Real reason Democrats want to raise minimum wage.

[Red1966]

'82 Sylvania: $430 (19")

you are not a great shopper
a black and white tv '82 GE: $105 (12")


you should have gone with VCR

Did I mention a date? No, I didn't. When TVs first started appearing in the 50's, they were $600-900 for a 12" round screen. Don't change the parameters of my quote and then tell me I'm wrong.

 

[Red1966]

View attachment 3174723 View attachment 3174724

compare the ingredients. Alpo with carrots

That Dinty Moore tastes like dog food. Its got a lot of orange grease in it, too. I wouldn't feed that to my dog.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

tech, with its initial R&D costs is not a good analogy here. $1400 Beta-Max become $89 VCR's quite quickly.
*runs*

 

[canndo]

It makes sense

conservatives ascribe to lots of things that make sense, my question was rhetorical. In reality they will buy into the logic given them by the self interested, especially when given to them by the rich and corporations.

a partial list looks like it was taken directly from a "what's best for us (rich) playbook.
less regulation ( regulation rarely affects individuals directly)
tort reform (those damn lawsuits that actually level the playing field for citizens agains big business)
minimum wage increases will help no one, after all, we will just charge you more (if that were true then corporations really wouldn't care, now would they? Or are they simply looking out for us little guys?)
lower taxes (and maybe even you will get a break). Of course that same company that threatens you with higher prices if their costs go up do not promise you breaks if their prices go down)

and the best lie of all-- trickle down. The more WE get the more you might see. At the discretion of those that get the money.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

That Dinty Moore tastes like dog food. Its got a lot of orange grease in it, too. I wouldn't feed that to my dog.

you'd eat it. let's ruck-sack 70 lbs, for 16 miles. you'd lick the can......lol.

 

[Red1966]

Minimum wage earners drive the economy, a strong economy benefits everyone

No, Pada, you don't drive the economy.

 

[canndo]

In the era when capitalism had no restraints the union was a vital and needed organization.

Fortunately for everyone most of what those earlier unions fought for is exceeded by labor laws.

Unions, like nearly everything else had to keep working to make themselves relevant.

They kept negotiating better conditions and eventually they passed the point of what I consider reasonable.
Different people can disagree on what is reasonable.

Not all unions have.

The auto union has. I have an uncle who was a high ranking union official. He is dead now. But he retired in the mid 90's, his widow still draws his retirement salary. It's nearly 50k. On top of his social security.

That's why a new Chevy and Ford is so expensive.

When I was in rehab the one I went to first was super expensive. I told my parents not to pay for it, that I wasn't done. The rehab of course convinced them they could cure me. The rail roads sent their people there.

So there is a rehab in knoxville Tennessee that is one of the highest rated in the country. Rail road workers from all over the country go there, while there they get 80% of their pay, 90 days in house and six months in half way house, all at 80% salary while the rail road pays the rehab 100k or better for them.

It's absurd that you can't fire an alcoholic, you have to pay to send one to rehab, and pay them their salary while there.

That is too far.

Now, if you don't understand formulas I don't know if I can communicate with you.

Minimum wage × Y = salary

Y can be different from one place to another. And it does.

And not all have that formula. But many do.

you make a very critical error, one that I made for years, that is that labor laws, once accomplished are static.

those laws can and are often rolled back, making unions a constant neccessity.

 

[Red1966]

you'd eat it. let's ruck-sack 70 lbs, for 16 miles. you'd lick the can......lol.

I have eaten it. It gave me diarrhea. Greasy crap.

 

[schuylaar]

that is silliness.

if four people in your office get a ten percent raise but you don't, you didn't get a pay decrease. Sounds like a case of envy to me.

i do understand what he means; you put in the sweat year over year and have merit increase from $9 to $15/hr then eventually there is COLA and that same $9 job starts off at $13 now and your making $15.

I worked myself up to a pretty hefty base due to tenure and not too long before i left, they raised the meager starting salary (which i endured)
by $10k; that equated to 5 years of increases half my career there; someone just walked in the door and is already making almost as much as myself (on base).

 

[Red1966]

why is this such a difficult concept for those in the right who all seem to claim mastery of economics and superiority over the left when it comes to things fiscal?

Uh, that's pretty much what the right has been saying all along. why is this such a difficult concept for those in the left who all seem to claim mastery of economics and superiority over the right when it comes to all things?

 

[BigNBushy]

that is silliness.

if four people in your office get a ten percent raise but you don't, you didn't get a pay decrease. Sounds like a case of envy to me.

Comparing it to me and my office is nonsense.

A raise in the minimum wage leads to increase in cost of life. Now, buck can come in and say that percentage wise, wages comes out ahead of the cost of living increase. And that may be. But for those over the new minimum, their pay doesn't go as far as it once did.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

I have eaten it. It gave me diarrhea. Greasy crap.

yeah......it blows. rice or bread, eaten in equal amount, to the amount of stew consumed, will form enough of a turd to not lose valuable fluids and electrolytes. straight up, its Taco Bell, dipped in mineral oil.......lol.

