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.
This is assuming that the reaction to business under the present conditions is somehow a natural economic one. It's not. Even when wages were at their peak and kept pace with inflation they were at what Warren was suggesting, and burgers were not 12 dollars. This is just a case of the top brass having to give up a share of the wealth they've been distributing upward, that's it. It has nothing to do with some natural economic law junk they love to peddle when pressed with this issue.
Now I am not naive enough to say that if wages were to rise today to 22 bucks an hour that nothing would happen, I am just trying to say that this a social/political battle not one where us on this side of the debate just don't understand "econ 101". Markets are largely social constructs. Understanding this is a first step to bettering the enviroment we're mired in.
Then tell me econ 101 what would happen if 22 bucks an hour became law? Really what would happen?
Then tell me econ 101 what would happen if 22 bucks an hour became law? Really what would happen?
Its complex but it would certainly impact dollar denominated assets and impact creditors. It would generally shift buying power to labor. However as I have said until I am blue. That is exactly what we having been doing with assets for years.
Its complex but it would certainly impact dollar denominated assets and impact creditors. It would generally shift buying power to labor. However as I have said until I am blue. That is exactly what we having been doing with assets for years.
I disagree with your assessment. I look at it this way. We raise the minimum wage, forcing employers to pay more for their employees. Not just in paying wages but that also increases payroll taxes unemployment insurance, FICA wages that employers pay. The first thing that happens is businesses go out and close their doors.
Are you a person who owns or runs a manufacturing shop? Do you have a mom and pop store that hires help? How about a land scaping business? Hell there are so many businesses that your increase of minimum wage impacts. You would kill this economy and probably destroy the world economy. With no one working no one is buying those cheap goods. Then we see China calling in their IOUs since they own half of this economy.
And if anything of this sort ever came out, Mcdonalds and the like would become mechanized to the point where 2 competent workers could handle an entire restaurant.
Or there would be fast food kiosks all over the place like in the movie "Idiocracy"
And if anything of this sort ever came out, Mcdonalds and the like would become mechanized to the point where 2 competent workers could handle an entire restaurant.
Dream-on Go drink some Kool-aid
Quote:
Originally Posted by matzoman
LOL! If that happened the 'REAL' unemployment rate would jump sky high!
So so true. No one gets that. They just see mega corp being the big employer. There are just too many mom and pop operations that would just disappear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBlueSky_
Or there would be fast food kiosks all over the place like in the movie "Idiocracy"
That would suck. Well we would just all become a lean mean people. No fat kids in school eating supersized fries and BACONATERS.
You may disagree, but the facts don't. There simply are not enough people affected, and typical increases are too small for them to combine to yield measureable increases in either inflation or unemployment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfingduo
I also believe that should we just raise those workers to an unreasonably high wage of over $20 per hour we would destroy our economy.
No one is suggesting that. Sen. Warren merely noted that if the minimum wage had risen since 1960 at the same rate as worker productivity has, it would be about $22 an hour today, not $7.25. President Obama has spoken of staged increases in the minimum wage that would bring it to $9 an hour by the end of 2015.
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfingduo
There needs to be some reasonable thought before we just raise that. It also means that those who would higher kids would limit those jobs or even eliminate them.
There seem to be some who assume that those running businesses are dumb enough today to be paying $7.25 an hour to significant numbers of employees they don't actually need. That is not the case. Low-wage labor is a necessary input in some production functions. If you need three minimum wage workers in your shop at $7.25 an hour, you will still need three at $9.00 an hour unless you wish to cut production and profits. The situation here is no different from the event of an increase in the price of any other necessaary input -- electricity, gasoline, rent, advertising, or what have you. The job of business owners and managers is to run a business in light of exactly such constantly changing input prices. That's something that comes with the territory. Those who can't stand the heat shouldn't be in the kitchen. It's that simple.
I disagree with your assessment. I look at it this way. We raise the minimum wage, forcing employers to pay more for their employees. Not just in paying wages but that also increases payroll taxes unemployment insurance, FICA wages that employers pay. The first thing that happens is businesses go out and close their doors.
I disagree with your assessment in treble. Firstly competitive businesses cannot raise prices due to competition. Since the competition is the same , there goes that reason not to raise prices. Price will be passed on. Next what we have is buying power, a thing which even a monopolist must contend. Since buying power will go up for many workers, people will afford the price increases. Thirdly, Henry Ford did not go out of business when he did so voluntarily. I also must be a bit skeptical since I tend to find lots of people who like to talk about economics but know little about it and frequently make static analytic logical errors like this. So answer what will prevent raising prices?
