Minimum Wage Hike

when did we start believing one needs to make a living off of minimum wage? burger flipping jobs are for teens in high school. they aren't supposed to be a career.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Sorry but the real question is why you couldn't link to a site other than a partisan hate site?
Click to expand...
That's a question, but it's not a relevant question. Darla stated that Republican men are white. I decided to prove the bimbo wrong. It's quite simple, really.
 
Granule said:
That's a question, but it's not a relevant question. Darla stated that Republican men are white. I decided to prove the bimbo wrong. It's quite simple, really.
Click to expand...


All you managed to prove is that you get your "facts" from a partisan hate website.

You provided nothing to contradict what she posted.
 
Darla said:
What I find most fascinating about this is the split between Republican men and Republican women. How do you like that? So the only demographic against a raise is Republican men. Who are Republican men?

That's right folks - white males! I am always accused, rather dramatically by board drama queens, of "demonizing white males". Just reporting the facts!
Click to expand...

Reporting facts??? LMAO... no, you are spewing his propaganda.

Raise That Wage
By PAUL KRUGMAN
President Obama laid out a number of good ideas in his State of the Union address. Unfortunately, almost all of them would require spending money — and given Republican control of the House of Representatives, it’s hard to imagine that happening.

One major proposal, however, wouldn’t involve budget outlays: the president’s call for a rise in the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9, with subsequent increases in line with inflation. The question we need to ask is: Would this be good policy? And the answer, perhaps surprisingly, is a clear yes.
Click to expand...

First mistake.

Why “surprisingly”? Well, Economics 101 tells us to be very cautious about attempts to legislate market outcomes. Every textbook — mine included — lays out the unintended consequences that flow from policies like rent controls or agricultural price supports. And even most liberal economists would, I suspect, agree that setting a minimum wage of, say, $20 an hour would create a lot of problems.
Click to expand...

Yes, it would, the same as raising it to $9 would. But Krugman ignores that and continues with the propaganda the left love to swallow...

But that’s not what’s on the table. And there are strong reasons to believe that the kind of minimum wage increase the president is proposing would have overwhelmingly positive effects.
Click to expand...

LMAO... No, there are not strong reasons to believe that. To the contrary, if you raise the costs of doing business, that cost will translate into higher costs of goods sold (which reduces demand) and most likely will lead to less hiring of unskilled labor (meaning more people on unemployment/welfare)

First of all, the current level of the minimum wage is very low by any reasonable standard. For about four decades, increases in the minimum wage have consistently fallen behind inflation, so that in real terms the minimum wage is substantially lower than it was in the 1960s. Meanwhile, worker productivity has doubled. Isn’t it time for a raise?
Click to expand...

LMAO... worker productivity has certainly increased (in a big way due to technological advances and automation... ie... eliminating a lot of unskilled positions), but that doesn't mean that unskilled labor has increased productivity by double.

Now, you might argue that even if the current minimum wage seems low, raising it would cost jobs. But there’s evidence on that question — lots and lots of evidence, because the minimum wage is one of the most studied issues in all of economics. U.S. experience, it turns out, offers many “natural experiments” here, in which one state raises its minimum wage while others do not. And while there are dissenters, as there always are, the great preponderance of the evidence from these natural experiments points to little if any negative effect of minimum wage increases on employment.
Click to expand...

Typical liberal, says there is lots and lots of evidence by cites none of it. aka... 'go look for it, I promise its out there'

What we do know is that if you raise the rate unskilled labor gets paid, then you increase wages on all fronts as the more skill a person possesses the more wage they will want in relation to the unskilled laborer.

Why is this true? That’s a subject of continuing research, but one theme in all the explanations is that workers aren’t bushels of wheat or even Manhattan apartments; they’re human beings, and the human relationships involved in hiring and firing are inevitably more complex than markets for mere commodities. And one byproduct of this human complexity seems to be that modest increases in wages for the least-paid don’t necessarily reduce the number of jobs.

