Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
Exactly why our economy has been in the slump that it is in. Morality economics is voodoo economics. Voodoo economics places defunct conservative ideology over economic principles.
|
Um, Voodoo Economics is thinking you can violate the Laws of Economics and get away with it.
It is an "economic principle" that excess Demand increases prices.
Reduce your consumption...that's an "economic principle," too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
Meanwhile in reality..., recessions cause desparate people to take desparate wages.
|
No, people who couldn't manage their finances and got in over their heads are desperate. Recession had nothing to with it. Those people would have folded anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
Minimum wage exists for a reason.
|
That reason is emotion, which has nothing to do with Economics or Reality.
Minimum Wage is Voodoo Economics...it's an attempt to circumvent and violate economic principles in order to feel good, which ultimately causes pain and suffering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
Every developed country either has a minimum wage or extensive collective labor bargaining.
|
"Meanwhile in reality"...every developed country has a population of 317 Million?
Really? In which Universe? Because that ain't reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
What the heck are you talking about? Economics is all about fair. The markets are regulated by the government to ensure a "fair" allocation of resources.
|
That is not why Markets are regulated in the US.
Economics is about equilibrium and balance, which has nothing to do with equality or fair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
No 21st century power will legislate the poorest of its country to starve on the street. That is just irrational.
|
The irrational turd is the one who won't deflate ego and swallow their pride to share living accommodations in an apartment or house.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
Minimum wage proponents is about getting working folks off Federal assistance.
|
That's a lie. You will never get people off of "federal assistance" so long as you keep increasing minimum wage.
You just increased minimum wage in 2007 to get people off of "federal assistance."
That makes it a lie.
You lost jobs, and you have more people on "federal assistance" than before.
Raise minimum wage to $10+ and you'll lose jobs and have even more people on "federal assistance."
And then you'll whine and cry until minimum wage is raised to $15/hour, at which point, you'll lose more jobs, and have even more people on "federal assistance."
And then you'll whine and cry until minimum wage is raised to $22/hour, at which point, you'll lose more jobs, and have even more people on "federal assistance."
And on top of that, you keep lowering the bar to get "federal assistance."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
A person who works full time should not be in poverty, period. It is non-debateable.
|
It is debatable, because poverty is subjective. When you can define poverty objectively in no uncertain terms, then you might actually have a leg to stand on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
If someone can satisfactorily demonstrate that I have caused harm to them, their proper recourse is a tort action against me. Using government to impose prior restraint on property owners is not a proper recourse.
|
No, preemption is perfectly permissible.
When we examine the correct and proper use of the Interstate Commerce Clause as intended by the drafters based on their notes, letters, journals and diaries, we see the purpose of the Interstate Commerce Clause as preemptive in nature.
When a business in Pennsylvania releases Carbon Tetrachloride (an organic compound harmful to humans and mammals) into the tributaries to the Ohio River, it causes harm to the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa and to the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
They can certain redress their grievances in federal court to recover losses and damages, but courts cannot write legislation, so the courts cannot prevent future occurrences, although the punishment meted out could serve as a deterrent.
This is where Congress now properly employs the Interstate Commerce Clause, enacting legislation to prevent future occurrences, assuming the causal event is not just a one-off freak accident, and that you can reasonably foresee such future events occurring with some regularity or frequency.
Zoning laws work the same way.
To prevent the courts from being clogged with litigation and valuable tax-payer money and resources frivolously tossed away, we enact zoning laws for the benefit of everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
If your zoning inflates my rent N dollars, haven't you harmed me? Where is my proper recourse?
|
No, you're a renter.
Do you not understand the difference between renting and owning?
You're certainly free to ask the property to take legal action, but myself personally, higher rent means a greater likelihood of higher quality tenants, and I can get rid of the turds, and make improvements to the property.
Why should I spend for plush pile carpet for HUD-tenants?
They'll destroy it.....they're only worth the cheapest indoor-outdoor carpet I can find, and the cheapest appliance I can find on Earth (and hopefully I can find cheap used appliances).
If zoning drives up the rent, that's just too damn bad. Now I can rent to working-class poor. I can spring for a little better quality carpet and cheap appliances.
Rent goes up and Lower Middle Class moves in, then I can get nicer carpet, and higher quality appliances, because I know they're not going to pull a Midnight Move-out and steal all of the appliances and rip out all of the copper and everything else.
For Middle Class renters, I can lay better carpet, and get name-brand appliances.
That's how it works.
Now my apartment in Kosice, I just charge token rent for that. I own it outright. I paid $3,700 cash...or maybe that was what I paid for my apartment in Arad (Romania). Anyway, I actually own those, and have the deeds/titles to them.
I used to own a flat in London out near the tube at Kilburn High Road. I sold that to pay for the flat in Arad, and part of the money went to my house out in Lipova.
Demonstrating satisfactorily...
Mircea
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.
