Be a Supporter!

$9 minimum wage

  • 3,361 Views
  • 183 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 18th, 2013 @ 11:24 PM Reply

At 2/18/13 09:28 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Well, no it doesn't. A) It's insolvent,

It's not.

B) It's immoral.

Like every pension plan.

Hemorrhaging money = efficiency. Right.

It's not, in fact all SSA officials do everyday is make it more efficient. It's why it's only going to be insolvent in 2050 (which is mostly because of improved healthcare).

Even IF there was a SURPLUS of money in the SS fund, it still wouldn't change the fact that it's stolen money.

Buying anything is also stealing. Buying food is stealing because you need food.

Yes. You, or I are not slaves. The government has no right to put a price on my labor, or dictate how much I am worth.

Blah blah blah but apparently unelected business leaders do.

What coverage? The whole "we saved the day" bullshit?

Hardly. It's as though you didn't even watch it yet are judging it.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

Which wasn't with Obama's knowledge. They tried investigating this and they found pretty much nothing tieing Obama to it. This was all done without his knowledge.

Hm..same wars (and even some new ones),

Ahhh the same old bullshit you spew out everytime.

The guy does not have an original political thought in his pea sized brain.

Oh great now he's a moron. If he has a pea sized brain you have a brain the size of a grain of sand which is unable to process an original coherent thought. So many times have you changed your position, forgotten your position or merely made up a new position and act like you didn't it's getting tiring to talk to you. Obama is smart enough to go to Harvard, Obama is smart enough to get elected Senator, Obama is smart enough to get elected President in a bad economy, you by comparison are a complete imbecile with no understanding of government or economics all the while acting like you're a genius who knows all about it. It reminds me of the ugly douchebags on the internet who spend all day judging pictures of women as though they are a point of authority on beauty.

I have seen MSNBC. And it's full of attacks against republicans and how "evil" they are.

Right. Fox news isn't even that I frequent that channel at least its area's of news coverage and every time there is news coverage it doesn't display any opinion.

MSNBC isn't actual news. It's political commentary like Fox News is.

Yes it is a news station. It's just they put up political pundits on their programming. If you actually watched them you'd know.

Yeah? MSNBC showing lots of anti-Obama protests huh?

Yah in fact they did. They had alot of coverage of the 9/12 protests.

Politics are not a career.

It certainly is.

I didn't say agreeing with him was an issue, I'm saying ignoring his bullshit is.

What are they ignoring?

Everything I have posted is a fact.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Stop throwing around words like "fact" or "prove" because it's quite obvious you don't know what they mean.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 18th, 2013 @ 11:43 PM Reply

At 2/18/13 11:24 PM, Warforger wrote: It's not.

Yeah?

Like every pension plan.

Pension plans are optional, at least where I am. At the very least, it varies from company to company. When dealing with the federal govt. you have no choice, you have no options. The government takers your money, without permission, by force. Immoral.

You can justify it all day long, but you cannot justify why it is manditory.

It's not, in fact all SSA officials do everyday is make it more efficient. It's why it's only going to be insolvent in 2050 (which is mostly because of improved healthcare).

See above.

Buying anything is also stealing. Buying food is stealing because you need food.

No it isn't. It's a voluntary exchange of goods and services. Buying food is not stealing. I'm voluntarily giving my money to someone who is voluntarily selling food items. A grocer is choosing to sell something at a price he sees fit. No one is forced to buy food.

Blah blah blah but apparently unelected business leaders do.

Shouldn't be so. Only YOU should decide how much your labor is worth. Don't you think you should have the right to decide how much you work for?

Hardly. It's as though you didn't even watch it yet are judging it.....

Ah, so MSNBC called Obama a Warmonger finally. Very nice. If only they could jump on the ball with the rest of his bullshit.

Which wasn't with Obama's knowledge. They tried investigating this and they found pretty much nothing tieing Obama to it. This was all done without his knowledge.

How convenient.

Ahhh the same old bullshit you spew out everytime.

Doesn't make it false.

