Farmers don't pay enough to get Americans to work for them, so....

Since you don't address any of my points, it's hard to take your criticism seriously.

You seem to think that the business of producing milk is about employing farm workers or preserving small family farms. It isn't. It's about producing milk.

Is that how it works? Because I know that more than one person has said that if they own a particular piece of land, they should be able to do what they want with it.

And what if that market is a monopsony? Or if a large segment of the market (be it buyers or sellers) is operating in collusion with other members of the market? What then?

Within certain limits, they can.

When labor acts in collusion to raise its price, that's called a union.

The labor market isn't a monopsony. There are many, many employers who bid for labor in a competitive marketplace.

And what are those limits?

Indeed it is. What's it called when employers do that? And how do you feel about employers who resort to lethal force to deal with unions?

Do they? It seems to me that this would be dependent upon location. For example, when you have an area where there are a large number of employers (for example, NYC) you certainly would have competition, but when you're dealing with another area (say a town in WV), there might very well be a smaller number of employers, many of whom might well be on friendly terms with one another and thus willing to act in concert on things like wages. What then?

Is this a case where the Conservatives are for the most socialist subsidy program in the history of Capitalism and the Democrats are at the same time pointing at it and laughing? or is this a drunk post?

I don't drink (anymore). Just sayin'

This is going to be a deep rabbit hole if I try to lay out my entire philosophy for environmental regulation. Can we cut to the chase?

I'm against it? It hasn't been a thing (in this country) in like 100 years?

That's wage fixing and it's against the law.

And you seem to think I was talking about milk.

You are beyond ignorant of the subject of economics. You have proven over and over that your grasp on the subject is tenuous, at best. You really should quit posting on the topic.

Then explain to us the current flurry of laws intended tou keep workers at low paying jobs. Tell us again how lazy people are because they wont keep low paying jobs instead of going after more lucrative paying jobs.

Dairy has jumped the shark.

Buy oat milk.

It's OK for putting on cereal or baking with it, but it tastes shit in a cup of tea.

Might work in coffee as it would mask the taste, but tea is superior to coffee.

Bovine gland excretions?

Blech.

Ok, maybe if it's been treated by Bailey's.

But anyone putting anything in their coffee is a communist.

Not only am I a communist, I also believe the only purpose of coffee is a vehicle to get the cream and surgery into my system.

Breakfast of champions:

Did you... download and attach to use it?

Given that any number of states and the Federal government put a price floor on milk, that seems unlikely.

No, the software seems to have put that in. Just used the smiley dropdown.

It strikes me that if nobody can make a sustainable living at something, it won't get done.

why is there a supposed labour shortage? because the jobs aren't sustainable at that rate for the workers.


(oops-aborted reply from earlier edited out)

Speaking of American socialists....

Earl Grey, hot.

PG Tips. And fuck off, twat.

Do oats have nipples? If not, then it is fucking juice.

Oats are seeds.

Seeds have endosperm.

You can figure out what any milky liquid coming from them is.

Still sounds like juice to me.

It’s processed oil.

Careful. You don't wanna get Tucker Carlson all hot and bothered.

Which law takes away a worker's right to pursue other jobs or higher pay?

I can't say it "again" if I never said it once.

But I will repeat this: if your job does not pay you what you think you should get or what you'd like to get, it's your responsibility to find and cultivate other opportunities.

If you're unhappy making $15/hour, you need to think about what you can do to make $16/hour.

Gee, it sounds so easy.... of course the basic assumption that employee and employer are on equal ground is absolutely ludicrous, but if it makes you comfortable to think so, go ahead...

Didn't say it was easy. Seldom do things in life get better easily.

And if it makes you comfortable to believe that waiting for a fairy godmother to grant one's wish for a better life is a better strategy, you go ahead.