USA move closer to equality in wages

What will increasing the minimum accompish?

  • Make a lot of workers very happy, and boost the economy

  • Cost jobs and drive businesses into bankruptcy

  • Nothing

Results are only viewable after voting.
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
Encourage is another word for forcing. The FED has forced the interest rate level artificially low to force people to spend money rather than save money.

But my point is that you do not create value by redistributing wealth, you just force it to go round and round in the economy. There is no growth and thus when inflation causes prices to rise you end up with less in the economy. Now, an economy that was not fucked with would devalue and normalize. However, the government does not want normalization so it borrows money and injects the borrowed money into the economy. And that does not add value either because you are now on the hook for interest payments.

Downward spiral after that.

The only way the economy changes is with more jobs creating added value to the economy.
Click to expand...
Interest rates are always artificial. They are made up by the Reserve bank or whatever you call it there.
Jobs create growth. To create jobs people need to spend. Its a linked cycle.
The govt injects money into the economy because people are not spending it. A dangerous but normal practice to stimulate growth (ie jobs- so people can spend money)
Inflation is normal due the world having finite resources. The less we have of something the more the value (land, oil etc). But must of cause be kept at an acceptable level.
Problems happen when things fall out of context to the inflation rate. Eg. If rental prices have on avg risen by 15% in the last 10 years then if wages have only risen by 3% people find themselves having less disposable income (7% less). This means that they will spend less money at local shops etc. Which means of cause that the local shop owners are earning less. So they spend less. This means jobs are lost. If the inflation is the same across the board then everyone is "stable". A stable or slowly growing economy is a good economy. But it all revolves around money being passed around. (hence interest rates rise and fall to help that).

You nearly have the concept your just looking at it from the wrong angle.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Lucky Luke said:
Interest rates are always artificial. They are made up by the Reserve bank or whatever you call it there.
Jobs create growth. To create jobs people need to spend. Its a linked cycle.
The govt injects money into the economy because people are not spending it. A dangerous but normal practice to stimulate growth (ie jobs- so people can spend money)
Inflation is normal due the world having finite resources. The less we have of something the more the value (land, oil etc). But must of cause be kept at an acceptable level.
Problems happen when things fall out of context to the inflation rate. Eg. If rental prices have on avg risen by 15% in the last 10 years then if wages have only risen by 3% people find themselves having less disposable income (7% less). This means that they will spend less money at local shops etc. Which means of cause that the local shop owners are earning less. So they spend less. This means jobs are lost. If the inflation is the same across the board then everyone is "stable". A stable or slowly growing economy is a good economy. But it all revolves around money being passed around. (hence interest rates rise and fall to help that).

You nearly have the concept your just looking at it from the wrong angle.
Click to expand...
I would argue that you are looking at it from the wrong angle. Jobs create value and wealth and grow the economy. By adding jobs you add wealth in a long term sustainable way. By redistributing wealth or borrowing you are making the economic situation worse in the long run but putting a bandaid on a bleeding wound makes things look great in the short term.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member

You are assuming that the jobs created would be minimum wage.

And yes, people can live on minimum wage, just not single with a car living alone, in a metropolitian city, etc. etc. etc.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
I would argue that you are looking at it from the wrong angle. Jobs create value and wealth and grow the economy. By adding jobs you add wealth in a long term sustainable way. By redistributing wealth or borrowing you are making the economic situation worse in the long run but putting a bandaid on a bleeding wound makes things look great in the short term.
Click to expand...
How do you pay all these people if you dont redistribute the money? By printing it? My god man THINK!
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Lucky Luke said:
How do you pay all these people if you dont redistribute the money? By printing it? My god man THINK!
Click to expand...
You lower regulation and taxes and create a better market for jobs to be created. The private sector will create the jobs and pay the people voluntarily by expanding businesses, not by having the same money confiscated.

You keep looking at 1/2 of the equation and discount the lack of economic activity on the side you took the money from. Great, the right hand is spending money but the left hand has nothing to spend. So you switch hands and declare an economic success!!

Again, your model shows no value creation, it simply demonstrates currency cycling around. That doesnt grow the economy. You need wealth creation to grow the economy and private business is where wealth creation happens, not through government.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
You lower regulation and taxes and create a better market for jobs to be created. The private sector will create the jobs and pay the people voluntarily by expanding businesses, not by having the same money confiscated.

You keep looking at 1/2 of the equation and discount the lack of economic activity on the side you took the money from. Great, the right hand is spending money but the left hand has nothing to spend. So you switch hands and declare an economic success!!

Again, your model shows no value creation, it simply demonstrates currency cycling around. That doesnt grow the economy. You need wealth creation to grow the economy and private business is where wealth creation happens, not through government.
Click to expand...
You dont get it...where do they get this money if its not already in the economy cycling around redistributing itself like healthy economy does?
Where does it come from?
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Lucky Luke said:
You dont get it...where do they get this money if its not already in the economy cycling around redistributing itself like healthy economy does?
Where does it come from?
Click to expand...
Obama has been trying to generate economic activity for 7 years now by borrowing and injecting money. It isnt his fault it is not working.

We have borrowed 10 trillion dollars. What did all that money do to help the economy? Where is the economic growth? Obama has borrowed and spent more money than all the previous presidents combined and what has it gotten us?