Quote:
Are you a person who owns or runs a manufacturing shop? Do you have a mom and pop store that hires help? How about a land scaping business? Hell there are so many businesses that your increase of minimum wage impacts. You would kill this economy and probably destroy the world economy. With no one working no one is buying those cheap goods. Then we see China calling in their IOUs since they own half of this economy.
No, just someone who did run his own business and studied economics both in a university and in private.
Quote:
Try that econ 101. Learn a little Macro Econ.
Try not to be so patronizing without first sizing up your opponent. Tell me , economist, from which theoretical school do you hail, and which authors have you read?
I am sick to death of seeing Econ 101 cliches and I would hate to take it out on you if you are not game or prepared.
I disagree with your assessment. I look at it this way. We raise the minimum wage, forcing employers to pay more for their employees. Not just in paying wages but that also increases payroll taxes unemployment insurance, FICA wages that employers pay. The first thing that happens is businesses go out and close their doors.
Are you a person who owns or runs a manufacturing shop? Do you have a mom and pop store that hires help? How about a land scaping business? Hell there are so many businesses that your increase of minimum wage impacts. You would kill this economy and probably destroy the world economy. With no one working no one is buying those cheap goods. Then we see China calling in their IOUs since they own half of this economy.
Try that econ 101. Learn a little Macro Econ.
I think you're working under the impression that economics is a value free science.
You may disagree, but the facts don't. There simply are not enough people affected, and typical increases are too small for them to combine to yield measureable increases in either inflation or unemployment.
No one is suggesting that. Sen. Warren merely noted that if the minimum wage had risen since 1960 at the same rate as worker productivity has, it would be about $22 an hour today, not $7.25. President Obama has spoken of staged increases in the minimum wage that would bring it to $9 an hour by the end of 2015.
There seem to be some who assume that those running businesses are dumb enough today to be paying $7.25 an hour to significant numbers of employees they don't actually need. That is not the case. Low-wage labor is a necessary input in some production functions. If you need three minimum wage workers in your shop at $7.25 an hour, you will still need three at $9.00 an hour unless you wish to cut production and profits. The situation here is no different from the event of an increase in the price of any other necessaary input -- electricity, gasoline, rent, advertising, or what have you. The job of business owners and managers is to run a business in light of exactly such constantly changing input prices. That's something that comes with the territory. Those who can't stand the heat shouldn't be in the kitchen. It's that simple.
First we will discuss the two bold lines of yours. One if that is the case that there are too few to be affected then why are we protesting Walmart? With all the fast food joints and mom and pop's and you name the small business how can you say that there are too few.
Second if we even raised it that much you would find that you have just cut out that many more jobs because the business would just close the door. Don't you understand that? You would create an underground economy that is twice the size it is now. Maybe that would be a good thing but federal revenue would drop drastically. It would not increase.
Now let's talk about freedom. Why is it that it is the governemt's job to mandate a wage? What gives the gives the feds or the state the right to mandate pay raises for entry level jobs on private employees?
The moment the "R" bomb is dropped is the moment one knows his opponent is fighting his last stand against overwhelming forces, similar to the last desperate measures the Japanese Kamikazes took against superior American forces at the Battle of Midway. Desperate, suicidal, ultimately futile.
For the record, every cliche about the "myth" of psychometric studies has been stated here, such as "IQ is nothing but a social construct" and that it's solely designed "to favor whites" over blacks - never accounting for how Asians consistently destroy blacks in IQ tests, who have even more of a "cultural disadvantage" to the tests than blacks.
The FACTS:
✔IQ tests measure intelligence - not knowledge.
✔A strong correlation has been consistently established between high IQ and high academic achievement.
✔Blacks consistently score the lowest on IQ tests worldwide - with not even one deviation in the entire history of IQ testing.
✔Worldwide, countries with the lowest socio-economic achievement also demonstrate the lowest national IQ for its citizens. In other words, countries with low national IQ's invariably have low economic progress and success. How could this be so if IQ tests were invalid?
In summation, the supportive data for the validity of IQ is absolutely stunning - so much so that many governments suppress its truth out of fear of igniting mass, murderous revolts against higher-IQ citizens.
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.
