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.
Republicans can certainly gain a lot of votes if they can guarantee a middle income job or better to anyone who votes for them. But since that hasn't happened, maybe it's not so strange people who are struggling are voting for those who seem care about their self preservation.
Creating jobs doesn't make you richer, making more money does. I'm not sure why there is always this assumption that the desire to make more money equates to creating more jobs.
Here is what would help people find work... the existence of jobs.
Neither Democrats nor Republicans have even the slightest shred of a clue how to create them.
Republicans don't believe that government is the answer to jobs, anyway. It's about freeing up the people and allowing freedom in this thing called the private sector.
If the CPI were still calculated as it was in the 1980s under Paul Volcker, it would show a very different picture of inflation than what is promulgated by Chairman Bernanke.
OK apparently you actually believe this. The fictional graph from the link is from shadowstats is pretty legendary. Do you know how they get their graph? They pick a constant value and add it to the CPI. Theres no economics behind it, its all made up.
And then places like the one you quote use it to spread fear uncertainty and doubt. IE you're wrong. Theres no actual economics to back you up on this, the only math involved is "take current inflation, and add X"
Have you ever been hired by anyone who didn't in one way or another depend on poor people to do the work for them to survive? You know, farmhands for example. Walmart employees.
Have you ever been hired by anyone who didn't in one way or another depend on poor people to do the work for them to survive? You know, farmhands for example. Walmart employees.
OK apparently you actually believe this. The fictional graph from the link is from shadowstats is pretty legendary. Do you know how they get their graph? They pick a constant value and add it to the CPI. Theres no economics behind it, its all made up.
And then places like the one you quote use it to spread fear uncertainty and doubt. IE you're wrong. Theres no actual economics to back you up on this, the only math involved is "take current inflation, and add X"
So it's your position that the way inflation is figured hasn't changed since 1980? And if you agree with the simple indisputable fact that it has, what is inflation today using those measures?
So it's your position that the way inflation is figured hasn't changed since 1980? And if you agree with the simple indisputable fact that it has, what is inflation today using those measures?
No thats not my position. I am well aware that the methodology changed, and even why. I DO agree it can be off, but not by a factor of 5X....but lets turn this around.
Lets say "Gosh you know what, you're right pknopp. It IS 10% since 1980.....So lets apply that to minimum wage shall we? I mean hey-lets keep minimum wage up at that 10% inflation rate shall we?
$3.10/hr in 1980
By your math, minimum wage should be $79.19.
Hmmmm......The moral of this story is "math is not that hard"
A lot of folks here are all about "if we cut off unemployment those people will actually go find work". They have a mistaken belief that the reason our unemployment is what it is is because of unemployment being available. This of course is insane to anyone who spends some time thinking instead of repeating slogans they hear on the radio.
This of course shouldn't be a surprise, unemployed people do not spontaneously create jobs just because they want one. Many here have pointed at a earlier experiment where a state stopped their unemployment as a great success, and their resulting unemployment rate went down-ignoring the reality that the total employed in the state didn't change.
It's not insane, it's just common sense. Any regulation like this will be helpful in a few cases, and abused in most cases. I knew a guy who ran small real estate business and had to lay people off after the crash of 2008. When things started to get better, he called them back one by one. In several cases he was told flat out, I've still got X weeks of unemployment left. Why would I want to come back to work?
Meanwhile people who show up for work every day and will never collect UE, continue to contribute their FUTA tax. Oh I know, the employer pays it...that is a legal fiction, according to economics 101. The money comes out of the worker's pocket.
It's not insane, it's just common sense. Any regulation like this will be helpful in a few cases, and abused in most cases. I knew a guy who ran small real estate business and had to lay people off after the crash of 2008. When things started to get better, he called them back one by one. In several cases he was told flat out, I've still got X weeks of unemployment left. Why would I want to come back to work?
Meanwhile people who show up for work every day and will never collect UE, continue to contribute their FUTA tax. Oh I know, the employer pays it...that is a legal fiction, according to economics 101. The money comes out of the worker's pocket.
Facts and reality disagree with him. Shrug.
And his response is based off of "a guy I knows story"
No thats not my position. I am well aware that the methodology changed, and even why. I DO agree it can be off, but not by a factor of 5X....but lets turn this around.
Not yet.....you say it's wrong but you can't tell me what it is?
Quote:
Lets say "Gosh you know what, you're right pknopp. It IS 10% since 1980.....So lets apply that to minimum wage shall we? I mean hey-lets keep minimum wage up at that 10% inflation rate shall we?
$3.10/hr in 1980
By your math, minimum wage should be $79.19.
Hmmmm......
Maybe you need to understand the argument. The argument isn't that it's 10% since 1980. It's that it's currently 10% using 1980 measurements.
Is the argument that inflation is far higher than the government is claiming a valid argument that the minimum wage should be higher? Yes it is but the problem is the government's Wall Street welfare programs causing inflation, not that the minimum wage is too low. We need to stop the welfare programs and then those on making minimum wage will be better off.
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.
