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.
Hey, it's not my fault you can't afford to live in the north east. Nevertheless the Northeast is the richest part of the country and most unionized. The poorest parts of the country, the south is the least unionized. You don't see the connection here?
And yet again you are wrong.
There are a lot of rich people in those areas, that's what makes those states SEEM rich, if you look at the economic indicators for the north east, you will see they actually rank in the bottom 50, and 2 of those states are int he top 10, of states with fewer working people than people on Welfare. New York state is one of them.
In fact, you can make half again what I make, and yet not live nearly as well, if you live in New York. I have a NICE home, car, live in a great are/neighborhood, and I live in one of the 3 top vacation spots on the east coast. I make enough to live well, and save money. You could make 2x as much as I, and still not live nearly as well, if you lived in New York City, for example.
One of the reasons that unions keep pushing for higher wages up in the north east, is because it costs more to live there, and the higher they push the wages, the more they make it cost to live there, Only the blind can't see that. A home like I have would cost almost 4 times New York, than it's cost in Va Beach.
If fact that's bigotry....you have a false belief that someone who is educated ought/should be paid more money than someone who is uneducated.
Why would perpetuate Class Warfare?
The Market determines wages/salaries, not governments and not unions. When unions and governments interfere, workers lose their jobs, and it is traumatic when workers must then deal with the reality of Markets.
Economically....
Mircea
Not even going to bother to reply to that book you just wrote for me, but I will take issue with this. Do you think if there was not a minimum wage that all businesses would pay at least $7.25 an hour? I don't. I'm sure there would be a lot of places paying less than $7.25 an hour.
Someone who is educated in the proper career field will have a more exact or sought after set of skills and knowledge. Why shouldn't they be paid more? It's something that not everyone can do, or has the knowledge to do. We reward hard work, it's how a capitalist economy operates. Sure it has its flaws, but hard work, education, and a set of specialized skills are the bedrock to doing well for yourself.
You mean like Michigan, detroit? We see how well that is working.
You need to brush up on your geography. Detroit nor Michigan are in the northeast. And as of last year, Michigan is a "right to work" state. Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, etc. Capiche?
Not even going to bother to reply to that book you just wrote for me, but I will take issue with this.
Your unconditional surrender is accepted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
Do you think if there was not a minimum wage that all businesses would pay at least $7.25 an hour? I don't. I'm sure there would be a lot of places paying less than $7.25 an hour.
Your logic is faulty and based entirely on ideology and not facts.
What prevents employers from paying only the established minimum wage, and nothing more?
The Labor Market.
And so what if employers paid less than $7.25/hour?
A limited bigoted mind-set is unable to understand that someone in the US can earn $4.55/hour and have the exact same identical life-style as someone earning $7.25/hour or $15/hour or even $22/hour.
Those bigots often scream, "Slave Wages!" in spite of the fact that people in foreign States can buy houses on $1.50/hour or even $0.80/hour.
They're Little Brains...they only see the numbers, not the reality backing the numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
Someone who is educated in the proper career field will have a more exact or sought after set of skills and knowledge.
Maybe.
You're making a sweeping generalization. Wages and salaries are based on the Supply & Demand of a specific Skill-set in a given Market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
Why shouldn't they be paid more? It's something that not everyone can do, or has the knowledge to do.
You have just proven me right....that is the Law of Supply & Demand in action.
A job pays whatever the Market says the wages should be. Education is merely incidental. Not all jobs require education. There was a time when over-the-road truck drivers made $35,000 to $60,000 annually, which was 3.5x to 6x more than the average American earned.
So people with college degrees are earning $9,000 to $12,000 annually while an high school drop-out Vietnam vet earns $35,000+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
We reward hard work, it's how a capitalist economy operates.
No such thing as a Capitalist Economy.
There's a Capitalist Property Theory. That theory says private individuals are more responsive to Market demands, since individuals own whatever Capital -- their labor, education, training, cash, credit, tools, equipment, machines, vehicles, aircraft or land -- they acquire.
There's a Free Market Economic System. In that system, the Market sets the price....not the Capitalists, not unions and not government. When Capitalists, unions or government or some other group -- like the American Hospital Association -- sets prices, that is a Soviet-style Command Economy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt
There are a lot of rich people in those areas, that's what makes those states SEEM rich, if you look at the economic indicators for the north east, you will see they actually rank in the bottom 50, and 2 of those states are int he top 10, of states with fewer working people than people on Welfare. New York state is one of them.
Well, almost.
They Cost-of-Living in that region is very, very high.
For example, in some of the 1,539 separate economies in the US, the government will not use tax-payer dollars to subsidize your housing if your annual income is greater than $9,101 --- which is about $4.55/hour.
However, in some of the 1,539 separate economies, the government will use tax-payer dollars to subsidize your rent, even if your income is $53,490 annually --- about $26.75/hour.
One such place is Stamford, Connecticut. If you are single, and making $26.75/hour or less, the government will steal from tax-payers to pay for your rent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapaport
Of course there is correlation between wealth and unionization, you just can't read simple tables... Lol Let's, see...
Let's see the life-time tables.
Sure, Zenith employees got paid union wages, except now their jobs are gone and they are working at Home-Depot, Wal-Mart and McDonalds.
Looks like over the long-term, their union benefit was erased.
There are a lot of rich people in those areas, that's what makes those states SEEM rich, if you look at the economic indicators for the north east, you will see they actually rank in the bottom 50, and 2 of those states are int he top 10, of states with fewer working people than people on Welfare. New York state is one of them.
That's again wrong. This is data on freeloaders completed by tax foundation:
I am not sure your map's information points to "freeloaders' at all.
I have "0" tax liability.
You must be depreciating faster than a meth addict.
Might be me, though.
The Government PAYS me every year.
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.
