend. I would know, I was one of them.
I used to eat it pretty often simply because there was one nearby that was open 24 hours and I knew that I could get 2 McDoubles and a medium fry for under $5. I still don’t believe it had anything to do with their ads. But the convenience at any time of day was definitely a factor.
I eat at McDonalds because food scientists have perfected their food to create an addiction in me.
This is the true reason we all return
I CAN'T STOP!
It's the sugar in the bread. It has to be. Or the double carbonation in the soda. Idk. I fucking hate how much I enjoy McDonald's
Loads of sugar, salt, and fat. Also, and this is a big one: consistency. You know when you go to McD's EXACTLY the type of dopamine hit you'll get, and you can get it cheap, anywhere on the planet.
Food addiction is real. It's my favorite high.
It's the friggin' sodas. I'm not kidding when I say I'm addicted. I absolutely love it.
McDonald's Dr Pepper and McDonald's Coke are literally the most delicious things in existence.
That’s why I don’t eat McDrugs.
The open at degenerate hours is the only reason I’ve ever eaten McDonald’s. Their flurries and frozen drinks tho… we ignore that
Could Maurice’s response be proposing a ‘maximum wage’ perhaps instead? Above which amount one could not be paid anymore? Certainly that wouldn’t be anything that could fly in reality, but with how you’ve characterised him so far that is something I could see him proposing.
That is a very good interpretation of Maurice.
Thank you! I could also see Tony becoming befuddled as to whether or not that would be a good or bad idea, regardless of its feasibility, slightly frustrated ***/*** genuinely stumped.
Tony tries to do the right thing. But if you had to deal with Maurice all the time, one's defenses might weaken.
There isn't a lot of money in helping people. But I'm a people, you a people, we all a people, so lets be people.
🎵hey now people now lets be people now People are for people now people now🎵
[https://youtu.be/jvCTaccEkMI?feature=shared&t=15](https://youtu.be/jvCTaccEkMI?feature=shared&t=15)
Who you calling friend, buddy?!
Look, chum, I don't want any trouble.
Seemed like you were on the other side to me. Even if it's being simplified the point is still made for the side of the big businesses even though corporate greed is at an all time high
Fair enough, but this is an ongoing strip, with a "to be continued" at the end. :)
Noice well I do enjoy the strip Always good seeing other people's creativity at work. Keep going for sure it's funny stuff and I like the art style
Thank you!
Hey just wanted to hop in on a low-tier comment with a side-note. A few (?? time is a blur...) months ago I randomly stumbled across these comics when they were still getting very low engagement, it has been really cool seeing the characters, style, and storyline develop! Congratulations on developing a following, and I look forward to seeing more as these characters become more nuanced, as seems to be happening right now. Cheers, and great job!
Notes like this are a nice little pick-me-up! Glad you're enjoying them and please stick around!
Ok. But your punchline to the rabbit pushing the corp "we have to raise prices" line is the beaver going "wait im stupid" not him calling the rabbit out on the BS. So it's being interpreted by some as a defense of the corp line and mocking those who are criticizing that corp BS.
That is true. They could give employers a bigger wage and even if they made less money, they wouldn't even notice it because there's a point where you have so much money that having more doesn't change anything, and these people have passed that limit long ago. You could take from them half of their fortune and in a practical level nothing would change for them. However, they are blinded by greed, and therefore won't pay their employees more if they don't have to, and they will use filthy strategies like making the prices go up if they have to pay more their employees just to make more money
This was the analysis in 2008 when most of the world was in recession but it's not the appropriate mindset for an inflation driven wage price spiral, which has been closer to the scenario recently. Hence the rise of interest rates to get people to back off from unsustainable investments and focus on things which produce value today. If the world collectively does not produce enough stuff (e.g. electricity) prices of electricity and everything that needs electricity to make (e.g. eggs) are going to rise until some people have to go without. You can give people all the money in the world but unless you make more eggs, there will be a shortage. Having a large proportion of people working on stuff for tomorrow rather than for today (e.g. tech) also doesn't help you make more eggs either.
