The False Promise of “McMarxism”

March 4, 2021
Updated July 24, 2021

There’s not a problem the left won’t try to “solve” without destructive legislation and policy. “McMarxism,” is the wildly flawed ideology promoted by sinister politicians and their corporate masters with an appeal to the most naive and base of the “entitled.”

The vile ACLU promotes every possible destruction of rights including a minimum wage, while simultaneously promoting the Kamala Harris lifestyle for our daughters of trading their wares for and beyond “livable” wages.

While actively destroying the market value of the American wage earner with open borders and full blown replacement migration, the same left decries any and all free transactions they deem might fall short of a “living wage.”

“McMarxism” is the foolish notion that jobs usually first held by high school students to gain some experience and tuck away some extra cash to either save towards college, buy a first car, or maybe spend on CD’s, concert tickets, gadgets or fashion should all be compensated at a level that would support the same child having their own apartment, cover all their living expenses for themselves, any spouse and children they might make, along with whatever medicine and doctors attention might be required over any congenital or self induced health problems.

In addition to preying on weak minds that have difficulty with the complicated concepts of a free market, an inability to muddle through basic math is also exploited by the promoters of McMarxism

Of course when every wage magically becomes “livable,” we couldn’t really expect anyone to pay their own tuition for the indoctrination formerly known as “higher learning.”

And of course free means that someone that worked for “less than livable” wages in exchange for “on the job training,” will now be paying someone else’s unpaid college loans.

Ultimately the idea of simply legislating affluence fails every test starting with logic. If it were “good” to make a $15 per hour “minimum wage,” than it would be “better” to make it $25 per hour, and again better to make it $50 per hour.

The same reason the more obviously foolish numbers are absurd applies to any number. Once this concept is examined a with a less casual and emotional eye, even the ever left leaning New York Times comes to terms as they had when they published that “Minimum Wage Should be $0.00!”

Full Article

Whereas their analysis is sound, few would want to pay their way into reading a full article from such a low quality brand as they’ve since become so here is some of our own.

Even most Millennials and GenZ types can recognize that getting through college3 can still be counted as “hard work.” So what’s the wage? Does Stanford pay anyone a “livable wage” to get through all that work? Or do they charge $24,902 (in tuition alone) for a Freshman’s first year of seeking an MBA? Let’s ignore all other costs and simply divide $24,902 by the number of days they’re in class and doing the homework based on a 40 hour week for 9 months of a school year. Seems that’s a big minus $15.96 per hour. Does anyone “live” on -$15.96 hourly? Probably not. But they are taking this big $30/hour “pay cut” as compared with applying their time in entry level jobs to “better their lives” in the longer term.

Similarly, if an individual business owner wanted to charge an employee to learn on a job so that they might be qualified to make $50 an hour in the near future, there would no doubt be a knock on his door. But before artificial minimums (now straddling the $15 range in most places,) an employer could make attractive deals rendered impossible now.

For example, a young lady might want to earn a few extra dollars to get through school by being paid to sit at a front desk and do her homework. Sure when an occasional customer might come in, she’d switch gears and temporarily put down her science textbook to be the “face of the company” and offer basic assistance. She might also have to take an occasional phone call. Does doing homework at a specific location deserve “livable wages?” Why would we presume that all who work at any job are heads of a household?

Additionally lots of employers voluntarily pay college tuition to employees they know and trust, so why shouldn’t these be permitted to hire at a lower than “livable wage,” to either cover training outside of the work environment, or offer direct experience that translates to a brighter future on the job?

Nearly every mob has unique aspects that are learned by practical daily experience that would be more valuable than the general teaching they may have already received in High School and/or College. Minimum wage laws reduce the range of the opportunities and make people more dependent on bullying (whether via wage laws or unions,) to interface with any sort of employer.

It should become increasingly clear that freedom provides the wider range of possibilities. But there is one form of “freedom” that hinders. And that’s the rights the same lefties that promote wage and price controls offer to non-citizens to simply prance across an open border by the “caravan.” In a free society where merit wins wages, crime is punished, and mooching discouraged, an open border might just bring in a reasonable stock of future workers. Still the larger the stock, the lower their market value. And so whether by invaders prancing in by the caravan, or overly generous work visas being formally granted, all the factors that make higher wages are countered.

That’s where the corporations that can afford to automate, and overcharge based on gaining monopoly status benefit from both artificial wage hikes and from an unmitigated flow of fresh stock.

The fact that the crowed that cannot even write nor read in their own language only promotes the larges corporate monopoly, aka the US Government who then is put in the business of extracting from the productive to attend to the “needs” or the moochers they bring. And they get immediate dividends in more votes for the Socialism that expands their version of “business.”

Ultimately less pesky freedoms and less expectations for an earlier American version of “livable,” that largely entitled someone with a HS Diploma to a home on his own property, a car, a wife and kids al on one income, while the least fit rage on with nothing to offer but demands for “equity,” (the new Marxist dogwhistle for open-check-reparations,) and “livable,” while the middle class is decimated and most of the population is “equalized” into a common poverty.

©2021 WarOnPress

More gaslighting from the nutty Marxist professor. While their policy forces everyone into poverty, the realities of market wages are smeared as the cause.
In addition to the overall negative impact of McMarxism, there is tangible pain imposed on small business that ultimately benefit larger corporations. The above video segment shows just how dire the situation is with recent laws passed to exacerbate the harm already done to small businesses caused by the shutdowns.

2 thoughts on “The False Promise of “McMarxism””

  1. You left out the part in the NYTimes editorial where it recommends replacing the minimum wage with wage supplements by the federal government, such as cash or payments for medical insurance, pensions, or Social Security taxes.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: