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.
What an absurd defense of low wages. Essentially, you are saying that when the owners of production have more money, it's better for workers, which is patently false. Were the factory workers in 1900 America, who earned subsistence t wages, better off because the owners of the factories earned so much they lived in absolute luxury?
Raising the minimum wage raises wages for the lowest earning workers and studies show it has a negligible effect on employment.
And yet areas like Seattle etc have such a high cost of living, that the poor are priced out of the market and helped very little by any such increase.. Why is that? I know.. you hate the poor....
Efficiency? What a stupid ass story.. who is suggesting we establish a system which results in those earning $400K netting less than those who earn $40K after taxes are paid?
Happiness? Using that argument, we should have a 0% tax rate..
"You're saying you don't understand the charts, sentences, or citations as they were included/written in the article? What is confusing to you"
I understand the facts, charts and your article plenty well.
No, you don't. You thought the article and the facts it presented were about tax codes in different parts of the country, when in fact it was about such in different industrialized countries of the world. Seems you're too confused, or are unable, to understand the facts presented. As such, It's really kind of pointless to present the facts to you. You either don't have the capacity to understand them, or you're stuck in your own ideology facts be damned.
PS: I attempted to correct my sentence to read "and/or in different countries." That was a typo, the kind of detail you love to focus upon, so we can't address your primary argument. Why? I think because you don't know yourself, so you refer to an article, leaving all to guess, or most certainly still me at this point...
I refer to the article because it presents the facts. My opinion doesn't matter, so I don't give it. The facts do matter. And you, yourself, asked for facts.
And yet areas like Seattle etc have such a high cost of living, that the poor are priced out of the market and helped very little by any such increase.. Why is that? I know.. you hate the poor....
Seattle has a high cost of living because everyone is moving here. With people competing for the limited homes available, costs increase. Basic supply and demand.
Seattle has a high cost of living because everyone is moving here. With people competing for the limited homes available, costs increase. Basic supply and demand.
So you understand supply and demand in the housing industry, but somehow believe the same doesnt hold true in regards to labor?
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.
