How Liberals Think: Mika Says 'It's Kind Of Simple'—Just Pay Workers More

NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I post this item not to mock Mika Brzezinski. But her comments this morning were so illustrative of the liberal mindset--in ignoring fundamental principles of economics--that they are worth highlighting here.

An entire Morning Joe segment had been devoted to discussing the wage dilemma in America. In the context of analyzing the right-to-work law soon to be signed in Michigan, the panel—apparently excepting Mika—agreed that we face hard choices here. We can artificially preserve high wages for a relative few, or let wages seek their natural level, providing more jobs at lower pay. As Joe Scarborough put it, we have to decide if we want jobs to go to China, or remain here, understanding that if we want them to stay, wages cannot remain at levels in existence before America was forced to compete internationally. All this was apparently lost on Mika. In the following segment, insisting "it's kind of simple," Mika argued that employers making big profits should pay their workers more. "Why not? I don't get it," miffed Mika about "greedy" bosses. As former Obama car czar Steve Rattner gently explained, "it's capitalism."

View the video here.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Today, the ramblings of a pampered media airhead.

Tomorrow, official US Government policy.

[bray]

And you should be paid more if you have perky breasts and high cheekbones.

Pray for America

[KC_Lion]

Mika! You ignorant Slut!

You wouldn't know what it takes to run a business if your life depended on it.

[wbill]

Can liberals really be this clueless about capitalism

Yes.

It's like their electricity, or their phone, or their internet service. Just something that works when you pick it up, and it performs exactly as they think it should, every single time.

If the thought that "Hey, someone here is working to keep the lights on" ever crossed their minds, it would die of loneliness.

[PeteB570]

The CEO of Wal-Mart makes around $35 million a year. Wal-Mart has around 2.2 million employees.

If you took all his yearly paycheck and gave it to the workers as a raise it would be less than $16 per year for each worker. Divided by 52 weeks - it ain’t that much.

Libs like Mika just can’t do math.

[sickoflibs]

RE “All this was apparently lost on Mika. In the following segment, insisting “it's kind of simple,” Mika argued that employers making big profits should pay their workers more. “Why not? I don't get it,” miffed Mika about “greedy” bosses. “

She is right.
That is exactly how the Fed government works and they are a model of efficency, as long as they can print money and borrow (of it) about a third of what they spend. Why cant employers be more like that?

[dowcaet]

But don’t you know that all of these companies have a secret stash where they can get the extra money to pay higher wages. That’s what a bunch of Hope and Change types believe. We’re neck deep in trouble already and it’s only going to get worse.

[The Great RJ]

Gee Mika it is really quite simple. To pay a worker say $10 an hour that worker has to on average produce revenue from their work of not only the $10 needed to pay them, but pay their Social Security, Medicare, health insurance, pension contribution, the cost of any paid time off like vacations and leave a few cents for the owner's profit. All together to pay that $10 per hour wage the average revenue from one hour of their work would need to be probably close to $25. So Mika to pay workers more they would have to produce more goods or services sold in the market so as to have the extra revenue to pay the higher wage. Mika also needs to realize that when government mandates like Obamacare raise the cost of hiring workers employers either need to have workers produce more with no wage increase or reduce the number of workers.

Liberals just seem to think businesses are awash with money and could pay workers higher wages without producing anything.

[dowcaet]

But don’t you know that all of these companies have a secret stash where they can get the extra money to pay higher wages. That’s what a bunch of Hope and Change types believe. We’re neck deep in trouble already and it’s only going to get worse.

[longtermmemmory]

Mika has been upset over the fact “meester joe” is paid more than her. He was hired as a former us congressman and leftist RINO. She was hired as female chest in fuzzy sweaters.

leftists force workers to be paid more....

employeers respond by charging more....

employees have to pay more for company goods...

Ivy league morons.

[TheCipher]

I’m rereading “Free to Choose” by the Friedmans.

You can also see the original 1980 series and the updated 1990 series here:

Free To Choose TV

[MrB]

I really offended a lib-in-law a time when I made a statement about laws of physics and the moral law. This really stuck in my mind because of the level of outrage I perceived.

My statement was that the objective moral laws are as fixed as the physical laws of the universe, as are the consequences for violating them.

I think the offensive thing about it was the unrefutable truth of it.

[I want the USA back]

In the communist world view, industry exploits workers and earns unfair profits from their work. The only fair industry is one run by the government.

In normal peoples’ view, you have a smart, hard-working risk taker who starts a business with his own money, and HAS THE RIGHT to the profit from his business.

[alloysteel]

Simple economics comes into play here. For employment to happen in a capitalist system, the employee has to be producing a sufficient amount of goods or services, to cover the cost to the employer. The employer, as entrepreneur, has to sell those goods and services to a client, with sufficient margin over costs, to earn the necessary income flow. When the costs are too high in relation to the market value of the goods or services, it makes no economic sense to continue to produce those goods or services. And if those goods and services are discontinued, there is no need for the employee, UNLESS -

Unless, either the employee agrees to change his job description to produce an alternative for the goods or services, which may be sold by the employer at a profit, or the employee reduces the cost to the employer for his labor to a point where the employer, as entrepreneur, reaches a break-even point in selling those goods and services.

Business enterprises which fail to produce a profit are soon either bankrupt, or they must rely on some other cash flow to maintain operations. They are either ADDING to the sum total of capital, or they are devouring it.

Liberals really are that clueless.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

She has yet to define who are “The Workers” and How much is “Fair”? Does it apply only to Union members? Should Bosses have a Union? What about soldiers? Their goal is based on false assumptions and a 19th Century view of Labor.

[asinclair]

The responses I have seen on this thread are what I expect from die-hard Freepers. May I present another possibility? Instead of coercion (particularly at the point of a gun) the libtards offer instead a carrot, an incentive to "do the right thing" that is so obvious to them: encourage profit-sharing with employees. There is an obvious answer, obvious to everyone except the liberals who think they can just snap their fingers and make it so. The solution lies in the oft-quoted-here statement: "Discourage what you don't like by taxing it, encourage what you want by subsidizing it."

The rest of this thesis is left as an exercise to the reader.

[McBuff]

I remember when my daughter was 4 years old. . .she wanted a "Barbie Vanity" for her birthday, which retailed for, like, a hundred bucks. . .I told her, "well sweetie, daddy's not sure he has enough money for that". . .to which she sweetly answered, "well, daddy. . .if you don't have enough money just go out and get some more money and then you can buy it!"

Fortunately, she grew up. . .Liberals, like Mika never do.

[depressed in 06]

I am sure Mika would agree that just pay them more is equivalent with just raise your prices.

[EQAndyBuzz]

I wonder if Mika ever thinks about how much she is being paid compared to the person that does her makeup every morning. Or the person that brings her coffee. Or the hundreds of people are involved in producing her show every morning.

Combined they do not make what she makes in a year.

[Brooklyn Attitude]

“well, daddy. . .if you don’t have enough money just go out and get some more money and then you can buy it!”

My guess is that part of Mika’s lack of financial smarts comes from growing up in a rich family where money was never an issue. To her it was never a limiting factor, paying more for something never meant you had less money for something else. Hence the attitude; if someone needs more money just give it to them...