What this means, in turn, is that the main effect of a rise in minimum wages is a rise in the incomes of hard-working but low-paid Americans — which is, of course, what we’re trying to accomplish.
Click to expand...

LMAO... and now he tries the emotional appeal... 'gee golly, these are hard working Americans, why do you not want them to make more money'???

The bulk of the people on minimum wage are teenagers and college students. Over half of them are 25 and younger.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm

Finally, it’s important to understand how the minimum wage interacts with other policies aimed at helping lower-paid workers, in particular the earned-income tax credit, which helps low-income families who help themselves. The tax credit — which has traditionally had bipartisan support, although that may be ending — is also good policy. But it has a well-known defect: Some of its benefits end up flowing not to workers but to employers, in the form of lower wages. And guess what? An increase in the minimum wage helps correct this defect. It turns out that the tax credit and the minimum wage aren’t competing policies, they’re complementary policies that work best in tandem.
Click to expand...

More nonsense. Higher wages mean the employer has to choose... does he pass the costs of the higher wages on to his customers or does she choose to make due with fewer workers. Trying to tie this into 'this complements the tax credit' is simply a diversion from the topic.

So Mr. Obama’s wage proposal is good economics. It’s also good politics: a wage increase is supported by an overwhelming majority of voters, including a strong majority of self-identified Republican women (but not men). Yet G.O.P. leaders in Congress are opposed to any rise. Why? They say that they’re concerned about the people who might lose their jobs, never mind the evidence that this won’t actually happen. But this isn’t credible.
Click to expand...

Yes, because the NYT and other liberally biased news media keep reporting nonsense like Krugmans to the point that people like Darla think it is 'fact'

For today’s Republican leaders clearly feel disdain for low-wage workers.
Click to expand...

Or they actually understand economics and know the crap Krugman spews forth is actually detrimental to the economy.

Bear in mind that such workers, even if they work full time, by and large don’t pay income taxes (although they pay plenty in payroll and sales taxes), while they may receive benefits like Medicaid and food stamps. And you know what this makes them, in the eyes of the G.O.P.: “takers,” members of the contemptible 47 percent who, as Mitt Romney said to nods of approval, won’t take responsibility for their own lives.
Click to expand...

and now back to more propaganda from Krugman...
 
= GRIND = said:
when did we start believing one needs to make a living off of minimum wage? burger flipping jobs are for teens in high school. they aren't supposed to be a career.
Click to expand...

Over half of minimum wage earners are 25 and younger. These are unskilled workers. Not low skilled... unskilled. A point the left never seems to grasp.
 
Darla said:
No not at all, he said it's both good economics and good politics.
Click to expand...

Henry Ford doubled wages for his workers and it set the US on a course for prosperity! I think the same woud happen if the minimum wage were increased, more buying power more production of wages. Business is sitting on more cash than ever before, to the point the stockholders are starting to complain. I think there is no better way for business to invest than in their workers!
 
Last edited:
Rana said:
Henry Ford doubled wages for his workers and it set the US on a course for prosperity! I think the same woud happen if the minimum wage were increased, more buying power more production of wages. Business s it ting on more cash than ever before, to the point the safe hokdrs are starting to complain. I think there is no better way for business to invest than in their workers!
Click to expand...

well then, we should just raise everyones wages tenfold... because that will really boost things.

Oh wait... no... forgot... that extra money you want them to pay the workers is coming from where again?
 
Disillusioned said:
Not sure how this can really be a huge argument, the law of unintended consequences surely applies, changing the minimum wage will raise the wages of minimum wage employees, increase the costs of employers, change prices at those businesses, cause some minimum wage employees to be laid off and those remaining employees to be forced to pick up the slack, it may result in increased spending or may not. Then there are consequences from those consequences and the spiral goes on. Fiddling with economics should be done carefully and after quite a lot of consideration.

It's rather like trying to fix a machine that you can't turn off, can't see all the parts at the same time and which alters itself while you're trying to fix it. You may succeed but often if you're not careful you're just going to get your hand crushed and the machine may be even worse off.
Click to expand...

