Galloping Over The Minimum Wage Myth

[PoliticalChic]

Each day, Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication. Often, he writes in response to an absurdity offered up by a columnist or politician, or an eye-catching factoid misleadingly taken out of context. This guy is da' bomb!

Here's one of his poison darts....


And this one, spotlighting 'government economics,' the minimum wage ....



1. "Program Director, 1010 WINS Radio New York City. Dear Sir or Madam:
You reported during today’s 11:00am hour that citizens of Utah are upset that the number of wild horses now being rounded up by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management is too few to protect the environment. In response, the BLM explains that its budget is too tight to justify spending additional sums to round up more horses.



2. An easy solution is available: politicians can simply declare that additional expenditures on horse round-ups are worthwhile.

3. After all, President Obama teaches us that government can make additional expenditures by businesses on employing low-skilled workers worthwhile simply by raising the minimum wage (that is, by government declaring that all low-skilled workers are now worth whatever wage government declares these workers to be worth).



4. In light of this “Progressive” economics lesson... government can make additional expenditures by the BLM on rounding-up more horses worthwhile simply by declaring that these additional expenditures are worthwhile.
It’s really quite simple!

5. So let’s have no more ‘neigh’-saying by those who deny that government can use incantations to miraculously raise the market values of whatever economic activities government wishes to raise."
Competition, Job One - The New York Sun




Hey, Liberals....how ya' like dem oats?

 

[rightwinger]

WTF?

 

[rdean]

WTF?

It's a round a bout way of saying "Prosperity through lower wages". Part of the GOP Economics plan.

 

[AquaAthena]

Having had many employees over time, I can attest a high percentage of minimum wage earners, are being overpaid.

 

[rightwinger]

Having had many employees over time, I can attest a high percentage of minimum wage earners, are being overpaid.

You made money off of every one of them

 

[Rshermr]

Each day, Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication. Often, he writes in response to an absurdity offered up by a columnist or politician, or an eye-catching factoid misleadingly taken out of context. This guy is da' bomb!

Here's one of his poison darts....


And this one, spotlighting 'government economics,' the minimum wage ....



1. "Program Director, 1010 WINS Radio New York City. Dear Sir or Madam:
You reported during today’s 11:00am hour that citizens of Utah are upset that the number of wild horses now being rounded up by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management is too few to protect the environment. In response, the BLM explains that its budget is too tight to justify spending additional sums to round up more horses.



2. An easy solution is available: politicians can simply declare that additional expenditures on horse round-ups are worthwhile.

3. After all, President Obama teaches us that government can make additional expenditures by businesses on employing low-skilled workers worthwhile simply by raising the minimum wage (that is, by government declaring that all low-skilled workers are now worth whatever wage government declares these workers to be worth).



4. In light of this “Progressive” economics lesson... government can make additional expenditures by the BLM on rounding-up more horses worthwhile simply by declaring that these additional expenditures are worthwhile.
It’s really quite simple!

5. So let’s have no more ‘neigh’-saying by those who deny that government can use incantations to miraculously raise the market values of whatever economic activities government wishes to raise."
Competition, Job One - The New York Sun




Hey, Liberals....how ya' like dem oats?

You are galloping, me poor ignorant con tool?? Nice of you to admit you have cloven hoofs.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Each day, Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication. Often, he writes in response to an absurdity offered up by a columnist or politician, or an eye-catching factoid misleadingly taken out of context. This guy is da' bomb!

Here's one of his poison darts....


And this one, spotlighting 'government economics,' the minimum wage ....



1. "Program Director, 1010 WINS Radio New York City. Dear Sir or Madam:
You reported during today’s 11:00am hour that citizens of Utah are upset that the number of wild horses now being rounded up by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management is too few to protect the environment. In response, the BLM explains that its budget is too tight to justify spending additional sums to round up more horses.



2. An easy solution is available: politicians can simply declare that additional expenditures on horse round-ups are worthwhile.

3. After all, President Obama teaches us that government can make additional expenditures by businesses on employing low-skilled workers worthwhile simply by raising the minimum wage (that is, by government declaring that all low-skilled workers are now worth whatever wage government declares these workers to be worth).



