I believe minimum wage is morally wrong because it makes it illegal for you to sell your labor for under a certain price.
Likely you misspoke, here. Morally wrong and illegal are two different things.
Likely you misread Lambie... Minimum wages makes ilegal to work being paid less than that... and it is morally wrong to impose such limitation because it ends up in more unemployment and bars from working (and being paid *anything*) people that do not produce/deserve more than that. I do agree... with some reserves though.
I doubt that I misread or misunderstood Lambie...
Minimum wage brings an attempt at a balancing of interests, and sometimes those interests are not very well balanced, but whether something is immoral or illegal tend to be different questions, and sometimes might overlap.. but they are a bit different categories of consideration.
Juan, my thoughts here are similar to Bitserve. I dont see why you would think I misspoke here, so perhaps you did not get my meaning. I stated a belief that minimum wage is immoral. I stated why I believe this, because it makes it illegal to sell your labor under a certain price. Its just an opinion, but I was pretty clear about it and I never implied morally wrong and illegal were the same things.
I am ok with minimum wage in a fiat system at the moment bc the de facto pay cut of currency debasement would wreak havoc on the vulnerable even more than it does now. Basically Im ok with fighting the immorality of money printing and employer oppression with the immorality of minimum wage.
But I believe when(not if) Bitcoin takes over as the main currency employees are paid in, then we will have made money printing obsolete and we can stop the immoral practice of minimum wages that price the low skilled, ex cons, mentally handicapped, drug addicts, homeless, etc, out of the work force.
Ok. That is a reasonable explanation both in terms of your prior morality assertions and in terms of how you believe future incentives are going to evolve including how bitcoin may play a role in such future motivations.
Thanks. I believe a more prosperous Bitcoin based society will have many more resources to protect the vulnerable, and like you this is also important to me. Hopefully with life extension tech we can all live to see this future.
Hahahaha.. you have me until the life extension tech. W have a short time here on this planet, and maybe we can squeeze a few more years, here and there by eating healthy and engaging in healthy habits, but in the end, the grim reapers going to get us all. Whether we only live into our 40s or if we have a more enduring life into our 100s.. I can hardly imagine banging hookers, doing blow and donuting in lambos into my 100s, so I plan to engage in those activities prior to my meat wagon causing me too many limitations in those regards.
Hookers and lambos doesnt have to wait. We will see massive Bitcoin profits in the next few years. Im talking about a future where most employees are paid in Bitcoin and it dominates global finance and payments. This will take a lot longer, but I think most will live to see it if they go easy on the drugs and booze so just dont go too nutz at the 100k party.
"According to a longevity study conducted by John Wilmoth (5), a UC Berkeley associate, the "oldest age at death for humans has been rising for more than a century and shows no signs of leveling off." Wilmoth and fellow colleges from the United States and Sweden researched the national death records in Sweden and found an increase in the average maximum lifespan each year since 1861. This finding calls into question the 120 lifespan limit.
"We have shown that the maximum life span is changing. It is not a biological constant. Whether or not this can go on indefinitely is difficult to say. There is no hint yet that the upward trend is slowing down," writes Wilmoth.
Wilmoth's statements about maximum lifespan run counter to a commonly held belief that there is a natural limit. "Those numbers are out of thin air," said Wilmoth. "There is no scientific basis on which to estimate a fixed upper limit. Whether 115 or 120 years, it is a legend created by scientists who are quoting each other." says Wilmoth.
Will the Trend Continue?
"Aging is a biochemical process and humans will learn how to intervene in it and slow it down" Nick Bostrom, founder of the World Transhumanist Association predicts in his article Case Against Aging(1). Optimistically, Bostrom see the elimination of aging as "theoretically possible." While it may not be within reach now, it will be soon.
Current trends seem to prove Bostrom correct. Evidence for an ever increasing human lifespan -- as a result of advances in medicine and improvements in quality of life -- is quite impressive. Not only is there mounting statistical evidence for a continued upward trend, there's evidence this trend is actually accelerating."
https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2003/01/this-wonderful-lengthening-of-lifespan/Sea Turtles living to be 400 years old is a slap in the face to humanity. We will catch up with our elitist turtle friends before too long.