This is what naysayers always claim and it doesn't happen.
 
Superfreak said:
LOL... Darla's link was from Paul Krugman... known shill for the Democrats and also known for his hatred of Republicans.
Click to expand...


First of all the only people who refer to Krugman as a "shill for the Democrats" are partisan hacks who can't counter his points with anything other than "look at the ig'nant Librul spread his propaganda"...I notice that in your entire response to Darla and the points she made, not ONCE did you cite facts or evidence, just the same tired "he is wrong" he's "spewing propaganda" and "typical Liberal".

If you're going to claim he's wrong then merely bleating "first mistake" and following it up with NOTHING isn't going to cut it.

And secondly...

So?

Krugman at least comes to the table with facts...something sorely lacking in your manifesto/response to Darla.
 
Superfreak said:
well then, we should just raise everyones wages tenfold... because that will really boost things.

Oh wait... no... forgot... that extra money you want them to pay the workers is coming from where again?
Click to expand...


Reductio ad absurdum.

So nice to engage in honest debate without having to dodge idiotic strawman arguments.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
First of all the only people who refer to Krugman as a "shill for the Democrats" are partisan hacks
Click to expand...

LMAO... wrong... he is a partisan hack and a shill for the Democrats. You quite obviously don't read his articles.

who can't counter his points with anything other than "look at the ig'nant Librul spread his propaganda"...
Click to expand...

Odd, given that I did indeed counter his 'points'

I notice that in your entire response to Darla and the points she made, not ONCE did you cite facts or evidence, just the same tired "he is wrong" he's "spewing propaganda" and "typical Liberal".
Click to expand...

Wrong again. Unlike Krugman, I did cite the BLS data on those earning minimum wages. Tell me, what did Krugman cite as evidence to support his claims? Oh yeah, nothing.

If you're going to claim he's wrong then merely bleating "first mistake" and following it up with NOTHING isn't going to cut it.
Click to expand...

Um... dearest Zappa... Krugman himself stated that minimum wage hikes are a very controversial and highly debated topic as to whether or not they work to the benefit of the economy. He then stated it was 'clear' the answer was yes. One need not provide evidence that a person is wrong when the person does it on his own.

And secondly...

So?

Krugman at least comes to the table with facts...something sorely lacking in your manifesto/response to Darla.
Click to expand...

LMAO... tell us... what 'facts' did he provide? List them out for us so that we can discuss.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Reductio ad absurdum.

So nice to engage in honest debate without having to dodge idiotic strawman arguments.
Click to expand...

It is not a strawman... it was indeed an exaggeration of her point. Which is why I included the question posed to her...

Where does this money for the wage increase come from?

Can you answer it?
 
I love watching SF meltdown whenever Krugman is posted. It's fascinating just how much smarter than this world renowned, nobel prize winning economist SF is.

I guess SF is destined not to be appreciated in his time. But just you wait! 100 years from now he will totally be vindicated!
 
Darla said:
I don't think he does that at all. And there are plenty of studies showing that raising the minimum wage impacts the economy positively because it gives the working poor more disposable income which they spend. I know there are some studies showing the reverse. You can find a study to say whatever you want it to say.
Click to expand...

B.S, it forces prices to go up, negatively impacting the middle class, and keeping the poor status quo, it also unless my employer raises my wage equally will screw me, and I am middle class. There is a reason differently skilled, or temporary jobs are just that. But it does seem to keep Democrats looking like knights in shining armor when nothing could be farhter from the truth. Say what you want, but I started at minimum wage in my company worked hard and worked my way up the pay scale.
 
Darla said:
What I find most fascinating about this is the split between Republican men and Republican women. How do you like that? So the only demographic against a raise is Republican men. Who are Republican men?

That's right folks - white males! I am always accused, rather dramatically by board drama queens, of "demonizing white males". Just reporting the facts!