Oh great now he's a moron. If he has a pea sized brain you have a brain the size of a grain of sand which is unable to process an original coherent thought. So many times have you changed your position, forgotten your position or merely made up a new position and act like you didn't it's getting tiring to talk to you. Obama is smart enough to go to Harvard, Obama is smart enough to get elected Senator, Obama is smart enough to get elected President in a bad economy, you by comparison are a complete imbecile with no understanding of government or economics all the while acting like you're a genius who knows all about it. It reminds me of the ugly douchebags on the internet who spend all day judging pictures of women as though they are a point of authority on beauty.

Obama had ENOUGH MONEY to go to Harvard. He had the MONEY to become a Senator (which, by the way, he did nothing during his Senate term). Obama had enough MONEY (and the race card) to be come President. You want a real democrat who care about minorities and helping the poor, etc? Hillary would've been your chick. Obama is a democrat's worst nightmare, as he stands for everything democrats hate (war, corporatism, etc).

Intelligence has nothing to do with politics. By that logic, Geroge Bush must have been a super genius in your eyes! After all, he went to an Ivy League school, and was a governor, and was elected president.

Right. Fox news isn't even that I frequent that channel at least its area's of news coverage and every time there is news coverage it doesn't display any opinion.

What?

It certainly is.

No it isn't. You can't just decide one day "oh hey, I'm just gonna sit on my ass for a living, and tell other people what they should do". Obama has not earned a single dollar in his life. He can't do anything for an average American. He's never had to bus tables. He's never had to wash dishes. He's never had to actually work for what he has. He was given money by political "visionaries" his entire life. He's been groomed for politics since day 1, just like Bush was.

What are they ignoring?

The wars, the guns to terrorists, the debt, his spending, his lack of performing ANY duty of a president. Anything that's negative or portrays him negatively, they ignore. In fact, anyone who even MENTIONS something negative to Obama is "a racist" or "hates women" or a "conspiracy theorist". Cult of personality at it finest (or worst, rather)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Stop throwing around words like "fact" or "prove" because it's quite obvious you don't know what they mean.

Please prove me wrong. I'll gladly concede a point or admit defeat if you can actually prove something.

MOSFET
MOSFET
  • Member since: Apr. 15, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Programmer
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 07:01 AM Reply

Lemon Crush, your supposed fact that the government is stealing from the public sounds more like an opinion. Unfortunately for you, there are many who are willing to buy into such programs like social security. So long as there is collective agreement to keep such programs running, then they will persist regardless how you feel about it.

Feoric
Feoric
  • Member since: Mar. 20, 2004
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 09:03 AM Reply

At 2/18/13 09:17 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Because it doesn't put more money into the middle class. The money they get is spent because the price of goods and services increase.

The rest of my post pointed out why this is incorrect so I don't know why you're just repeating the same thing.

Ceratisa
Ceratisa
  • Member since: Dec. 8, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Gamer
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 09:22 AM Reply

At 2/19/13 07:01 AM, MOSFET wrote: Lemon Crush, your supposed fact that the government is stealing from the public sounds more like an opinion. Unfortunately for you, there are many who are willing to buy into such programs like social security. So long as there is collective agreement to keep such programs running, then they will persist regardless how you feel about it.

Is that really true? Our government takes money out of them to pay for other things then borrows to pay for S.S. that is true of many welfare programs.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 11:43 AM Reply

At 2/19/13 07:01 AM, MOSFET wrote: Lemon Crush, your supposed fact that the government is stealing from the public sounds more like an opinion. Unfortunately for you, there are many who are willing to buy into such programs like social security. So long as there is collective agreement to keep such programs running, then they will persist regardless how you feel about it.

No, it is STEALING. It is taking my money, which I earned by doing a job, without my permission.

It doesn't matter if people are willing to buy into such things, or if all tax money went to saving starving children. It doesn't matter how noble the reason for theft is, it is still theft. If those people want to pay into it, GREAT. Let them. I see no reason why I am FORCED to pay into it, especially when the money is just going to be stolen by some asshole with a conquest boner to kill people with drones and bombs.

