Life in the Bush Economy

TheDanold said:
Good point cypriss, the only thing that has changed is Democrat's got control of congress and now we have job losses.

Weren't you guys warned OVER and OVER that the minimum wage has been known to cause job losses? Didn't you respond OVER and OVER that that was not true? And the Liberal Democrats passed the increase anyway...

In perfectly competitive markets, the market price settles to the marginal value of the product. Therefore, absent a minimum wage, workers are paid their marginal value. As is the case with all (binding) price floors above the equilibrium, minimum wage laws are predicted to result in more people being willing to offer their labor for hire, but fewer employers wishing to hire labor. The result is a surplus of labor, or, <drum roll> unemployment.
Click to expand...

I rather doubt these are minimum wage jobs...and to blame the Dem is ridiculous. this bad economy has been on the horizon since Bush started his war!
 
Damocles said:
That is not the only tie. They get cost of living increases as well as raises normally, however the entirety of their wages are almost always tied in to the minimum wage as well. Thus when a minimum increase is passed they too get a raise. Why do you think that much of the time they are talking about such increases they do it at a Union event?
Click to expand...
Umm because the unions do not want the competition of lower paying jobs against union jobs ?
Duhhh.
 
uscitizen said:
Umm because the unions do not want the competition of lower paying jobs against union jobs ?
Duhhh.
Click to expand...
The effect generates cost effective shortages, thus some job loss almost always becomes inevitable. Usually among those they sought to protect.
 
Whiney assed Turbolibs. The economy is roaring, sales are up, the stock market is doing great, the surge is working. What more could you want ?
Even that socialistic minimum wage increase could not slow things down.
We need to get the military enrollment up so we can get those jobs added in there to boost the numbers.
 
Demwit said:
Whiney assed Turbolibs. The economy is roaring, sales are up, the stock market is doing great, the surge is working. What more could you want ?
Even that socialistic minimum wage increase could not slow things down.
We need to get the military enrollment up so we can get those jobs added in there to boost the numbers.
Click to expand...


And then you woke up...it was all a dream and Bush was still President!
 
TheDanold said:
This is sort of like saying you need to examine the details of the law of gravity in order for it to be true.

Again:
In perfectly competitive markets, the market price settles to the marginal value of the product. Therefore, absent a minimum wage, workers are paid their marginal value. As is the case with all (binding) price floors above the equilibrium, minimum wage laws are predicted to result in more people being willing to offer their labor for hire, but fewer employers wishing to hire labor. The result is a surplus of labor, or, <drum roll> unemployment.
Click to expand...


But the fact that most jobs pay above the minimum anyway means the effect you describe is not, in actuality, occurring. Perhaps the issues is, as damo noted, tieing union rates to the minimum wage, that is actually the problem.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But the fact that most jobs pay above the minimum anyway means the effect you describe is not, in actuality, occurring. Perhaps the issues is, as damo noted, tieing union rates to the minimum wage, that is actually the problem.
Click to expand...
It's not occurring a lot because as you correctly state, most jobs do pay above the minimum wage, but in some areas it does not and in those areas unemployment will increase.

I'm not sure of the union rates being tied to it, certainly one of the effects of boosting minimum wage beyond the market rate (ie: what people are naturally paid) is that inflation will go up and that can put pressure on employees and unions to seek higher pay.
 
The whole notion is silly and circular. Prices rise because prices rise. That's it in a nutshell. Brilliant aint it?
 
dungshit,
economist never say median wages are up x%, you total fucking moron.
If average is up 4% median is up about 4%
the difference if for idiots to think they have a clue which you obviously don't:pke:
 
Topspin said:
dungshit,
economist never say median wages are up x%, you total fucking moron.
If average is up 4% median is up about 4%
the difference if for idiots to think they have a clue which you obviously don't:pke:
Click to expand...
Uhm, no. It's perfectly possible for the average to be up 4% and yet the median to be down 4%. Or 10%, for that matter. The two means are calculated entirely differently. In fact, they have nothing to do with one another.
 
Topspin said:
dungshit,
economist never say median wages are up x%, you total fucking moron.
If average is up 4% median is up about 4%
the difference if for idiots to think they have a clue which you obviously don't:pke:
Click to expand...


Topspin - First, this is basic math and you are completely clueless. You should demand your money back from whatever institute of higher learning you managed to get a degree from.

Let me give you an example. Let's say we have five people. Two make 1 dollar a year, one makes two dollars a year, one makes three dollars a year and one makes 100 dollars per year. The average income is 21.4 dollars per year. The median income is 3 dollars per year.

Now, let's say that the guy earning 100 dollars per year gets a 10% increase. He now makes 110. Everyone else earns the same. The average increases to 23.4 per year, about a 9% increase. The median remains at 3 dollars per year.

Get it?

Only dishonest hacks look at only average wages and income. As I said, the median is much more important.
 
you to "poor dorks" must never watch business news.
Please show me a report where median increase is frequently used.
You show how utterly business stupid you are by saying average is no good.
Turbo-lib never made a dollar in the market gay boys:clink:
 
Topspin said:
you to "poor dorks" must never watch business news.
Please show me a report where median increase is frequently used.
You show how utterly business stupid you are by saying average is no good.
Turbo-lib never made a dollar in the market gay boys:clink:
Click to expand...



:rolleyes: Good Lord toppy...how much did you pay for your MBA from the internet anyhoo?..The guys above brought you up to speed on Median income...basic econ 101...Ya really should demand a refund on your (BS) MBA!
 
Battlegramps, I have zero doubt you've ever listen to a serious ecomist much less hundreds like I have. None report on median increases.
You have even less knowledge than the english majors do.
 
LOL............

Topspin said:
Battlegramps, I have zero doubt you've ever listen to a serious ecomist much less hundreds like I have. None report on median increases.
You have even less knowledge than the english majors do.
Click to expand...



Like I previously said...put up your actual credentials or like darla and Lady T love to say...'Shut Up'!:cof1:
 
Dungheap said:
Topspin - First, this is basic math and you are completely clueless. You should demand your money back from whatever institute of higher learning you managed to get a degree from.

Let me give you an example. Let's say we have five people. Two make 1 dollar a year, one makes two dollars a year, one makes three dollars a year and one makes 100 dollars per year. The average income is 21.4 dollars per year. The median income is 3 dollars per year.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is 2. 1,1,2,3,100. 2 is in the middle position of the dataset.
 
RStringfield said:
Actually, it is 2. 1,1,2,3,100. 2 is in the middle position of the dataset.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I guess I fucked that up. Anyway, topper is most likely a 12 year old kid with a big imagination. Either that or he's just delusional.

Anyone doubting the truth of the Dunner-Krueger Effect need only look to topper to be convinced of its existence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top