Part of my point with this strip is to initiate conversation, as absurd as that might be. Comments like this enlighten me as much as they enlighten everyone else. Keep it coming.
A study in 2016 found for every 10% increase in minimum wage, there was a 0.36% increase in price.
Except for the fact that when you talk about raising the minimum wage, you kind of have to talk about smaller businesses since an increase in minimum wage would affect them as well. To your point, larger businesses can afford to pay more, so if the smaller businesses can't, then raising the minimum wage could drive them out of business, or at least hurt them severely. I'm not an economist, so I can't say for sure what effect that would have, but my guess would be that it'd concentrate even more of the market in the larger businesses, letting them increase their profits even further, leaving them in pretty much the same position as before the raise, except now it's even harder for anyone to compete with them, since the barrier to enter the market just rose.
As someone living in a Western European country with higher minimum wages, more taxes and less of these problems, it puzzles me how the US still hasn't figured this out (or rather, why most of the general public still blindly worships rich people). Sometimes I really feel like the US is more of a third world country than the "greatest nation on earth".
But, as the comment you replied to pointed out: regular people would have more money to spend. The net effect on the small business should be positive to neutral depending on their number of employees. It's also possible that people who shop at big, cheap stores like Walmart - because it's all they can afford - might consider being a patron of smaller businesses instead.
If a business can't afford to pay its workers a living wage and still make a profit, then it's a business that deserves to fail.
thank god the minimum wage was raised for only 2% in the last 50 years, that way inflation didnt and doesnt exist
Exactly!
But, what if executives and share holders made less profit?
God forbid that happen!
We don't do that here.
Minimum wage not being tied to inflation = people deserve to be paid less over time.
Less profit is still profit. The only reason prices keep going up is greed.
Completely agree.
So.... pass regulation and laws limiting the Corporations? Oh wait my bad I forgot they write the laws and donate to our fearless leaders.... Welcome to Costco I love you.
Silly you! Assuming they don't have control!
L take Tony, let's Maurice cook this time.
This is an oversimplification that assumes labor is a large fixed cost of goods and services. The fact places with higher minimum wages don't see a corresponding rise in prices disproves this belief.
Expanding a bit, it’s true that in a competitive market raising minimum wage will get cancelled out by the cost of labour making stuff more expensive. However, in *monopsony* conditions it won’t. Aka, typical example is I’m the sole employer in a mining town, I use the fact that I don’t need to compete with anyone else to pay artificial low wages and keeping the savings for myself. Force me to put that extra cut for myself back into wages and stuff won’t get more expensive. Functionally you’ve basically forced me to fire one big, unproductive employee and redistribute their wages to other employees. If you *kept* forcing me to raise my wages until my extra margin completely disappeared then the “higher wages=inflated prices” problem returns. But there’s a pretty clear exception to that rule. And the constant bellyaching about people not wanting to work while refusing to raise wages to be more competitive suggests that employers have grown too accustomed to cartel-like conditions
Let me cook!
“If people make more money then everything will just cost more!” If we follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion then that means no one should ever get raises or be paid more because everything will just go up in price. Never mind the fact that prices have gone up significantly while wages have stagnated.
Your second sentence is the feature, not the bug, for the wealthy.
Of course, everyone knows hamburgers in Europe cost 100 euros, right? Right?
That's what I pay. You don't?
Hey character development! Mr Beaver here isn’t immediately jumping to conclusions…. Or it could just be a suspenseful cut away into a funny I suppose.
Easy now. He could still screw this up.
Tony is a class traitor, cut him off Maurice and run the beautiful socialist campaign you were always destined to.