STEAL: to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice

With the thousands of dollars STOLEN from my paycheck every year, I could buy food, clothes, gas, hell, even just entertainment stuff like TV's or video games. THAT would keep the economy going, as it keeps money flowing. But no, instead of letting people keep their money, to ACTUALLY stimulate the economy, we'll just give out credit and loans. That way we can build the economy on debt, and then it will collapse. But fuck it, when that happens, I won't be in office anymore.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 11:49 AM Reply

At 2/19/13 09:03 AM, Feoric wrote: The rest of my post pointed out why this is incorrect so I don't know why you're just repeating the same thing.

Dude, you're talking about WAL MART. Of course it wouldn't affect them. They've got the govt on their side, and use slave labor. They can absorb almost any expense or cost.

I'm talking about actual business owners. The ones who don't have the privilege of donating to political campaigns or buying lobbyists. The actual engine of the economy, which are privately owned, small businesses. They will absolutely have to raise prices in order to stay afloat. Or cut hours. Which, surprise, leads to un- or underemployment.

Of course, when you elect leaders who have never actually owned a business, or even worked at one in Obama's case, this is what happens. Once again, proof that the monarchy have no concept of what ACTUAL america is.

MOSFET
MOSFET
  • Member since: Apr. 15, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Programmer
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 02:01 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 11:43 AM, LemonCrush wrote:
At 2/19/13 07:01 AM, MOSFET wrote: Lemon Crush, your supposed fact that the government is stealing from the public sounds more like an opinion. Unfortunately for you, there are many who are willing to buy into such programs like social security. So long as there is collective agreement to keep such programs running, then they will persist regardless how you feel about it.
No, it is STEALING. It is taking my money, which I earned by doing a job, without my permission.

It doesn't matter if people are willing to buy into such things, or if all tax money went to saving starving children. It doesn't matter how noble the reason for theft is, it is still theft. If those people want to pay into it, GREAT. Let them. I see no reason why I am FORCED to pay into it, especially when the money is just going to be stolen by some asshole with a conquest boner to kill people with drones and bombs.

STEAL: to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice

With the thousands of dollars STOLEN from my paycheck every year, I could buy food, clothes, gas, hell, even just entertainment stuff like TV's or video games. THAT would keep the economy going, as it keeps money flowing. But no, instead of letting people keep their money, to ACTUALLY stimulate the economy, we'll just give out credit and loans. That way we can build the economy on debt, and then it will collapse. But fuck it, when that happens, I won't be in office anymore.

You didn't earn that. I'm actually surprised a Libertarian such as yourself feels that your fiat currency has worth to begin with. You paying your taxes actually gives the rest of your money worth. Just imagine, the government would still turn on the spending spigot, but now there's no drain to relieve you of your excess cash. You should be glad that the Government is up to the tiresome chore of spending that money for you (how nice of them).

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 02:29 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 02:01 PM, MOSFET wrote: You didn't earn that. I'm actually surprised a Libertarian such as yourself feels that your fiat currency has worth to begin with. You paying your taxes actually gives the rest of your money worth. Just imagine, the government would still turn on the spending spigot, but now there's no drain to relieve you of your excess cash. You should be glad that the Government is up to the tiresome chore of spending that money for you (how nice of them).

I did earn it. I did a job in exchange for something. That is the definition of earn.

Regardless of if they paid me in pigs, dollars, meals or horseshit, I still earned. I did a job in exchange for something.

Those silver-spoon fucks, did not do anything to give them a right to touch something I earned.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 07:04 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 02:29 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Those silver-spoon fucks, did not do anything to give them a right to touch something I earned.

Roads, police, schools, electricity, national security... Yawn. Saying the same thing over and over to you gets really tiring.

Feoric
Feoric
  • Member since: Mar. 20, 2004
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 08:42 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 11:49 AM, LemonCrush wrote: Dude, you're talking about WAL MART. Of course it wouldn't affect them. They've got the govt on their side, and use slave labor. They can absorb almost any expense or cost.

