Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-26-2015, 11:55 PM
 
1,160 posts, read 714,084 times
Reputation: 473

Advertisements

Ummm....

This what you said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
$70K or $35/hr doesn't get one much in NYC without a partner that also makes about that much at least.
and this is what you pivoted too:

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
What assumption? The high cost of living in NYC? The income needed to rent is typically 40 times the rent. $70K will get you a $1750/month apartment. In NYC, that doesn't get you much, nor does it get you close in.
Both are unaltered quotes from you. You changed the goalpost. Both are direct quotes dude, come on, You could not defend your initial premise so you altered it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2015, 11:57 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,193,867 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
Ummm....

This what you said:



and this is what you pivoted too:



Both are unaltered quotes from you. You changed the goalpost.
Ah, then you simply mean you don't know what "doesn't get you much" means. That makes sense. We are off topic, so I won't be commenting anymore on this off topic post of yours, but now you should clearly know what I said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 01:55 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,469,142 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
What assumption? The high cost of living in NYC? The income needed to rent is typically 40 times the rent. $70K will get you a $1750/month apartment. In NYC, that doesn't get you much, nor does it get you close in.

$14K will get you a $350/month room? Does such a thing exist in NYC?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 02:06 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,057,820 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by J746NEW View Post
20 Million a year is to low for a CEO, why not 100 million by moving operations to China. What could possibly go wrong.


There are consequences to raising minimum wage in the markets and there also consequences to moving your operations overseas to gain more profits also in the markets to the detriment of your consumers.

Eventually it comes back to bite you.
There is no Free Lunch

We have been told that it would cost 2000 for our 500 dollar monitors.
It is all lies
Consumers are being gouged to prop up Wall Street Global Investors and Globalist Corporations

Apple's iPhone 6 Reportedly Costs $200 to Make
Apple’s $649 iPhone 6 Reportedly Costs $200 to Make

That excess profit is being used to funnel investment back into other countries, not this country

The real leeches in this country are not at the bottom, but the very top
So don't buy an iPhone 6.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 02:21 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,193,867 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
$14K will get you a $350/month room? Does such a thing exist in NYC?
I don't think so, but I couldn't say for sure. I would just feel really bad for anyone who is looking for that little in rent in that city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 09:49 AM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,386,435 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
This is wrong for the same reasons why raising the minimum wage to $1,000,000/hour would not increase demand and would immediately shut the entire economy down, just imagine it being orders of magnitudes less but with the same systemic issues.
If you coupled a $1,000,000 hr. wage with enough newly printed money so that the current employees could keep spending and the current employers could write pay checks it wouldn't shut things down.



Here is a thought experiment. If you have 100% investment, and 0% consumption what happens to the economy?

If you have no investment then what happens to the economy?

If you have too much investment and not enough consumption what do you have?

We currently have an over production of raw materials and an under consumption of finished goods, with an over capacity of production and underutilization of that capacity.

Too much investment and not enough consumption. We need less investment and more wages. We have a miss allocation of resources. This is world wide not just in the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,481 posts, read 10,227,792 times
Reputation: 2536
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
I think people who are arguing that minimum wage should be $15 an hour are shooting too low. Who can live on that? I think it should be more like $20. What do you think?
Why not a 1000 an hour
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Riding the light...
1,635 posts, read 1,814,618 times
Reputation: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
I think people who are arguing that minimum wage should be $15 an hour are shooting too low. Who can live on that? I think it should be more like $20. What do you think?
I say tax the wealthy at 90% on any income in excess of the national average income. This would incentivize the wealthy to insure everyone makes more, even if only to releive their own tax burden.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 10:05 AM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,386,435 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
This explains it well too.
Quote:
The same principles apply to artificially increasing the price of labor. Imagine that you own a burger stand. You hire a cook that makes you 10 burgers every hour for $8. He voluntarily accepts those terms. Then the government comes along and says that you must now pay him $10 an hour. But wait, has the government promised you more burgers per hour? What if your cook physically cannot produce more than 10 burgers per hour? You get no additional burgers per hour, but now those 10 burgers cost you $2 more. The economy is now poorer by the value of that $2 per hour. Why? Because now $8 only buys 48 minutes of cooking burgers. Or, in terms of burgers, $8 dollars only buys 8 burgers now instead of 10! A $2 dollar minimum wage increase may not seem like much, but to you as the owner of the burger stand, your labor costs have now gone up 20 percent for no additional output!
Ok some math to crunch. You say the economy is poorer for the $2 an hr. But 10 burgers an hr would only require an increase in price of $0.20 per burger to cover it.

Now some reasonable assumptions about labor cost. If the cost of the cook was 20% of the cost of the burger then $0.80 per burger labor for a $4 burger. Upping the cost per burger to $4.20 means that an hr of the cooks labor went from buying 2 burgers to buying 2.38 burgers. ($8 hrs/ $4 burgers) to ($10 hrs/ $4.20 burgers)


The economy isn't poorer those $2 an hr it is richer those $2 an hr.

The broken wind fallacy doesn't apply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2015, 11:53 AM
 
Location: it depends
6,369 posts, read 6,412,287 times
Reputation: 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
Ok some math to crunch. You say the economy is poorer for the $2 an hr. But 10 burgers an hr would only require an increase in price of $0.20 per burger to cover it.

Now some reasonable assumptions about labor cost. If the cost of the cook was 20% of the cost of the burger then $0.80 per burger labor for a $4 burger. Upping the cost per burger to $4.20 means that an hr of the cooks labor went from buying 2 burgers to buying 2.38 burgers. ($8 hrs/ $4 burgers) to ($10 hrs/ $4.20 burgers)


The economy isn't poorer those $2 an hr it is richer those $2 an hr.

The broken wind fallacy doesn't apply.
Unless the 20 cents/burger is delivered by a magical unicorn, then the 20 cents certainly DID come off of some other consumption. You should read up on the broken window fallacy, this time for comprehension.

We would not be better off, we merely would have substituted what we really preferred to spend money on so we could overpay a fry cook, because the government dictated it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:24 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top