4. In light of this “Progressive” economics lesson... government can make additional expenditures by the BLM on rounding-up more horses worthwhile simply by declaring that these additional expenditures are worthwhile.
It’s really quite simple!

5. So let’s have no more ‘neigh’-saying by those who deny that government can use incantations to miraculously raise the market values of whatever economic activities government wishes to raise."
Competition, Job One - The New York Sun




Hey, Liberals....how ya' like dem oats?

You are galloping, me poor ignorant con tool?? Nice of you to admit you have cloven hoofs.

How gracious of you!

Not everyone would have a picture of their mortal enemy in their avi....you worm.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Having had many employees over time, I can attest a high percentage of minimum wage earners, are being overpaid.

When our pal wingy was gainfully employed, he was paid in beaver pelts.

His understanding of economics is at the same level of his understanding of politics....probably believes that the community organizer is doing a great job with the economy.


What he misses in your post is how minimum wage laws are at odds with value provided.




1. While legislative bodies have the power to order wage increases, they have not as of yet found a way to order commensurate increases in worker productivity that make the worker’s output worth the higher wage.

a. Further, while Congress can legislate the wage at which labor transactions occur, it cannot require that the transaction actually be made, and the worker hired.


2. Employers, of course, are free to make adjustments in their use of labor. Often said adjustments are at the expense of the workers who are most disadvantaged in terms of their marketable skills. They will lose their jobs, or not be hired in the first place.

a. The workers who suffer most are the most marginal, usually youths, and racial minorities, disproportionally represented among low-skilled workers.

b. Not only are the above made less employable by minimum wage laws, but they lose the opportunity to upgrade their skills via on-the-job training.
From “Race & Economics,” by Walter E. Williams, chapter three

 

[rightwinger]

As usual...

Political Chic struggles with those..."This is the same as that" analogies

But she is good for a Friday morning chuckle

 

[jwoodie]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Typically fatuous responses to a serious topic. The question that can never be answered is why not make the minimum wage $100 per hour? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!") Instead, the Knee Jerks continue to pick at the dying carcass of the American economy one bite at a time. OF COURSE increasing the minimum wage increases unemployment: No (nongovernmental) employer will pay someone $15/hr for a job that only produces $10/hr in revenue. All this does is ensure that an ever increasing number of people with marginal skills will rely on government assistance. Why not guarantee an annual income of $100,000 for everyone? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!")

So who is really being ridiculous?

 

[PoliticalChic]

As usual...

Political Chic struggles with those..."This is the same as that" analogies

But she is good for a Friday morning chuckle

Translation: I hit the nail on your head again!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Typically fatuous responses to a serious topic. The question that can never be answered is why not make the minimum wage $100 per hour? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!") Instead, the Knee Jerks continue to pick at the dying carcass of the American economy one bite at a time. OF COURSE increasing the minimum wage increases unemployment: No (nongovernmental) employer will pay someone $15/hr for a job that only produces $10/hr in revenue. All this does is ensure that an ever increasing number of people with marginal skills will rely on government assistance. Why not guarantee an annual income of $100,000 for everyone? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!")

So who is really being ridiculous?

a liberal knows absolutely nothing about economics. In fact he lacks the IQ for it. If you tell him a Rolls Royce sells less than a Chevy because of the higher price he cant really grasp it and certainly cant grasp why employers will hire less at a higher wage or price.

 

[Rshermr]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Typically fatuous responses to a serious topic. The question that can never be answered is why not make the minimum wage $100 per hour? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!") Instead, the Knee Jerks continue to pick at the dying carcass of the American economy one bite at a time. OF COURSE increasing the minimum wage increases unemployment: No (nongovernmental) employer will pay someone $15/hr for a job that only produces $10/hr in revenue. All this does is ensure that an ever increasing number of people with marginal skills will rely on government assistance. Why not guarantee an annual income of $100,000 for everyone? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!")

So who is really being ridiculous?

Got proof, dipshit, or just opinion. You know how much I value your opinion.

 

[Rshermr]

As usual...