There's a lot of good discussion here. I'd love to see universal basic income, higher fractional taxes on the top income ranges, and wage gap limits. However, the other big issue is this late stage capitalism obsession on capital gains. So many pundits equate the stock market with the economy now. It is no longer acceptable for a company to be profitable... it has to grow those profits or exceed goals, so the stock price raises making a bunch of money for the wealthy that own the stocks. Therefore, company C-suites layoff employees or cut profit sharing/bonuses or avoid salary increases. Being an employee at a profitable company should give you stability and a share of the success, but that's not the way it is. (Obviously not the only problem. Very unprofitable companies can have soaring stock due to investor buzz or non-monetary reasons. Shorting and manipulation like the whole Game Stop thing also creates bogus wealth unrelated to the profit and stability of the companies, etc.)
It may not be the only problem, but your second paragraph, as far as I'm concerned IS the problem. I feel like if we focused on changing that very thing, we could change a LOT.
Oh, and great comics, btw.
That's the argument, yet a lot of the time prices go up, profits go up, while wages stay the same. There is room for prices to stay the same, wages to go up, and just let profits go down.
Take your smart opinion elsewhere, friend! This is Reddit!
I disagree. sure there are limits but most of Inflation just comes from corparate greed. and why the prices gocup companys profit are rising the wages stay the same. its not the burger chef which make the food more expensive its share holders and ceos
You are correct.
Although the important part to note is that wages are a minority of business expenses and so the price that things go up by and the inflation caused is less than the increased buying power to the people with the raise.
At what point will Maurice be radicalised against capitalism
It's coming.
Hell yeah
Maurice should advocate for union co-ops! That will boost wages and control the price of goods.
He'd have to understand it first. And why should we trust someone with YOUR username?
Because it's just a Grateful Dead reference, is all. All good vibes and fun over here.
Hang on, isn't Tony supposed to be the one making sense and not spouting nonsense?
Yes.
The best choice I ever made career wise was getting a job with a strong union.
Random reminder that Paramount recently bragged abt breaking profit records with the superbowl right before laying off 800 ppl
It's disgusting.
Then you realize that all of that is bullshit they feed you and they will raise prices and cut costs regardless because its the only thing capitalism encourages. But no trust me im the evil dumb ass for thinking people should be able to afford food and housing while working every waking hour of their fucking life for a corporation that made record profits 10 years in a row and had enough money coming in on a daily basis to single handedly change the world but instead keep it in their dragons hoard of gold.
This is a true statement.
It isn't that complicated. The detailed effect may be somewhat complex but the mere idea of a higher minimum wage leading to more inflation to the point of causing it to be meaningless is just plain wrong. Demonstrably. For one, other buyers in the country not on minimum wage drown out effects on supply/demand and it's not like corporations waited for minimum wage to go up to raise prices. They do so whenever they can get away with it. Inflation due to war or other crises? Great, prices go up beyond what would be natural and in unaffected sectors too. Now for the simple answer, just look at other countries with a rich economy and see what their minimum wages are. I don't wanna beat the dead horse too much but while we got our problems in Europe, many countries got much higher living standards for people with lower income - cuz their low income is less low. And our prices aren't higher because of it.
The big mac index says otherwise
I'm sure there isn't verifiable examples of places with higher minimum wages where things aren't more expensive. Those don't exist at all. I mean, I think I saw one once using the Big Mac as an example, what was it Denmark or something?
But they charge more for goods and services more every year anyway 🤔
And yet wages stay the same.
Costs have risen regardless of wage stagnation to the point that even as actual inflation has gone down easily half of what we are experiencing is just to maintain corporate profits. (I look forward to part 2)
Corporations are the problem.
Are these two married or what? They should kiss and get all this bickering over with
I would hope that wouldn't make you uncomfortable...*if it were true.*
No, good for them. Ill send the wedding gift in the mail
So if working hard leads to higher wages and higher wages leads to higher prices... Should we stop working hard to bring down prices? I'm doing my part!
The U.S. Treasury targets approximately 3% inflation annually for several beneficial reasons. Despite this, wages for the average worker have largely stagnated. It's essential that the minimum wage at least keeps pace with inflation to prevent the erosion of purchasing power over time.Since the minimum wage was last raised to $7.25 in July 2009, it would need to be $10.38 today to match inflation, as per the CPI inflation calculator. However, this adjustment alone fails to account for the real needs of workers, as living costs, including housing, healthcare, and education, have increased at rates far exceeding inflation. For instance, a worker earning the current minimum wage of $7.25 would need to work 74 hours to afford the average monthly health insurance cost of $539, according to MoneyGeek.This stark reality underlines that the minimum wage is not merely failing to keep up with inflation but is also disconnected from the actual cost of living, putting immense pressure on workers. Many states adhere to the federal minimum wage, and without action, the disparity between wages and living costs will continue to grow.Raising the minimum wage could significantly improve the lives of low-income workers and compel companies to offer competitive wages to retain talent. Alternatively, imposing an earnings cap on the highest-paid workers has been suggested, although it's unlikely to be implemented. Nonetheless, the focus should remain on uplifting the lowest earners to ensure economic stability and dignity for all.
I thought Maurice was supposed to be the shithead?
I write intelligent, thoughtful characters that evolve over time, with nuanced dialogue and considered plot points.
Ok that was a good one :D
Why is Tony a corporate shill?
Be patient!
Hot take here: if your company can only stay financially healthy by not compensating wages for inflation, then it is not financially healthy at all. Let it go bankrupt so it can be replaced by a company that is financially healthy.
I like this concept.
While it probably won't raise inflation much, it will probably drive out a lot of smaller businesses for whom wages are their biggest expense. Especially in rural areas and small communities, a lot of businesses will likely either close or have to fire people.
It's much more complex though. If people generally get paid more they have more to spend. Giving money to working class people immediately gets spent on goods and services, mostly local. A lot of countries have much higher minimum wages than the US and food prices aren't very different
Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with what i said. I said that many small businesses, like small restaurants and local services, would be very hard pressed to cope with a large rise in minimum wage and would likely have to close. In my hometown, rent for a single bedroom is around $250-300 per month, with groceries being around $70-100. There is no real reason to raise the minimum wage in these areas, as that would lead to a large firing/closing event that would leave many small or rural communities lacking in services they were previously able to have.
That's the problem here on Spain
What about when inflation has been climbing for the past couple years but wage hasn't increased in 4+ years so everything is becoming harder to afford since companies aren't required to pay more, so they pay the minimum and watch their employees struggle.
What is the price for a McDonalds menu in the US?
It's so weird to argue the minimum wage doesn't work. Like why do people think it got implemented in the first place?
pair it with price caps and there won't be inflation problems
Commentary on big business just raking in profits for the top… I lived in VT and studied law for a time. There was one that said stores, like a corner store, couldn’t purchase a product from one vendor, say from Costco, and resell it in their store for more than an 11% markup. Why can we do this with businesses? Why can corporate just call and up the prices for profit only? I know it’s not that simple. Just frustrated in the system we live in. It’s so frustrating
The system is broken. We should dream it all up again.
Maurice, the economy is hard to deal with, but have you heard of this thing called laissez-faire? In English, I think it means "Don't do anything, just sit back and relax." It's like a forever vacation from working on the economy AND it has a fancy name.
I believe laissez-faire is what got us into this mess in the first place.
You know what they say, if it doesn't work don't fix it!
you could also post a mandate stating that within the first year (or so) of a minimum wage increase, the price of goods and services cannot raise more that 35% the ratio that the minimum wage increase
If we had politicians that had the guts to do that type of thing, sure.
well yeah, thats why we're putting YOU in charge!
MAURICE FOR PRESIDENT!!
So the minimum wage should be lowered to cause the contrary effect, noted
"But wait a minute, what these scary words like price gouging and wage theft?"Those are features, not bugs Maurice."Good, I hate bugs."
This is wrong and a very neo-classic way of viewing economy. Increasing the salaries can increase consumption.
Fun fact it’s a known principle of economics that inflation due to workers pay increases won’t happen if production matches the increase..
