Minimum Wage 1968=$1.60. With grown and distribution it would be $21.16 today?

Asa said:
I don't dictate the argument, economics dictates.

Why don't you tell me the purchasing power of those who lose their jobs overseas by calculating the income of the lowest quintile versus receiving all forms of available government assistance.

Then after that, address the purchasing power under protectionism and under globalization for the lowest quintile since you have not made an argument.
Click to expand...

A lot of people don't go get all forms of economic assistance. They just get poorer.

Nice attempt to limit the discussion, idiot boy. I will make the argument my way.
 
evince said:
got a link to your numbers?


I provided the proof you asked for so do the same smuck

BTW if it was so UNDIFFERENT from what we have now why do the corps scream bloody murder at the suggestion of doing it again?


because your full of shit.
Click to expand...

IRS.gov. Knock your lights out.
 
AssHatZombie said:
A lot of people don't go get all forms of economic assistance. They just get poorer.

Nice attempt to limit the discussion, idiot boy. I will make the argument my way.
Click to expand...

Why are you so adverse to data and calculation to substantiate your argument?

Give me the calculations for your various arguments if you want to make an argument with any validity.
 
AssHatZombie said:
ASA is actually a totalitarian globalist jew, happy with people being wards of the state. Go back to Israel, traitor jew.
Click to expand...

Now this is an extraordinarily persuasive argument pregnant with data, calculations, and purchasing power. I must admit, you have me doubting conventional economic science on the subject. Are you taking applications for your side?
 
Asa said:
Why are you so adverse to data and calculation to substantiate your argument?

Give me the calculations for your various arguments if you want to make an argument with any validity.
Click to expand...

WHy are you so adverse to an argument that really highlights the flaws in your worldview.

Do people lose their jobs due to globalization? yes.

Is their purchasing power decreased? yes.

You want to only talk about those who receive all forms of government assistance. You only want to talk about wards of the state. That is not really a sustainable model. We cannot all be wards of the state, but we could all have jobs. There could be a real actual thriving middle class. Your globalist shitty policies destroy that possibility.
 
I really would prefer asa, if you would just take your Olam Ha Ba nonsense and go back to Israel and smash your brains out on the wailing wall. That will give you something to cry about.
 
AssHatZombie said:
WHy are you so adverse to an argument that really highlights the flaws in your worldview.

Do people lose their jobs due to globalization? yes.

Is their purchasing power decreased? yes.

You want to only talk about those who receive all forms of government assistance. You only want to talk about wards of the state. That is not really a sustainable model. We cannot all be wards of the state, but we could all have jobs. There could be a real actual thriving middle class. Your globalist shitty policies destroy that possibility.
Click to expand...

What I want is for you to show me the difference in purchasing power for the lowest quintile under our current globalization compared to the protectionism you advocate. If you can't, your argument is only ideologically based.
 
Asa said:
What I want is for you to show me the difference in purchasing power for the lowest quintile under our current globalization compared to the protectionism you advocate. If you can't, your argument is only ideologically based.
Click to expand...

As is yours, and yours is irrational. You only want to discuss wards of the state, and leave out the facts of a shrinking middle class, and nonsustainability of everyone being a ward of the state.
 
AssHatZombie said:
As is yours, and yours is irrational. You only want to discuss wards of the state, and leave out the facts of a shrinking middle class, and nonsustainability of everyone being a ward of the state.
Click to expand...

I have asked very specific questions so you can substantiate your argument; you cannot support your argument, so you are spinning around in circles and redirecting, to avoid supporting your arguments.
 
Asa said:
I have asked very specific questions so you can substantiate your argument; you cannot support your argument, so you are spinning around in circles and redirecting, to avoid supporting your arguments.
Click to expand...

Your specific requests assume a condition that is not sustainable, hence any answer you would get is irrelevant.

Globalization has destroyed our middle class, and everyone getting the maximum state benefits is not sustainable, considering the shrinking of the middle class.

Your asking me to elaborate on your illusions and falsehoods, and I will not do so.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Your specific requests assume a condition that is not sustainable, hence any answer you would get is irrelevant.

Globalization has destroyed our middle class, and everyone getting the maximum state benefits is not sustainable, considering the shrinking of the middle class.

Your asking me to elaborate on your illusions and falsehoods, and I will not do so.
Click to expand...

Show me your calculation of the purchasing power for the lowest quintile under protectionism vis-a-vis globalization if you want to make an argument.

Show me the purchasing power of those who lose their jobs overseas by calculating the income of the lowest quintile versus receiving all forms of available government assistance.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Dude, we spent a ton. We built the highway system. Developed a whole space program. now we've privatized ourselves into oblivion.
Click to expand...

A ton? Can you quantify that?

Spending as a percent of GDP was around 18% in the 1950s. It is now over 24%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top