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.
If she wants to see this passed, she will probably have to compromise. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the city council is fine with the time line for this bill.
Paying people more so they can spend more is not "economic growth".
It's redistribution of money.
Where is the "growth" ?
Redistribution of money is growth.
1,000 people need food, clothing, shelter, water, and would like some spending money to buy little goodies.
If 10 men have all the wealth and the other 990 have none, we only have 10 men buying food, clothing, shelter, water, and little goodies. Which one causes more velocity in the economy, 10 men or 1,000 men??!?!
1,000 people need food, clothing, shelter, water, and would like some spending money to buy little goodies.
If 10 men have all the wealth and the other 990 have none, we only have 10 men buying food, clothing, shelter, water, and little goodies. Which one causes more velocity in the economy, 10 men or 1,000 men??!?!
It isn't hard.
Apparently to Republicans, people earning more doesn't count as growth. I wonder if they turn down raises from their own jobs because they are against redistribution.
Great articles on this topic, it seems like we might finally see a move forward for working Americans.
Not in red states where Republicans rule. They will surely want to act to ban their state cities from raising their minimum wage as has already been done in Oklahoma.
1,000 people need food, clothing, shelter, water, and would like some spending money to buy little goodies.
If 10 men have all the wealth and the other 990 have none, we only have 10 men buying food, clothing, shelter, water, and little goodies. Which one causes more velocity in the economy, 10 men or 1,000 men??!?!
It isn't hard.
Again..that is not growth, that is redistribution of money.
Apparently to Republicans, people earning more doesn't count as growth. I wonder if they turn down raises from their own jobs because they are against redistribution.
Not when the mandated minimum rises.
That is not "growth" in a capitalist society. The driving force in economic growth is growth in productivity.
Again..that is not growth, that is redistribution of money.
A consumer gets an extra $5,000 a year from a CEO/owner/whomever that makes 7 figures.
Was that boss really going to spend that $5000 like the consumer would? Or would he invest, pay miniscule taxes, and contribute nothing to the economy (which is heavily consumer based)?
So if a employer gives employees a raise voluntarily, that is growth, but if minimum wage goes up, that is redistribution. This right wing talking point is a very thin one at best, and sadly all you really have to fight against better wages for working Americans.
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.
