Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really, I thought he was more intelligent than that.
He mocked the idea of raising the minimum wage to $9.00, trotting out the old "Why not raise it to $1000 an hour" and added, "and have the Fed crank up the printing press to accommodate it".
Raising it obviously has a marginal impact on employers and on workers earning low wages, and it's important to not disrupt those people by raising it too much.
So $1000 per hour is just plain ridiculous and nobody has ever credibly proposed it.
Right after that televised debacle, Jim Sinegal, co-founder and former CEO of Costco, supported the proposal, saying it would increase productivity. "You get what you pay for," he said, and Costco demonstrates it daily with its high wages, high productivity, and superior value to consumers.
It is not Santelli who is showing himself to be less than smart here. Obviously nobody has suggested $1000/hr min wage, but the point is that low wage workers cannot be made better off by legislative fiat without some funding to back it up. Consider the difference between the way ag price supports work vs. the minimum wage. The aim is very but in one case there are subsidies provided to maintain a price floor, while in the other case there are no subsidies, just a legislative fiat. The former is put in place by a well-organized lobby with political clout, while the latter is just a sham pushed by pandering politicians trying to hoodwink the low-wage worker into thinking that they care.
Of course Sinegal supports a higher min. wage. It won't affect Costco since they already pay over the min. wage. But it could be bad for some of his competitors, in particular Wal Mart, which has opted to follow a different business model.
Really, I thought he was more intelligent than that.
He mocked the idea of raising the minimum wage to $9.00, trotting out the old "Why not raise it to $1000 an hour" and added, "and have the Fed crank up the printing press to accommodate it".
Raising it obviously has a marginal impact on employers and on workers earning low wages, and it's important to not disrupt those people by raising it too much.
So $1000 per hour is just plain ridiculous and nobody has ever credibly proposed it.
Right after that televised debacle, Jim Sinegal, co-founder and former CEO of Costco, supported the proposal, saying it would increase productivity. "You get what you pay for," he said, and Costco demonstrates it daily with its high wages, high productivity, and superior value to consumers.
It says a lot about a person who gets all worked about raising the minimum wage a dollar or two.
Really, I thought he was more intelligent than that.
He mocked the idea of raising the minimum wage to $9.00, trotting out the old "Why not raise it to $1000 an hour" and added, "and have the Fed crank up the printing press to accommodate it".
Raising it obviously has a marginal impact on employers and on workers earning low wages, and it's important to not disrupt those people by raising it too much.
So $1000 per hour is just plain ridiculous and nobody has ever credibly proposed it.
Right after that televised debacle, Jim Sinegal, co-founder and former CEO of Costco, supported the proposal, saying it would increase productivity. "You get what you pay for," he said, and Costco demonstrates it daily with its high wages, high productivity, and superior value to consumers.
I see the usual desperate liberal fanatics are ducking and dodging again, calling conservatives names when they can't refute their points and misunderstanding their arguments as hard as they (the liberals) can.
Don't you people ever try to come up with new material? THis BS is becoming old.
The idea of a federal minimum wage is archaic and outdated. It shouldn't be set at the federal level and from an macroeconomic standpoint I disagree with it fundamentally. The market will appropriately evaluate the worth of labor.
That being said, I realize that it isn't politicall expedient to propose getting rid of it. The minimum wage should be managed by each state with no federal involvement. The states are in a better position to evaluate the needs of their citizenry as opposed to the Federal Gov's one size fits all approach. A minimum wage of 7.15/hr may be more than adequate in Eastern Tennessee but it's worthless essentially in New Jersey.
Really, I thought he was more intelligent than that.
He mocked the idea of raising the minimum wage to $9.00, trotting out the old "Why not raise it to $1000 an hour" and added, "and have the Fed crank up the printing press to accommodate it".
Raising it obviously has a marginal impact on employers and on workers earning low wages, and it's important to not disrupt those people by raising it too much.
So $1000 per hour is just plain ridiculous and nobody has ever credibly proposed it.
Right after that televised debacle, Jim Sinegal, co-founder and former CEO of Costco, supported the proposal, saying it would increase productivity. "You get what you pay for," he said, and Costco demonstrates it daily with its high wages, high productivity, and superior value to consumers.
I agree if you raise it to $1000/hr too many people will lose their job, but why not raise to $25/hr? Costco is a pretty good company that has always paid more than min wage and more than their competitors, but this is seen in their prices.
Having taken econ 101 (and got an A in it), I am aware that minimum wage laws tend to hurt the very people it is purportedly supposed to help.
But I don't think it's worth a lot of time and energy to try to fight it at this time. I remember Dick Armey, who is an ex econ prof, said that he would fight min wage increases with every fiber of his being or some such thing. Years later I heard him interviewed and he was very rueful about that statement. He knew he lost the PR fight big time.
Smart Dems are never going to raise the min wage rate enough to do massive damage to the economy (except maybe in a few over-the-looney-left-edge places in California). It will hurt younger workers to some extent, but they are mostly Dem voters anyway. If Dems want to do that, go for it. It's just a dog & pony show, a charade, and I don't think the GOP should waste a lot of time and energy on this issue.
The idea of a federal minimum wage is archaic and outdated. It shouldn't be set at the federal level and from an macroeconomic standpoint I disagree with it fundamentally. The market will appropriately evaluate the worth of labor.
That being said, I realize that it isn't politicall expedient to propose getting rid of it. The minimum wage should be managed by each state with no federal involvement. The states are in a better position to evaluate the needs of their citizenry as opposed to the Federal Gov's one size fits all approach. A minimum wage of 7.15/hr may be more than adequate in Eastern Tennessee but it's worthless essentially in New Jersey.
I would be okay with no minimum wage if we also had a free market in housing and real estate.
Conservatives are unwilling to allow the latter, and I maintain that a minimum wage is an unfortunate but necessary price of an unfree housing market.
If an employer is free to pay say $2 per hour, a landlord or developer should also be free to provide housing affordable to the worker earning $2 per hour.
I'd love to hear objections that do not entail class warfare.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