I'm talking about actual business owners. The ones who don't have the privilege of donating to political campaigns or buying lobbyists. The actual engine of the economy, which are privately owned, small businesses. They will absolutely have to raise prices in order to stay afloat. Or cut hours. Which, surprise, leads to un- or underemployment.

The effect of raising the minimum wage is the same across all economies of scale, it's just that the effect is larger on big companies. The study chose walmart because a) their wages are terrible and b) lots of low income people shop there. The prices for goods and services aren't dictated by nefarious men in black suits, it's set by market forces. Prices will not increase beyond what the market can bear, and the current prices are already locked in at what the economy arbitrates it to be. You've yet to actually demonstrate to any of us that there is a direct link between higher prices and a minimum wage or that minimum wage leads to unemployment. The complete opposite is true.

If a business is profitable, it means that they can increase expenses without changing the price of their product. In any business of any scale, labor is for the most part a small portion of total expenses. If you're able to stay in the green given the state of the current fundamentals, then paying the minimum wage will not change that dynamic. If anything, prices will be higher because of increased demand due to more money being available to spend within millions of households, not because business owners are offsetting the costs of paying for labor. Let's have a look:

1. Labor cost isn't a multiplier on the overall cost of an item, which means that the cost of an item isn't going to increase or decrease proportionally to the cost of labor.

2. The price of an item often has very little to do with the actual cost of an item. Rather cost figures into whether the item will be produced at all. Price is determined by what people are willing to pay for an item. People who were making above the minimum wage to begin with aren't going to be affected as much as the people who depend on it, so they're going to be willing to pay the same as they were before. The people making the current minimum wage are only going to be willing to pay, say, half as much or not at all. However, relative to the economy as a whole. they're a small proportion of the whole market, so they're not going to have much effect on the price of the item. There's no way the small minority of people who will be making the new minimum wage can cause the price to rise enough that it's proportional to their increase in wages.

At 2/18/13 06:44 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: See the problem is that the extra money was created out of nothing and handed out to workers whom did absolutely nothing extra to earn extra income. The injection you speak of is called inflation and it's the death knell to the USA.

M0: The total of all physical currency, plus accounts at the central bank that can be exchanged for physical currency.

M1: M0 + those portions of M0 held as reserves or vault cash + the amount in demand accounts (checking or current accounts).

Unless there is new money created, M0 stays the same. If people with lower income tend to spend rather than save then M1 would decrease. Banks would have less deposits to lead out. This is augmented by the money multiplier since banks can lend out than their reserves.

leanlifter1
leanlifter1
  • Member since: Sep. 30, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 10:29 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 08:42 PM, Feoric wrote:
At 2/18/13 06:44 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: See the problem is that the extra money was created out of nothing and handed out to workers whom did absolutely nothing extra to earn extra income. The injection you speak of is called inflation and it's the death knell to the USA.
M0: The total of all physical currency, plus accounts at the central bank that can be exchanged for physical currency.

M1: M0 + those portions of M0 held as reserves or vault cash + the amount in demand accounts (checking or current accounts).

Unless there is new money created, M0 stays the same. If people with lower income tend to spend rather than save then M1 would decrease. Banks would have less deposits to lead out. This is augmented by the money multiplier since banks can lend out than their reserves.

Why are you trying to beat it around the bush about inflation and the downward spiral of the American economic stability due to inflation. You can try and complicate it all you like but the fact remains that no amount of safety nets can save a completely worthless currency that is created out of debt and sold as a commodity in exchange for interest - interest that can only again come into existence through more loan sales. Once again you are painting a ship and once again the ship you are painting is still sinking.


BBS Signature
Feoric
Feoric
  • Member since: Mar. 20, 2004
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 10:37 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 10:29 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Once again you are painting a ship and once again the ship you are painting is still sinking.