When Regan took office he cut regulation and taxes and job growth exploded. He wasnt the first one. Kennedy caused major economic activity by cutting taxes as well.

We need jobs in this economy. More jobs = growth = increased economic activity through added value and circulation.

Everything Obama is proposing and Clinton by extension makes jobs more expensive and thus more scarce. Who cares what the minimum wage is if there are no jobs at minimum wage?

Dont we all want the same thing? Jobs for anyone who wants one, a rapidly expanding economy and wealth generation?
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
Obama has been trying to generate economic activity for 7 years now by borrowing and injecting money. It isnt his fault it is not working.

We have borrowed 10 trillion dollars. What did all that money do to help the economy? Where is the economic growth? Obama has borrowed and spent more money than all the previous presidents combined and what has it gotten us?

When Regan took office he cut regulation and taxes and job growth exploded. He wasnt the first one. Kennedy caused major economic activity by cutting taxes as well.

We need jobs in this economy. More jobs = growth = increased economic activity through added value and circulation.

Everything Obama is proposing and Clinton by extension makes jobs more expensive and thus more scarce. Who cares what the minimum wage is if there are no jobs at minimum wage?

Dont we all want the same thing? Jobs for anyone who wants one, a rapidly expanding economy and wealth generation?
Click to expand...
So you dont know where the money will be coming from for your fictitious new economy?
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
The money is already there... There is trillions parked offshore waiting for an opportunity to return to America. The money is circulating as we speak. No additional injection needed.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
Why would the vast amount of people be broke if they had jobs?

Our unemployment rate is somewhere near 20%

Jobs create value and grow the economy. Redistribution does not.

Obama spent more than all the other presidents combined and it didnt do shit for the economy.

Again, you cant take money from one pocket, put it in another pocket and claim it is income.
Click to expand...
Because minimum wage dont pay the bills and fuck you on your 20% unemployment figure
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
Because minimum wage dont pay the bills and fuck you on your 20% unemployment figure
Click to expand...
If they lowered minimum wage would you end up getting a cut in pay?

Minimum wage is minimum, not a living wage... and check the U6 number if you want to deal in reality. Not the bullshit unemployment number that stops counting people who have given up looking for work. Saying we have 5% unemployment is a total fucking joke.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
The money is already there... There is trillions parked offshore waiting for an opportunity to return to America. The money is circulating as we speak. No additional injection needed.
Click to expand...
How is it circulating if its sitting in a fkn bank vault? Please.......
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
If they lowered minimum wage would you end up getting a cut in pay?

Minimum wage is minimum, not a living wage... and check the U6 number if you want to deal in reality. Not the bullshit unemployment number that stops counting people who have given up looking for work. Saying we have 5% unemployment is a total fucking joke.
Click to expand...
U6 number is No where near 20
And on top of that it's way better than when Bush was in office
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Supply-side economics is a hoax -- for 4 reasons:

1. Supply-side tax cuts create huge budget deficits. The U.S. debt as percentage of GDP jumped to 50 percent by the time Ronald Reagan left office, from 31 percent at the start of 1981. (Now it’s more than 105 percent.)

2. They worsen inequality. The rich are now taking home a bigger percentage of U.S. income and wealth than at any time in the last century. Cutting their taxes now is absurd.

3. They don’t even spur growth. We had faster average annual economic growth in the three decades after World War II, before Reagan’s supply-side tax cuts, than we’ve had since.

4. Nothing trickles down. Since Reagan, the median wage has barely risen, adjusted for inflation. Since George W. Bush’s supply-side tax cuts, median family income has actually declined.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Lucky Luke said:
How is it circulating if its sitting in a fkn bank vault? Please.......
Click to expand...
What money is sitting in a bank vault? There are not several banks located 'Offshore'... LOL!!

Money doesnt grow when it is sitting in a bank vault. Those offshore accounts are invested in the markets, and other ventures.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
What money is sitting in a bank vault? There are not several banks located 'Offshore'... LOL!!

Money doesnt grow when it is sitting in a bank vault. Those offshore accounts are invested in the markets, and other ventures.
Click to expand...
Of cause money grows sitting in a fkn bank vault..its called interest. Please stop arguing you have no idea and are making yourslf look silly.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
The fed has kept interest rates near 0 for the last 8 or so years. No interest...
Click to expand...
Thats for banks borrowing and id be very surprised if thats for deposits.

Either way you can deposit money in any bank in any country you like and get a return. You example was "off shore" at any rate.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Lucky Luke said:
Thats for banks borrowing and id be very surprised if thats for deposits.

Either way you can deposit money in any bank in any country you like and get a return. You example was "off shore" at any rate.
Click to expand...
I did not make any money on my deposits last year. CD rates are miserable. Understand, this is on purpose to punish saving and force spending to 'encourage' the economy as you said.

The FED doesnt know what it is doing and it hasnt worked for a long time and they are out of tools to manipulate the economy.

The solution you are suggesting is simply to add more debt to the economy and it will change things. After 10 trillion dollars and 7 years of that strategy I am more than skeptical that it works.

Money goes to where it can make money. Money does not stay in banks unless that is the only safe place for it.

Going back to my former point, Jobs is the most important thing and creating an atmosphere conducive to creating jobs is what we need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top