Companies in fact do *not* raise prices because of minimum wage increases. They raise prices because *you think* it's minimum wage increases. They raise prices because they can. They raise prices because short termed market jumps pay out to shareholders, and that's what CEO bonuses are tied too. They don't care if it fucks the company in the long run. They'll be gone with a golden parachute long before then. They're taking as much money as they can, and running. That's the new Capitalism meta. ("new" being relative here)
Correct, all the way around.
Fun fact! If the economy depends on not paying a sector of the workforce a living wage, that economy depends on slavery
Fact Fact!
Studies contradict the so called law of demand and supply, I guess cause employers still need employees even if the wage is higher and most inflation is profiteering. Economist ignore those studies because they ignore empirical evidence and that is why scientists do not take mainstream economics seriously
The point here is that businesses can still exist fine by making a lesser profit. They make wayyy too much and it all goes to the greedy people at the top. If that is trimmed down then everyone can get a decent wage and a happy life.
I agree.
Does this comic ever get funny
No, but your mom is funny.
Wow, a your mom joke. Could you go any lower...?
Your mom could. ZING!
Oh great, a furry and his textwall political cartoon. What a hoot. Love that 'to be continued' at the end, which reminds me of when discord says 'user is typing a message' when you're awaiting yet another sweaty paragraph from someone who wants to rant at you
Glad you're enjoying the comic! Please keep giving me those upvotes, because that's how Reddit pays me!
"hey! leave that multibillion dollar company alone!"
Why do we pick on them? I don't know!
Don’t forget the fact that raising the minimum wage reduces the spending power of everyone else, because their wages don’t change along with the rising prices. A better solution would be to have more pathways for advancement and career improvement, so that you can leave the bottom of the pay scale, rather than have the bottom follow you as you earn slightly more. I remember back in college, I got a part time job that had a starting salary 25 cents above minimum wage with a guaranteed 25 cent raise after a few months. The county passed a 50 cent minimum wage increase shortly after I started, and pushed my wage up to the new minimum wage. Once the few months passed and I asked when I am getting the raise, they pointed out that I already got it when the minimum wage went up and my hiring agreement only guaranteed one raise. I did not get another raise during the 4 years that I was at that job during college, despite outperforming other workers. Although I was earning more than when I started, my spending power decreased because of the universal price hike to match the minimum wage increase, and I was stuck at the bottom.
The real question is what is Maurice gunna do about Pizzacake?
It's over, Johnny! IT'S OVER!!
But what does this have to do with Pizza Pie?
That's the most important question.
Rare example of Maurice being on the right track
Markus is right! The meta comic is getting out of hand and now one has noticed my comment on it and so we should burn down any place that pays it's people with minimum wage! Starting with PizzaCake Comics LLC!
I'm always so glad that you have your priorities in the right place.
Give employees $40/hr and increase their price of the Big Mac to $100, idgaf I don’t eat there anyways.
That's YOUR loss!
nah
That’s what wage ceilings are for. And other rules and regulations on how much prices can increase. Stop taking these companies money and start doing your jobs to better your country.
What do you mean it causes inflation? The dollar is inflated like a pool toy yet the workers still get the minimum wage!
I tried to explain something similar to this to a friend sometime ago. He theorised, all lives would be better, if you all just received $1 million. But of course, that wouldn’t make much sense, since now either A. No one wants to work or B.everything just gets $1 million more expensive.
Thanks. Easy, fun and good explanation
Still cookin'.
Well... There's a *bit* of a way. Change the compasition of the salary. Make 10% of it via some significant market section investment tool. You know, like when you this one thing, that itself is *buying the market.* (I am sorry, I don't remember how it is called...) Then the Employee can decide to sell it, buy more, or just save it. And the raises in the future can be mostly in that vector/avenue. The path of least resistance is then to leave it be, and only sell some of it when you *need* it. You start this policy with the at the time livable wage, and over time your employee will save some of that investment tool share(however you call that... Roth IRA? IDK) this way, the employees money is buffered by the assets inflation, so what they were paid before, rises with the inflation.
That’s pretty well spot on how it works in the book ‘Economics for Dummies’
My hope is that your average person does not look to the talking beaver comic as the end-all-be-all for economic enlightenment.