Progressive-Fundamentalist Theory On Trial: Of Street Pirates and The Living Wage, Part 1

Yesterday I was asked "How would you deal with the 'Street Pirates' who are in existence right now?".  The question was a demand for specific tasks that I would suggest.  I had given a framework for the development of children through the school system and inculcation process.  This person believed that I was writing off an entire generation of offenders who were 20 years old and above.

In addition I saw a participant in the same message thread tell of the need for 'Living Wages' as the basis for addressing the problem with desperate people at their wits end, turning to crime as a means of paying the bills.   On a related note I saw an article of "20 questions" read to television host Tavis Smiley.  Smiley said that if there was one thing he could do as president it would be to implement a 'Living Wage'.

I was going to address the issue of Street Piracy and the Living Wage in two separate posts.  Instead they are intractably associated.   In fact both of them showcase the "mind of the progressive".   They are rooted in "Demand Side Economics".

The notion of a "Living Wage" is socialist in nature.
It attempts to establish a floor on labor wages as the "consumers of labor" are asked to express the society's valuation of the human being via his own consumption of labor as a work task is completed.  Even further as a person's "needs" increase due to family burden the grounds for a "pay raise" is made, even if not one additional component of competency is expanded for the "consumer of labor" to benefit from.
It is clear to me that no "Living Wage" can be implemented without some overbearing centralized system is put into place to both enforce this policy upon all private contracts but also to fill in the void on the payment end when such a contracted price does not make sense.

Let's use some examples to bear this out.  The Living Wage Calculator

Right away their grid defines the increased wage requirements of an individual "seller of labor" as indexed by their family size.   Since this is an "hourly wage rate" rather than a weekly or monthly target that must be hit I can assume that the creators of this grid do not see this as a income budget target that a second job could potentially address.   The notion of an "hourly wage rate", at least to me, shows one person in one position and the money that they need to make per the hour as a unit of labor in order to address his commitments back at home.   It would be a grand idea to have the government mandate that this grid be printed on the back of each condom packet.

The second chart shows the lifestyle spending components that make up a "living wage standard of living".

Of the components involved in this list how many of them are already subsidized by some government program already?

• Food
• Child Care
• Medical
• Housing
• Transportation

To be clear I am not suggesting that you watch out for a "boogie man".  I am making the case that those who lobby for a "living wage" price point often fail to note that existing programs already offer the imputed value of such entitlements.  The Progressive left merely wants to fill the "donut hole" between the welfare programs that directly address all of these items on the list and the solid middle class that can pay for these items directly from their own salary.  The SCHIP program is a perfect example of this.   SCHIP was purportedly meant to offer insurance coverage for children who's parents were making too much money for Medicaid yet not enough money to comfortably afford insurance.  What we see in their bigger picture scheme, however, is that the goal of the Progressive Left is to get everyone ensnared into a health insurance program that is regulated by the government and thus do away with the donut hole in the first place.  Everyone will be either in a government program or in a quasi-government program as health insurance companies become government regulated utilities.  Their financial models requiring approval by the government.


The Living Wage As Applied To Occupations

To some this last diagram is the "money shot".  It shows "wage discrimination" and its oppressive effect.

In truth the occupational salaries do not matter to the "statist".  This list merely showcases the pivot points for his "Progressive Tax System".   Such a worker may take home this nominal amount of money.  The net pay that goes into his pocket, after an array of taxes used to support this "Living Wage" infrastructure is a different matter.


Indeed the Progressive Tax System and related social programs are the key tools in the tool box of a Quasi-Socialist.  To be clear I am not doggedly opposed to all of these mechanisms.  I am opposed to the underlying motivation that is present in many of the individuals who are experts with these tools.   Anger and resentment over the imbalance of capital resources and the claim that "capitalism CREATES poverty" is what drives many of them.

In their war against capitalistic marketplaces they merely strengthen the government hand.  Private and personal choices that used to determine the valuation of goods or services that are exchanged give way to government as the middle man, enforcing (supposed) societal values into every exchange.  Or at minimum drawing taxes out of the exchange to blunt the force of the imbalance.  Their long heard claim against "privatizing profit and nationalizing risk" as said against the Wall Street bailouts (which I partially agree with) should be counterbalanced by the indictment against their "Demand-Side Economic theories":

• Nationalizing Standards Of Living while Stripping away Private Advantage for "Preparing One's Self"
• Punitive Taxation Against Those With Life's Fortunes while Handing Public Funds away in Generous Lawsuits in favor of the Victim

The bottom line is that a fully deployed "Living Wage" scheme cannot co-exist with ECONOMIC FREEDOM and PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.  The expansive government with its voracious appetite will need to put as much capital at play and thus "private property" that is hoarded in private hands is a threat. Various policies to "free up that ill-gotten wealth" will be implemented over time.

When Quasi-Socialists talk about "Wealth Taxes" and how 90% of America's wealth is in the hands of 1% of Americans - this is what they are going after.

My challenge to them is to see that their confiscatory system DOES NOT GENERATE WEALTH.  Instead it is a series of complex "maintenance payments".  They leverage the second unit of currency in America to their advantage - The Ballot.  

The ballot, they have learned can bring forth money.

Money spent can bring forth favorable ballots. 

When a people learn that they can "vote themselves a pay raise" one can be sure that the seeds of the collapse of the great American Ponzi scheme have been sown.