You've been saying that for quite some time, even in the face of significant evidence that what you're saying is flat out wrong and delusional. It's hard to have a conversation with someone who never takes anything in, as I and others have discussed this very topic with you dozens and dozens of times in great detail. You might find people that will agree with you on the zeitgeist movement forums instead of here.

leanlifter1
leanlifter1
  • Member since: Sep. 30, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 19th, 2013 @ 10:49 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 10:37 PM, Feoric wrote:
At 2/19/13 10:29 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Once again you are painting a ship and once again the ship you are painting is still sinking.
You've been saying that for quite some time, even in the face of significant evidence that what you're saying is flat out wrong and delusional. It's hard to have a conversation with someone who never takes anything in, as I and others have discussed this very topic with you dozens and dozens of times in great detail. You might find people that will agree with you on the zeitgeist movement forums instead of here.

See the problem is that you never proved that matters such as "Fractional Reserve Lending", "Inflation", debt based currency are not major issues. Once again you cannot refute the fact that American currency is worthless which probable stands to reason why other countries are dropping American currency and petrodollar like it's hot. You call me delusion but it is you with the problem as you don't even recognize and you blatantly defend the many huge problems that don't add up exist in American money mechanics including fractional reserve lending so lets start right there.


BBS Signature
Feoric
Feoric
  • Member since: Mar. 20, 2004
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 20th, 2013 @ 12:12 AM Reply

At 2/19/13 10:49 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: See the problem is that you never proved that matters such as "Fractional Reserve Lending", "Inflation", debt based currency are not major issues [...] so lets start right there.

That's the problem with you, because you have no god damn idea what the hell you're talking about, ever, and it always results in massive thread derails covering basic econ101 topics. The same ones, oddly enough. We always start "right there" because that's all you ever want to talk about, no matter how wrong you are. I've covered FRL and inflation with you countless times, feel free to check my posting history. Plus the fact that FRL has absolute jack shit to do with this thread. Now I'm going to get back on topic and stop bashing my head into a brick wall.

At 2/15/13 12:23 AM, LemonCrush wrote: Well, no. See, we had the regulation. Jimmy Carter passed it. It was called the "Community Reinvestment Act". It required that everyone should get a house for cheap. Banks couldn't be "greedy" as you put it, because they had to pay fines out the ass.

Well, people were taking out loans on houses, and they couldn't pay them back. This caused foreclosures, and the bubble we're feeling the fallout from.

This is a myth:

"The Commission concludes the CRA was not a significant factor in subprime lending or the crisis. Many subprime lenders were not subject to the CRA. Research indicates only 6% of high-cost loans -- a proxy for subprime loans -- had any connection to the law. Loans made by CRA-regulated lenders in the neighborhoods in which they were required to lend were half as likely to default as similar loans made in the same neighborhoods by independent mortgage originators not subject to the law."

To really understand what happened here, we need to start from the beginning. The CRA is a law that was passed in the late 70's under Carter which was meant to make sure that banks were reinvesting into communities they were receiving deposits from. In a nutshell, the reason for this was because there were serious concerns that banks weren't investing in poorer areas, even though they had banks in those locations. The argument was that this was causing credit shortages in low and mid-income neighborhoods. This fear was compounded with the fact that banks were partaking in a practice which essentially outright refused to loan at all to geographic areas around them.

The CRA does not (and never did) force banks to give out loans they know are bad. It was explicitly stated that the law should be "consistent with the safe and sound operation of the bank." As far as subprime loans go, most of them weren't even subjected to CRA regulations. This was because a lot of loan originators were independent mortgage companies who didn't take deposits and thus didn't have to follow the regulations.

leanlifter1
leanlifter1
  • Member since: Sep. 30, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 20th, 2013 @ 12:27 AM Reply

At 2/20/13 12:12 AM, Feoric wrote:
That's the problem with you, because you have no god damn idea what the hell you're talking about, ever, and it always results in massive thread derails covering basic econ101 topics. The same ones, oddly enough. We always start "right there" because that's all you ever want to talk about, no matter how wrong you are. I've covered FRL and inflation with you countless times, feel free to check my posting history. Plus the fact that FRL has absolute jack shit to do with this thread. Now I'm going to get back on topic and stop bashing my head into a brick wall.

