Economics lesson for the low information liberals

Dungheap said:
It's correct. Period. Full stop. CPI for all items from Jan. 2012 to Jan. 2013 was 1.6%. If you exclude food and energy, it actually increases to 1.9%. No matter how you slice it, inflation is below the target (which is actually treated as a ceiling and not a target at all).


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm
Click to expand...

It would be nice if they calculated inflation like they did in the 1970s. But under Clinton they changed the formula so proles like you would see you are getting ass raped by the federal reserve.
 
I've gotten groans and insults, but so far Damo's the only one who actually addressed the principal of redistributive economic stimulus I laid out. And he was proven wrong within a few posts.
 
Shy Guy said:
That's not altogether true. Look at adults with disabilities or a low level of education who aren't able to earn more than a minimum wage. According to Department of Labor, about half of those earning the ~minimum wage are 25 years of age, or older.


http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm
Click to expand...

Min. wage jobs are entry level jobs for those new to the work force....you don't demand wages because of your age or disability....as a matter of fact, those that
are disabled are already cared for by 'disability' allowances under SS....
If its a matter of a low level of education, then get off your ass and get a better education....you don't need a PHD to get a decent job or a degree to
push a broom or heave a shovel....if min. wage is the best you can do, you make do with what you have.
You don't run marathons after a heart transplant, you don't climb mountains or buy shoes with no legs, you don't demand a professorship at Harvard if you only have a GED like Dude.......you don't buy a BMW or have six kids or shop in Bloomingdales if you're making 8 bucks an hour.
You play with the cards your dealt.
 
I Love America said:
It would be nice if they calculated inflation like they did in the 1970s. But under Clinton they changed the formula so proles like you would see you are getting ass raped by the federal reserve.
Click to expand...


Oh boy. You should include the fact that you're an Alex Jones and shadowstats.com adherent in each of your posts just so people know what they're dealing with at the outset. It would save us all a lot of time.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... poor Dung... doesn't want to look at what actually effects our daily lives, just wants to chant his little line and be done. Housing accounts for about 40% of the CPI number. How many people are effected on a daily basis by the changes in housing prices? Does it effect the amount of their mortgage payments? Nope.

Now, do food, energy and clothing fluctuations effect people on a daily basis? Do those changes alter their purchasing power? Of course. But dung doesn't want to address this...
Click to expand...


LOL at SF who can't just admit that what I said was correct. Jesus. Get a grip, man.
 
NOVA said:
Min. wage jobs are entry level jobs for those new to the work force....you don't demand wages because of your age or disability....as a matter of fact, those that
are disabled are already cared for by 'disability' allowances under SS....
If its a matter of a low level of education, then get off your ass and get a better education....you don't need a PHD to get a decent job or a degree to
push a broom or heave a shovel....if min. wage is the best you can do, you make do with what you have.
You don't run marathons after a heart transplant, you don't climb mountains or buy shoes with no legs, you don't demand a professorship at Harvard if you only have a GED like Dude.......you don't buy a BMW or have six kids or shop in Bloomingdales if you're making 8 bucks an hour.
You play with the cards your dealt.
Click to expand...

This is the person saying I don't understand economics?

1. The reason people don't get an education is, as I pointed out, is primarily the cost - or disability -, not laziness.
2. Deal with it isn't a valid public policy.
3. We're demanding the poor get a living wage, not a professorship at Harvard.
 
Shy Guy said:
This is the person saying I don't understand economics?

1. The reason people don't get an education is, as I pointed out, is primarily the cost - or disability -, not laziness.
2. Deal with it isn't a valid public policy.
3. We're demanding the poor get a living wage, not a professorship at Harvard.
Click to expand...

What's a living wage to you in numerical value?
 
NOVA said:
Wrong....your customer will ALWAYS look for some way to cut his expenses in the face of rising costs....just as you do in your everyday like....
If the price of gas go up, the customer will drive less whenever possible....the cost of food, waste less, its not only simple math, it human nature.
Click to expand...

They set the price well above what supply requires. In the real world it does not always work like the text books describe. Sorry. The Government is used as a manuplator to keep an increase in supply from causing the price from going down.
 
tinfoil said:
So what? Supply and demand are not mutually exclusive. What does supply have to do with demand? They are two independent factors used to determine the price to sell a product at. WTF are you even trying to say with your assertion?
Click to expand...
Ugh, you dont really understand classical economics do you?
 