Raise That Wage
By PAUL KRUGMAN
President Obama laid out a number of good ideas in his State of the Union address. Unfortunately, almost all of them would require spending money — and given Republican control of the House of Representatives, it’s hard to imagine that happening.

One major proposal, however, wouldn’t involve budget outlays: the president’s call for a rise in the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9, with subsequent increases in line with inflation. The question we need to ask is: Would this be good policy? And the answer, perhaps surprisingly, is a clear yes.

Why “surprisingly”? Well, Economics 101 tells us to be very cautious about attempts to legislate market outcomes. Every textbook — mine included — lays out the unintended consequences that flow from policies like rent controls or agricultural price supports. And even most liberal economists would, I suspect, agree that setting a minimum wage of, say, $20 an hour would create a lot of problems.

But that’s not what’s on the table. And there are strong reasons to believe that the kind of minimum wage increase the president is proposing would have overwhelmingly positive effects.

First of all, the current level of the minimum wage is very low by any reasonable standard. For about four decades, increases in the minimum wage have consistently fallen behind inflation, so that in real terms the minimum wage is substantially lower than it was in the 1960s. Meanwhile, worker productivity has doubled. Isn’t it time for a raise?

Now, you might argue that even if the current minimum wage seems low, raising it would cost jobs. But there’s evidence on that question — lots and lots of evidence, because the minimum wage is one of the most studied issues in all of economics. U.S. experience, it turns out, offers many “natural experiments” here, in which one state raises its minimum wage while others do not. And while there are dissenters, as there always are, the great preponderance of the evidence from these natural experiments points to little if any negative effect of minimum wage increases on employment.

Why is this true? That’s a subject of continuing research, but one theme in all the explanations is that workers aren’t bushels of wheat or even Manhattan apartments; they’re human beings, and the human relationships involved in hiring and firing are inevitably more complex than markets for mere commodities. And one byproduct of this human complexity seems to be that modest increases in wages for the least-paid don’t necessarily reduce the number of jobs.

What this means, in turn, is that the main effect of a rise in minimum wages is a rise in the incomes of hard-working but low-paid Americans — which is, of course, what we’re trying to accomplish.

Finally, it’s important to understand how the minimum wage interacts with other policies aimed at helping lower-paid workers, in particular the earned-income tax credit, which helps low-income families who help themselves. The tax credit — which has traditionally had bipartisan support, although that may be ending — is also good policy. But it has a well-known defect: Some of its benefits end up flowing not to workers but to employers, in the form of lower wages. And guess what? An increase in the minimum wage helps correct this defect. It turns out that the tax credit and the minimum wage aren’t competing policies, they’re complementary policies that work best in tandem.

So Mr. Obama’s wage proposal is good economics. It’s also good politics: a wage increase is supported by an overwhelming majority of voters, including a strong majority of self-identified Republican women (but not men). Yet G.O.P. leaders in Congress are opposed to any rise. Why? They say that they’re concerned about the people who might lose their jobs, never mind the evidence that this won’t actually happen. But this isn’t credible.

For today’s Republican leaders clearly feel disdain for low-wage workers. Bear in mind that such workers, even if they work full time, by and large don’t pay income taxes (although they pay plenty in payroll and sales taxes), while they may receive benefits like Medicaid and food stamps. And you know what this makes them, in the eyes of the G.O.P.: “takers,” members of the contemptible 47 percent who, as Mitt Romney said to nods of approval, won’t take responsibility for their own lives.

Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, offered a perfect illustration of this disdain last Labor Day: He chose to commemorate a holiday dedicated to workers by sending out a message that said nothing at all about workers, but praised the efforts of business owners instead.

The good news is that not many Americans share that disdain; just about everyone except Republican men believes that the lowest-paid workers deserve a raise. And they’re right. We should raise the minimum wage, now.

Entire Article Here
Click to expand...

Are you white? and who did they poll?

How do you know they deserve a raise? have you done a evaluation of them all? what if they suck at their job?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top