 

[Red1966]

Thank you for this I was just googling, aggregate demand, lol. This seems logical

I have never heard of that statistic before though. "At peak efficiency, two dollars in jobs are created for every dollar in foodstamps issued."

I gotta ask... How often does the GOV run things efficiently?

When I did a tour Houston (Houston we have a problem, Houston) they told us that NASA's return on $1 of tax payer funding was $3 - $8 dollars. If you count the internet, satellites and ton of the technological breakthroughs that have happened because of NASA. Nothing to do with this just one example of efficient use of Taxpayer money by the GOV.

Yeah, and every government entity claims every dollar they spend of your money somehow equals X times as much. "Aggregate demand" is more of the same bullshit for the simple minded. If you and I both buy a car, the demand is for two cars. If the government taxes you what it costs to buy a car and gives it to me, I can buy two cars, but you have to walk. Where is this increase in "aggregate demand"? And that claim about food stamps came from Nancy Pelosi, but it was $1.60, not $2.00. Explain how $1.60 in wages is created from selling something that had to cost something to produce. The city of Jacksonville tried to justify spending $630 million on a stadium they gave to Wayne Weaver by saying they would get $35.00 for every $1.00 spent. The city has had to PAY Weaver close to 1/2 million every year and still has to maintain the stadium.

 

[Red1966]

Thank you for this I was just googling, aggregate demand, lol. This seems logical

I have never heard of that statistic before though. "At peak efficiency, two dollars in jobs are created for every dollar in foodstamps issued."

I gotta ask... How often does the GOV run things efficiently?

When I did a tour Houston (Houston we have a problem, Houston) they told us that NASA's return on $1 of tax payer funding was $3 - $8 dollars. If you count the internet, satellites and ton of the technological breakthroughs that have happened because of NASA. Nothing to do with this just one example of efficient use of Taxpayer money by the GOV.

NASA didn't create the internet. Sun (Stanford University Nerds) Microsystems did.

 

[Red1966]

Cheaper then the Koch brother's 'donations.'

Edit for '

Not when its your "donation" that's getting spent.

 

[BigNBushy]

i do understand what he means; you put in the sweat year over year and have merit increase from $9 to $15/hr then eventually there is COLA and that same $9 job starts off at $13 now and your making $15.

I worked myself up to a pretty hefty base due to tenure and not too long before i left, they raised the meager starting salary (which i endured)
by $10k; that equated to 5 years of increases half my career there; someone just walked in the door and is already making almost as much as myself (on base).

You're starting to get it, but that isn't the reason. I don't care what discretionary measure a company takes to increase its base.

When you've worked hard for a time at a fairly skilled job, and you're on the cusp of being middle class America at $15/hr, then all of a sudden the law changes and we're at a $10/hr minimum, you have just ensured a lot more people are at the poverty line.

If you're making 15, and they raise it to 10, you're poor again.

I care a lot more about the hard working talented people making 15 than I care about those making minimum wage.

If you set minimum wage to $100/hr after a few years when everything sorted it's self out, people making $100/hr would still live paycheck to paycheck. Not be able to save for retirement.

We're always going to have poor people. They're not poor because they don't make much money, they're poor because of how they live their lives.

It's not an income issue it is a decision making issue.

You ever seen that documentary where they gave the poor guy 100 grand?

He blew it all. He was no better off after it.

There are plenty of stories out there of poor people who win a few hundred thousand dollars in the lottery, after a few years they're worse off.

You can't fix poverty with more money. Unless you're willing to dictate to people how they spend it.

Now, you could take a successful person, take everything he has, and there is a damn good chance he will rebuild his wealth.

 

[abandonconflict]

Yeah, and every government entity claims every dollar they spend of your money somehow equals X times as much. "Aggregate demand" is more of the same bullshit for the simple minded. If you and I both buy a car, the demand is for two cars. If the government taxes you what it costs to buy a car and gives it to me, I can buy two cars, but you have to walk. Where is this increase in "aggregate demand"? And that claim about food stamps came from Nancy Pelosi, but it was $1.60, not $2.00. Explain how $1.60 in wages is created from selling something that had to cost something to produce. The city of Jacksonville tried to justify spending $630 million on a stadium they gave to Wayne Weaver by saying they would get $35.00 for every $1.00 spent. The city has had to PAY Weaver close to 1/2 million every year and still has to maintain the stadium.

Simpleton.

Labor creates all wealth. When labor is stimulated, more wealth is created.

 

[Red1966]

tech, with its initial R&D costs is not a good analogy here. $1400 Beta-Max become $89 VCR's quite quickly.
*runs*

OK, in the thirties, the average earner worked 20 hours just to buy food for a week, now its more like 5 hours. No R&D costs in Cheerios.

 

[abandonconflict]

If you're making 15, and they raise it to 10, you're poor again.

No, you still make $15.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

OK, in the thirties, the average earner worked 20 hours just to buy food for a week, now its more like 5 hours. No R&D costs in Cheerios.

food......well, there ya go, as they say in upstate PA. 9% increase in the cost of meat, in the last year. the Fed declares this a victory for the economy, and you go from sirloin to Encore Salisbury steak.........hooray!
organic and heirloom seed prices way up. land use regulation increasing.