Shy Guy said:
This is the person saying I don't understand economics?

1. The reason people don't get an education is, as I pointed out, is primarily the cost - or disability -, not laziness.
2. Deal with it isn't a valid public policy.
3. We're demanding the poor get a living wage, not a professorship at Harvard.
Click to expand...

So you think $18,720 is a living wage for a family of four? That is what you are advocating by supporting a $9/hr min wage.

Tread carefully. The sands are shifting beneath you
 
I Love America said:
So you think $18,720 is a living wage for a family of four? That is what you are advocating by supporting a $9/hr min wage.

Tread carefully. The sands are shifting beneath you
Click to expand...

No, by supporting a $9/hr minimum wage, I'm supporting a $9/hr minimum wage. Two employees preforming the same at the same job should be paid the same wage - under vertical management, employers shouldn't set wages based on family size.
 
Superfreak said:
overall that is correct... but if you look at food/energy/clothing... you know, those things that affect us daily, there is inflation.
Click to expand...

Dungheap said:
It's correct. Period. Full stop. CPI for all items from Jan. 2012 to Jan. 2013 was 1.6%. If you exclude food and energy, it actually increases to 1.9%. No matter how you slice it, inflation is below the target (which is actually treated as a ceiling and not a target at all).


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm
Click to expand...

Superfreak said:
LMAO... poor Dung... doesn't want to look at what actually effects our daily lives, just wants to chant his little line and be done. Housing accounts for about 40% of the CPI number. How many people are effected on a daily basis by the changes in housing prices? Does it effect the amount of their mortgage payments? Nope.

Now, do food, energy and clothing fluctuations effect people on a daily basis? Do those changes alter their purchasing power? Of course. But dung doesn't want to address this...
Click to expand...

Dungheap said:
LOL at SF who can't just admit that what I said was correct. Jesus. Get a grip, man.
Click to expand...

once again dearest Dung proves that he is incapable of reading what is written. So Dung... before you run around with your panties bunched up next time about what someone 'can't say'... perhaps you should check to see whether or not they have indeed already said it.
 
Superfreak said:
once again dearest Dung proves that he is incapable of reading what is written. So Dung... before you run around with your panties bunched up next time about what someone 'can't say'... perhaps you should check to see whether or not they have indeed already said it.
Click to expand...


But your "but" was wrong. If you include energy, food and clothing, the annual rate of inflation is lower than if you exclude them. When I pointed that out to you, you couldn't just acknowledge that I was correct and instead had to resort to your standard nonsense.

Inflation is at or below target. That's the reality.
 
And an increase in the minimum would help to offset the loss in "real income" (adjusted for inflation) that low income working people have suffered during the last FIFTY YEARS.

BILL MOYERS: If workers at the bottom get the increase in the minimum wage that President Obama proposed in his State of the Union message, they will still be faring less well than their counterparts did 50 years ago.RICHARD WOLFF: That's right.
BILL MOYERS: What does that say to you?
RICHARD WOLFF: The peak for the minimum wage in terms of its real purchasing power was 1968. It's been basically declining with a couple of ups and downs ever since. So that if you adjust for the current price, the minimum wage was about $10.50 roughly, back in 1968 in terms of what it could buy.
And it's $7.25 today in terms of what it can buy. So you've taken the folks at the bottom, the people who work hard, full-time jobs, and you've made their economic condition worse over a 50-year period, while wealth has accumulated at the top. What kind of a society does this?.............

..............RICHARD WOLFF: Well, in the end, it's the society of the whole that tolerates it. But it was Congress's decision and Congress's power to raise the minimum wage, as has happened from time to time.

Even this time, not to be too critical of our president, but when he was running for office, he proposed a $9.50 minimum wage. Here we are in the beginning of his second term, and something has happened to make him only propose a nine dollar minimum wage. So even he is scaling down, perhaps for political reasons, what he thinks he can accomplish. When, if we just wanted to get it back to what it was in 1968, it would have to be $10 or $11 an hour.
Click to expand...
http://billmoyers.com/wp-content/themes/billmoyers/transcript-print.php?post=25343

Now, tell me again who is suffering from "low information"....
:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top