You proved that American money mechanics is fraudulent and you still try and uphold it even though your country is falling apart because of people such as yourself inability to recognize and admit defeat.


BBS Signature
Saen
Saen
  • Member since: Feb. 22, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Reader
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 21st, 2013 @ 10:59 AM Reply

At 2/14/13 04:34 PM, LemonCrush wrote:
That unnecessary. Guess what, if something is too expensive, PEOPLE DON'T BUY IT. That's your price cap. No need for government to implement one, price caps are inherent in basic economics.

If something is too expensive then only the rich or moderately wealthy get to enjoy that luxury. Milk is a food staple for all age demographics, that's why the public voted and put the legislation forward to have a price ceiling on milk.


The govt. regulations are what causes the level of inflation we have in the first place. Cost of living is higher than it needs to be, because the government price fixes or protects price fixing on everything from housing, to gasoline, to food.

Low interest loans for housing would not be available if it were not for federal and state legislation, gasoline would be well over $10/gallon in the U.S. if the government didn't subsidize the cost of refinement.

The television market is one of the few which the Feds set a price floor, that is the lowest you can charge for a good. In this case a price floor is in place to keep domestic companies in the t.v. market, such as Vizio.

fatape
fatape
  • Member since: Apr. 28, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 21st, 2013 @ 06:50 PM Reply

At 2/19/13 11:43 AM, LemonCrush wrote:
At 2/19/13 07:01 AM, MOSFET wrote:
II see no reason why I am FORCED to pay into it, especially when the money is just going to be stolen by some asshole with a conquest boner to kill people with drones and bombs.

The reason you are "forced" too is because without forcing you to the government wouldn't have enough money to run and pay for basic shit like police,roads,prison ect;.

If you want to live free from society you could easily go live in the woods and survive on your own.But as long as you live in society and take advantage of what it provides it's going to demand something from you. Wither it be taxes, labor or something else.

Pre-taxes most people societies would make demands in terms of labor or military service, I doubt you'd think those are much better.


"Work hard, sleep hard, play hard!"

BBS Signature
MOSFET
MOSFET
  • Member since: Apr. 15, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Programmer
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 21st, 2013 @ 07:44 PM Reply

Wouldn't increasing the minimum wage also help balance out our trade deficit? Since minimum wage tends to effect people in retail, It kind of serves as tariff indirectly. At least more money remains here. But then again, It could just be a wash and people would just spend more money on foreign products.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 21st, 2013 @ 10:30 PM Reply

At 2/21/13 07:44 PM, MOSFET wrote: Wouldn't increasing the minimum wage also help balance out our trade deficit? Since minimum wage tends to effect people in retail, It kind of serves as tariff indirectly. At least more money remains here. But then again, It could just be a wash and people would just spend more money on foreign products.

Raising the minimum wage has very little to do with trade defecits and tariffs. Retail, by its very nature, is 100% domestic on the transaction end. Now, if you forced the companies who sell foreign goods to pay their workers more (thus driving up the end prices for foreign goods) then you would have a tariff effect likely.

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 22nd, 2013 @ 01:20 AM Reply

At 2/21/13 07:44 PM, MOSFET wrote: Wouldn't increasing the minimum wage also help balance out our trade deficit? Since minimum wage tends to effect people in retail, It kind of serves as tariff indirectly. At least more money remains here. But then again, It could just be a wash and people would just spend more money on foreign products.

The opposite. Ceteris Paribus raising wages would increase the lose of jobs overseas particularly manufacturing (it's why manufactering is starting to leave China because the wages are lower in other countries). On top of this higher wages means higher inflation, prices abroad haven't changed with this change in wages so we will import more goods as ours are more expensive. That's all theory of course, the real world throws so many complications into the fray but the overall premise is the same.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
Famas
Famas
  • Member since: Nov. 26, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 26th, 2013 @ 06:06 AM Reply

At 2/19/13 11:43 AM, LemonCrush wrote:
No, it is STEALING. It is taking my money, which I earned by doing a job, without my permission.
STEAL: to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice

With the thousands of dollars STOLEN from my paycheck every year, I could buy food, clothes, gas, hell, even just entertainment stuff like TV's or video games. THAT would keep the economy going, as it keeps money flowing. But no, instead of letting people keep their money, to ACTUALLY stimulate the economy, we'll just give out credit and loans. That way we can build the economy on debt, and then it will collapse. But fuck it, when that happens, I won't be in office anymore.

