The truth about minimum wage and income inequality

Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
it took someone "to collect and distribute it" in order for the hoover dam to be built, and the people didn't do it and private enterprise didn't do it. government did it, and they did it with the money that people voluntarily agreed to give them when they signed the W4s. if this little bit of fail is how you plan on starting your stormfronting weekend, i look forward to what's next.
Click to expand...
You blathering about a W4 is far from a "fail" for me. Perhaps another example of your usual inclination to declare victory where none exists? Do you think one is not required to pay taxes if one doesn't fill out a W4? Do you think filling out a W4 is optional? "in order for the hoover dam to be built" the People provided the funds, private enterprise built it. Your insistence that the guberment is the giver of all is, indeed, strange.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
New Age United said:
My brother made a real good point last summer that I never thought of before, I don't work at min wage, lmao $10/per hour I wouldn't grow weed if it only saved me that much, point is he is a fairly new graduate and trying to make his way into his career; I always thought that min wage was a good way to determine the strength of the economy, keep in mind that I'm from Canada and he's from the States, no offense but our economy is much better up here. He said that he hates it when he hears that the min wage just increased bc this is cutting the gap between the poor and the middle class, while the min wage keeps increasing the avg. wage for the educated stays the same, so in turn this actually has a detrimental effect on the economy bc more money ends up in the hands of the uneducated, this is similar to what caused the downfall of communism, why would you become a doctor when you can be a street sweeper and make the same wage.
Click to expand...
And your Minimum wage is much higher than ours as well as your dollar is on par with ours as well
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
And your Minimum wage is much higher than ours as well as your dollar is on par with ours as well
Click to expand...
canada dodged the brunt of the economic collapse through SOUND FISCAL POLICY, and nationalizing their central bank.

if they had left their central bank as a private cartel they would have been just as fucked as we are, perhaps even more so.

again, the federal reserve cartel is at the heart of the economic boom/bust cycle, NOT capitalism. and the federal reserve exists to serve the interests of the big money banks, their investors and the bureaucracy that keeps it in the black even if they have to bulldoze the economy to keep their margins up.

eliminating the federal reserve bank, and placing the power to print money back in the hands of congress would be a huge step, since congress cant stop fighting each other long enough to fuck up our monetary policy.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
canada dodged the brunt of the economic collapse through SOUND FISCAL POLICY, and nationalizing their central bank. if they had left their central bank as a private cartel they would have been just as fucked as we are, perhaps even more so. again, the federal reserve cartel is at the heart of the economic boom/bust cycle, NOT capitalism. and the federal reserve exists to serve the interests of the big money banks, their investors and the bureaucracy that keeps it in the black even if they have to bulldoze the economy to keep their margins up. eliminating the federal reserve bank, and placing the power to print money back in the hands of congress would be a huge step, since congress cant stop fighting each other long enough to fuck up our monetary policy.
Click to expand...
Would you be willing to entrust Congress with the power of printing money? Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
So where does your wife tell you she's going, if not Waffle House, when she wants to get laid? Or does she bring them home while you sleep outside with the dog?
Click to expand...
Would you trust Buck to print money? There's a strong possibility one of his in-laws will give him their spot on the Federal Reserve once one of them dies.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
Would you trust Buck to print money? There's a strong possibility one of his in-laws will give him their spot on the Federal Reserve once one of them dies.
Click to expand...
you guys were given fair warning in the protocols of the elders of zion, and foolishly you chose to ignore our jewish world dominance plot.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
nontheist said:
That means so much from a pathological liar.
Click to expand...
the guy who works 16 hours every day, comes home, tends to his land, fucks his wife like a porn star, grows the best weed EVAR! and then PWNS us all over a beer or two is now accusing other people of being liars.

that's just grand!

oh, nonsenseist. you are always good for a laugh, albeit at your pathetic, bigoted expense.
 
T

tokeprep

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
canada dodged the brunt of the economic collapse through SOUND FISCAL POLICY, and nationalizing their central bank.

if they had left their central bank as a private cartel they would have been just as fucked as we are, perhaps even more so.

again, the federal reserve cartel is at the heart of the economic boom/bust cycle, NOT capitalism. and the federal reserve exists to serve the interests of the big money banks, their investors and the bureaucracy that keeps it in the black even if they have to bulldoze the economy to keep their margins up.

eliminating the federal reserve bank, and placing the power to print money back in the hands of congress would be a huge step, since congress cant stop fighting each other long enough to fuck up our monetary policy.
Click to expand...
We had boom and bust long before we had the Federal Reserve, which was the reason we created it in the first place. I think capitalism is naturally and inevitably prone to boom and bust because of human nature: people are irrational and moronic and will make terrible decisions. Comparing the economy pre-Fed and post-Fed, I think it gives us more stability: we get shorter and shallower recessions that net to better growth. Of course, you should expect that outcome if the alternative was leaving the power to Congress, which can be counted on to mimic the mob it serves. I'll take a room filled with distinguished economists operating outside of political pressure over that any day, even though I'm nervous about where quantitative easing might lead. At the least the economists have very compelling reasons for the policy they're pursuing and have some confidence that they'll achieve the result they want. Congress just floats with the wind, wherever it leads.

