User talk:Peoplestruth

Your POV edits

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! BigDT 01:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Reply to your question

Peoplestruth, I have replied to the question that you left on my talk page. Please feel free to let me know if I can be of further assistance and please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view as well as Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words, as I think these articles will help answer some of your questions. BigDT 02:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

In reply to the message you left on my user page...

get your facts straight first regarding the "Controversies"

seems like you're biased, starting out thinking that Joma is a "terrorist" and clearly without an understanding of objective history.

I've answered the ones in "controversies". For that, I apologize.

But for the "biased" bit, except for many parts of Joma's article (that won't happen again, I promise) I was only trying to change some wordings to NPOV (e.g. "incorrectly" => "allegedly" [1]). The contributions are still very much appreciated. Please continue contributing to Wikipedia. --Quess 16:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Please give your comments on my answer

Good day,

Sir, I have given an answer to your issue about raising the minimum wage [[2]]. I honestly would like your comments and reaction. MartinDK also gave some inputs. Responsiblebum 06:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sir, it has been 6 days since I answered why raising the minimum wage P125 will not necessarily mean the betterment of workers (it could but certain conditions must be present). Do you still intend to answer or rebut my comments? Responsiblebum 08:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I should have guessed that you would attack the initial conditions of the equation. Indeed it was far too simplistic. It does not address specialization of labor. Or that some person's labor is more valuable than another's and why that is. Such a situation is impossible to attain beyond a simple hunter-gatherer or small farming society. I only wish to highlight that Filipinos are just as productive as before the petitioned 125 wage increase. Surveys indicated we slipped a bit. Essentially, Filipinos (hence the whole economy) are producing the same value as before but they're still asking for higher wages. You contend that it's just a question of distribution. You may want to read the following [3] [4].

I'm curious how you'd define what constitutes as a “fair” and not greedy share of the profits for workers and owners in a firm. It will have to have something to do with how to value a worker's input in the production. Also how should entreprenuers be compensated for the risks and delayed gratification they took up in investing in a business if not the profit motive? What about the risks owners take in making every business decision they make? Indeed how should anyone be motivated to do anything if they can't expect a positive return? How should that return be defined as fair? By a lawyer, priest, english lit professor, or the market? History seems to favor the last. Also, how do you account for workers being paid before the product of their labors is sold?

In addition, the equation could have started with unemployed people (in fact I'll revise it to reflect this) and it would still have the same effect. You could start the cycle all over again with the 8 employed people and 2 unemployed people where the model ended. Raising minimum wage without raising productivity will only be inflationary. The idea that the model economy is already at it's maximum potential can be compared to the Philippine economy. The Philippine economy is probaby the most efficient it can be right now given the institutional and technogical restraints we have (Read natural rate of unemployment). It isn't exactly protected like before. Especially if you take into account the smuggling. Raising the minimum wage will probably make things worse if it does not address the issue of productivity. Look at all the local SMEs filing for exemption from the raise in order to stay afloat. I suppose they're only doing so because they're too greedy? Firms will either raise prices or close shop because they think its not worth doing business anymore. How are you going to stop this? Legislate the amount of profits businessmen should have in a business? You'll have take so many intangible things into account like the many many many risks involved in starting a business. If it doesn't agree with what people think is a worthy return then no one will start a business. Ergo no one will have jobs! And I think it is impossible to measure such risks because not even entrepreneurs know all of the risks and rewards they may get starting a business.

It seems strange to me that owners would rather close down their businesses rather than give in to certain labor demands. Unless they actually lose more money giving in to certain labor demands compared to closing down a plant.

However, I do not deny there are some unscrupulous employers that deserve to go to jail. These people tend to operate under the patronage of powerful people and less affected by tactics employed by the likes of KMU. Making businesses operated by sincere hardworking people unprofitable isn't going to change bad employers' practices. If anything it forces more people to adopt “unfair” labor policies TO SURVIVE. Which makes me wonder why KMU hasn't really gone after much of these truly inhuman businesses.

Finally, I did not really offer a rebuttal. It was just an answer to tell you what will happen if we do raise the minimum wage. I didn't say we should or shouldn't. Like what MartinDK said, just because you don't like the force of gravity doesn't mean you can argue with a phycisist. Economist only describe the forces of the market. It's up to us how to make the most or least of it. Responsiblebum 06:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

On BayanMuna

I've added that Thailand and Indonesia have lower minimum wages AND LOWER RATES OF POVERTY adjusted for [PPP]. Vietnam also has lower minimum wages (I didn't mention it because it also has lower GDP but catching up quick). And as a self-professed communist country (have you denounced it already like China?) it has lower minimum wages and they don't say that factory workers there should have wages equal to developed countries. Responsiblebum 09:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I've waited long enough and I think I can ask this, how can you sleep at night knowing that your beliefs are making people miserable and poor? Acting on your beliefs only deprive them of livelihood and a true chance at a dignified life. For every job you protect and give benefits to, how many lives have you ruined? Or how many lives have failed to become what they can be? I'm angry. So very angry, but more so because you will not even defend your beliefs. Not even for the lives you supposedly want to protect and better. I have assumed good faith but I think it would be foolish for me to continue to do so. What can I do but vote for Gloria Arroyo again? As unholy as it is. Responsiblebum 09:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

comment moved from user page to talk page

Sir, it has been a month since I answered your comment. While I understand the complexity of the issue and that you've a life outside wiki as reasons for your inability to answer quickly, I expect you to have had a firm grounding in your beliefs that you would be able answer the problems that your comment on minimum wages and profits brings up by now. Your comments are after all very consequential and it would be irresponsible not to defend them with reason and the facts of reality (at least the reality of market forces). Responsiblebum 06:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)