Yeah I have really bad news for you: Taxation is one of Congress' expressed powers. A democratically imposed tax by a federal government that renders services that you use literally every day of your life is pretty much the exact opposite of "wrongfully taking" and therefore does not match the definition of theft you have provided at all.

Nice try breaking out the Merriam Webster, but you should probably try using some of the paychecks you earn to get your eyes fixed so that you can actually read what the hell you're posting.


"R.I.P. Gunther Hermann - 2002-2052

He wanted orange. The world gave him lemon-lime"

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 02:57 AM Reply

At 2/26/13 06:06 AM, Famas wrote: Yeah I have really bad news for you: Taxation is one of Congress' expressed powers. A democratically imposed tax by a federal government that renders services that you use literally every day of your life is pretty much the exact opposite of "wrongfully taking" and therefore does not match the definition of theft you have provided at all.

No, the expressed powers says Congress, must levy taxes for the "general welfare". Things that benefit the nation as a whole. This does not include lining the pockets of Obama's UAW buddies or insurance mogul pals. This does not include blowing up villages and killing civilians in the middle east. This does not include golf trips on Air Force One. This does not include giving money to nations that wish to have us blown off the planet. This does not include subsidies to IHOP or federal benefits for dead govt. employees.

You wanna raise taxes so you can fix roads, improve our military or improve schools? I'm game. What I do not support is my tax dollars going to bankrupt waste-pits and bureaucracies. Hell, the things the government SHOULD be spending money on and fixing, like, say, nuclear waste containers, are over 20 years out of date and are now leaking in Washington State. A large number of bridges in this country are in bad, bad shape. But do those get fixed? No, a bailout for Obama's buddies in the auto industry is more important. Playing warlord is more important. We can't be bothered to make sure people have food in this country. Hell no, we have to go kill kids in Afghanistan!

Don't have enough to feed the hungry, but we sure as hell have enough for CEO's and bombs, huh?

FWIW, there is nothing that says the govt. can tax income. Until, of course, we packed the SCOTUS with a bunch of liberal douchebags and corporatist pawns.

Nice try breaking out the Merriam Webster, but you should probably try using some of the paychecks you earn to get your eyes fixed so that you can actually read what the hell you're posting.

Dictionary > your opinion

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 03:04 AM Reply

At 2/21/13 06:50 PM, fatape wrote:
The reason you are "forced" too is because without forcing you to the government wouldn't have enough money to run and pay for basic shit like police,roads,prison ect;.

They don't use the money for that anyway!

They can't even keep the POST OFFICE solvent. They are not using money for what it's meant for. They're using it on bailouts and bombs.

Feoric
Feoric
  • Member since: Mar. 20, 2004
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 09:36 AM Reply

At 2/27/13 03:04 AM, LemonCrush wrote: They can't even keep the POST OFFICE solvent. They are not using money for what it's meant for. They're using it on bailouts and bombs.

It's amazing how effective starve the beast is. Say, did you know that the USPS is the only federal agency required to prefund its pension plan? Can you give me an example of just one Fortune 500 business which is legally mandated to prefund its pension plan 75 years ahead of time?

Famas
Famas
  • Member since: Nov. 26, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 09:46 AM Reply

At 2/27/13 09:36 AM, Feoric wrote:
At 2/27/13 03:04 AM, LemonCrush wrote: They can't even keep the POST OFFICE solvent. They are not using money for what it's meant for. They're using it on bailouts and bombs.
It's amazing how effective starve the beast is. Say, did you know that the USPS is the only federal agency required to prefund its pension plan? Can you give me an example of just one Fortune 500 business which is legally mandated to prefund its pension plan 75 years ahead of time?

