“I can’t free my slaves, I’d never be able to keep my plantation going if i had to actually pay workers on it!”
But like, hideousness aside, doesn’t this person realise that if minimum wage is higher, then more people will be able to afford their overpriced coffee? They would make up the losses in wages through more sales, since more people would have more disposable income.
But I guess the concept of: “more money for people = more money to spend on things” is just too complex and difficult of a topic for this world class economist.
Capital really isn’t about generating wealth, but only about hoarding as much of it as possible.
doesn’t this person realise that if minimum wage is higher, then more people will be able to afford their overpriced coffee? They would make up the losses in wages through more sales, since more people would have more disposable income.
Two problems with this argument:
One: it assumes that those who consume the coffee are also those employed to make it. This is not necessarily the case. The customer base of artisanal coffee shops typically works higher paying jobs. It is commonplace across many industries that workers don’t generally get paid enough to buy the products they themselves make. They make it for those wealthier than themselves to consume. This is by design.
Two: in the eyes of a liberal what you are describing is inflation. The liberal theory goes like this: When you increase wages or in any other way give people more money to spend, prices will rise as a response. Why? Because they can. A capitalist will always raise prices as high as they can get away with. It is fine and expected that some people will not be able to afford the product – this is also intentional.
“I can’t free my slaves, I’d never be able to keep my plantation going if i had to actually pay workers on it!”
But like, hideousness aside, doesn’t this person realise that if minimum wage is higher, then more people will be able to afford their overpriced coffee? They would make up the losses in wages through more sales, since more people would have more disposable income.
But I guess the concept of: “more money for people = more money to spend on things” is just too complex and difficult of a topic for this world class economist.
Capital really isn’t about generating wealth, but only about hoarding as much of it as possible.
Two problems with this argument:
One: it assumes that those who consume the coffee are also those employed to make it. This is not necessarily the case. The customer base of artisanal coffee shops typically works higher paying jobs. It is commonplace across many industries that workers don’t generally get paid enough to buy the products they themselves make. They make it for those wealthier than themselves to consume. This is by design.
Two: in the eyes of a liberal what you are describing is inflation. The liberal theory goes like this: When you increase wages or in any other way give people more money to spend, prices will rise as a response. Why? Because they can. A capitalist will always raise prices as high as they can get away with. It is fine and expected that some people will not be able to afford the product – this is also intentional.