I would blame the scale of the housing bubble, for example, on Congress, not the Fed. Congress demanded that subprime borrowers have more access to loans, and implicitly standing behind Fannie and Freddie--the guarantors underlying everything--was the financial guarantee of the federal government. Anyone who gambled on that result won. What would have happened without that guarantee? Subprime couldn't possibly have attracted the kind of money it did; buyers would actually have to fear the losses instead of resting comfortably on their federal insurance policies.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
tokeprep said:
We had boom and bust long before we had the Federal Reserve, which was the reason we created it in the first place. I think capitalism is naturally and inevitably prone to boom and bust because of human nature: people are irrational and moronic and will make terrible decisions. Comparing the economy pre-Fed and post-Fed, I think it gives us more stability: we get shorter and shallower recessions that net to better growth. Of course, you should expect that outcome if the alternative was leaving the power to Congress, which can be counted on to mimic the mob it serves. I'll take a room filled with distinguished economists operating outside of political pressure over that any day, even though I'm nervous about where quantitative easing might lead. At the least the economists have very compelling reasons for the policy they're pursuing and have some confidence that they'll achieve the result they want. Congress just floats with the wind, wherever it leads.

I would blame the scale of the housing bubble, for example, on Congress, not the Fed. Congress demanded that subprime borrowers have more access to loans, and implicitly standing behind Fannie and Freddie--the guarantors underlying everything--was the financial guarantee of the federal government. Anyone who gambled on that result won. What would have happened without that guarantee? Subprime couldn't possibly have attracted the kind of money it did; buyers would actually have to fear the losses instead of resting comfortably on their federal insurance policies.
Click to expand...
IF as you seem to imply, the federal reserve were led by a group of wise and noble scholars with only the health and wealth of the nation on their minds that may be true, but the federal reserve was conceived in secret, drafted by the very men the law purported to control, for their own ends.

It's not Federal, since it operates for it's own purposes, not at the behest of washington, it's a private profit driven cartel designed to increase the profits of it's member banks and it's backers. it is not and never was a part of the US federal system, and is not designed to operate within our constitutional restraints.

It's not a Reserve, as it has nothing backing it except the promise they can pick OUR pockets if their shenanigans fail to work, and it has succeeded solely in enriching the banks and it's investors, not the nation. It is a net drain on our economy, creating nothing but debt and inflation with their endless delight at printing more fiat currency to pad their balance sheet.

It's not a Bank, since it has no depositors and has no fiduciary responsibility to act with care and concern for those non existent depositor's funds, as it merely create fiat currency to keep the ball rolling, and charges the government for exercising the congress's own constitutionally mandated responsibility to stabilize our monetary system.

The Federal Reserve Bank is as much a bank as the Medellin Cartel is a pharmacy.
 
T

tokeprep

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
IF as you seem to imply, the federal reserve were led by a group of wise and noble scholars with only the health and wealth of the nation on their minds that may be true, but the federal reserve was conceived in secret, drafted by the very men the law purported to control, for their own ends.
Click to expand...
See, I've seen these nerds go at it behind closed doors. It's totally legitimate.

This conspiracy nonsense--blah blah blah. In 1907 the United States experienced a terrible bank panic that was resolved by J.P. Morgan himself; everyone recognized that having no central bank was a serious problem. The Federal Reserve was then born shortly thereafter. What's so suspicious about it now? How are the central bankers serving the interests of the banks?

It's not Federal, since it operates for it's own purposes, not at the behest of washington, it's a private profit driven cartel designed to increase the profits of it's member banks and it's backers. it is not and never was a part of the US federal system, and is not designed to operate within our constitutional restraints.
Click to expand...
It's designed to be independent of political pressure so that we don't have Congress or the president trying to pull stupid shit over. Do these nerds care about how much profit they're delivering to member banks? I really doubt it.

It's not a Reserve, as it has nothing backing it except the promise they can pick OUR pockets if their shenanigans fail to work, and it has succeeded solely in enriching the banks and it's investors, not the nation. It is a net drain on our economy, creating nothing but debt and inflation with their endless delight at printing more fiat currency to pad their balance sheet.
Click to expand...
Depending on how you price stability. Evidently you put quite a substantial discount on it, since you aren't even attempting to argue that the monetary system was better off pre-Federal Reserve, which is the tack I usually see in these discussions.

I think manipulating the money supply is a truly beautiful thing, personally. If it bothers you, you're trying to impute your rationality to all the other human beings you share this country with, and that's a serious mistake. If they were rational, there would be less boom and bust in the first place--of course they aren't going to think rationally about the money supply.

It's not a Bank, since it has no depositors and has no fiduciary responsibility to act with care and concern for those non existent depositor's funds, as it merely create fiat currency to keep the ball rolling, and charges the government for exercising the congress's own constitutionally mandated responsibility to stabilize our monetary system.

The Federal Reserve Bank is as much a bank as the Medellin Cartel is a pharmacy.
Click to expand...
Fiduciary responsibility? The Federal Reserve has a legal mandate, which is certainly far more powerful when you consider how incredibly easy it is to satisfy a fiduciary duty. They act with sincerity toward that list of goals in the statute, which they probably cite in every letter they write...
 
T

tokeprep

Well-Known Member
echelon1k1 said:
Nice, so we're talking to a class A shareholder?
Click to expand...
Noble scholars--those heartfelt academic economists who have no other passions in their lives. They don't get paid enough or according to anything we're discussing here, so really, why would they give a fuck?
 
echelon1k1

echelon1k1

New Member
tokeprep said:
Noble scholars--those heartfelt academic economists who have no other passions in their lives. They don't get paid enough or according to anything we're discussing here, so really, why would they give a fuck?
Click to expand...
"Noble, Scholar & Economist" don't really jive in the one sentence...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top