No, because it's specifically designed for the USPS by the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. No Fortune 500 is ever going to pre-load its pensions like that because they ultimately see them as useless money hemorrhages and would sooner see them dissolve completely than do anything to actually strengthen their ability to uphold employee contracts.

It's irrelevant though, because LemonCrush is making it seem as if it's a menial task to keep a federally mandated nation-wide postal service operating with the same efficiency of a privatized delivery service. They already KNOW they can't ever possibly be competitive with UPS/Fed-EX, that's not even the point.


"R.I.P. Gunther Hermann - 2002-2052

He wanted orange. The world gave him lemon-lime"

BBS Signature
Feoric
Feoric
  • Member since: Mar. 20, 2004
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 10:29 AM Reply

At 2/27/13 09:46 AM, Famas wrote: No, because it's specifically designed for the USPS by the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. No Fortune 500 is ever going to pre-load its pensions like that because they ultimately see them as useless money hemorrhages and would sooner see them dissolve completely than do anything to actually strengthen their ability to uphold employee contracts.

Right, exactly. It was a rhetorical question. It's amazing to me how anyone can look at a federal agency with that kind of a weight chained to its ankle and wonder why it can't swim.

It's irrelevant though, because LemonCrush is making it seem as if it's a menial task to keep a federally mandated nation-wide postal service operating with the same efficiency of a privatized delivery service. They already KNOW they can't ever possibly be competitive with UPS/Fed-EX, that's not even the point.

Well, yeah. The Postal Service does not need to turn a profit. Let it run a huge deficit. Who cares, it performs a vital function for the public. The heads of people like LemonCrush explode when they hear this, though.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 01:35 PM Reply

At 2/27/13 09:36 AM, Feoric wrote: It's amazing how effective starve the beast is. Say, did you know that the USPS is the only federal agency required to prefund its pension plan? Can you give me an example of just one Fortune 500 business which is legally mandated to prefund its pension plan 75 years ahead of time?

You're missing the ENTIRE point.

The government is focusing their money on the wrong things. We're worried about making sure corporations are taken care of, investing in failed technologies, and imperialism

Meanwhile, important things, like infrastructure, military, schools, etc. are horribly neglected.

Our military can't even get decent armor and properly functioning weapons. Bridges are collapsing in here. The post office can't even run on Saturdays! Because our presidents for the past couple decades have been focused on doing favors for special and corporate interests, instead of remembering that THEY WORK FOR US. They're more interested in social engineering and forcing their agenda, than SERVING us.

Instead of actually serving the country, they're just interested in playing the game of politics. They have no interest in actually doing what's right for the country. Everything is about winning re-election and having a good public image.

It's beginning to look a lot like 1780's France. Too bad the American public is too retarded to do anything about it.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 01:36 PM Reply

At 2/27/13 09:46 AM, Famas wrote: No, because it's specifically designed for the USPS by the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. No Fortune 500 is ever going to pre-load its pensions like that because they ultimately see them as useless money hemorrhages and would sooner see them dissolve completely than do anything to actually strengthen their ability to uphold employee contracts.

It IS a money hemorrhage. The proof is staring you right in the face.

It's irrelevant though, because LemonCrush is making it seem as if it's a menial task to keep a federally mandated nation-wide postal service operating with the same efficiency of a privatized delivery service. They already KNOW they can't ever possibly be competitive with UPS/Fed-EX, that's not even the point.

The point is, the government is neglecting it's actual responsibilities, so it can meddle in places that it has no business fucking around in.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to $9 minimum wage Feb. 27th, 2013 @ 03:06 PM Reply

At 2/27/13 01:36 PM, LemonCrush wrote: The point is, the government is neglecting it's actual responsibilities, so it can meddle in places that it has no business fucking around in.

So your response is to castrate the government's ability to actually do what it is supposed to? How is that even remotely logical?