Political Chic struggles with those..."This is the same as that" analogies

But she is good for a Friday morning chuckle

Translation: I hit the nail on your head again!

No, me poor ignorant con tool. We know you think you hit the nail on the head. I suspect there is something deeper, relative to head, and Rightwinger. But you are ignorant, me poor con tool. A congenital idiot, of course, is by definition, ignorant. And yes, indeed, you are a congenital idiots.
Con bosses pay pretty much only congenital idiots to post their drivel. Odd.

 

[itfitzme]

Each day, Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication. Often, he writes in response to an absurdity offered up by a columnist or politician, or an eye-catching factoid misleadingly taken out of context. This guy is da' bomb!

Here's one of his poison darts....


And this one, spotlighting 'government economics,' the minimum wage ....



1. "Program Director, 1010 WINS Radio New York City. Dear Sir or Madam:
You reported during today’s 11:00am hour that citizens of Utah are upset that the number of wild horses now being rounded up by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management is too few to protect the environment. In response, the BLM explains that its budget is too tight to justify spending additional sums to round up more horses.



2. An easy solution is available: politicians can simply declare that additional expenditures on horse round-ups are worthwhile.

3. After all, President Obama teaches us that government can make additional expenditures by businesses on employing low-skilled workers worthwhile simply by raising the minimum wage (that is, by government declaring that all low-skilled workers are now worth whatever wage government declares these workers to be worth).



4. In light of this “Progressive” economics lesson... government can make additional expenditures by the BLM on rounding-up more horses worthwhile simply by declaring that these additional expenditures are worthwhile.
It’s really quite simple!

5. So let’s have no more ‘neigh’-saying by those who deny that government can use incantations to miraculously raise the market values of whatever economic activities government wishes to raise."
Competition, Job One - The New York Sun




Hey, Liberals....how ya' like dem oats?

Gibberish!

And I warned you that following this "philosophy" style of resoning was a dead end.

 

[OnePercenter]

Having had many employees over time, I can attest a high percentage of minimum wage earners, are being overpaid.

Since YOU hired them, isn't that YOUR fault?

 

[OnePercenter]

Having had many employees over time, I can attest a high percentage of minimum wage earners, are being overpaid.

When our pal wingy was gainfully employed, he was paid in beaver pelts.

His understanding of economics is at the same level of his understanding of politics....probably believes that the community organizer is doing a great job with the economy.


What he misses in your post is how minimum wage laws are at odds with value provided.




1. While legislative bodies have the power to order wage increases, they have not as of yet found a way to order commensurate increases in worker productivity that make the worker’s output worth the higher wage.

a. Further, while Congress can legislate the wage at which labor transactions occur, it cannot require that the transaction actually be made, and the worker hired.


2. Employers, of course, are free to make adjustments in their use of labor. Often said adjustments are at the expense of the workers who are most disadvantaged in terms of their marketable skills. They will lose their jobs, or not be hired in the first place.

a. The workers who suffer most are the most marginal, usually youths, and racial minorities, disproportionally represented among low-skilled workers.

b. Not only are the above made less employable by minimum wage laws, but they lose the opportunity to upgrade their skills via on-the-job training.
From “Race & Economics,” by Walter E. Williams, chapter three

When employees make you all of your money isn't their value 100%?

 

[OnePercenter]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Typically fatuous responses to a serious topic. The question that can never be answered is why not make the minimum wage $100 per hour? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!") Instead, the Knee Jerks continue to pick at the dying carcass of the American economy one bite at a time. OF COURSE increasing the minimum wage increases unemployment: No (nongovernmental) employer will pay someone $15/hr for a job that only produces $10/hr in revenue. All this does is ensure that an ever increasing number of people with marginal skills will rely on government assistance. Why not guarantee an annual income of $100,000 for everyone? (Typical response: "That would be ridiculous!")

So who is really being ridiculous?

a liberal knows absolutely nothing about economics. In fact he lacks the IQ for it. If you tell him a Rolls Royce sells less than a Chevy because of the higher price he cant really grasp it and certainly cant grasp why employers will hire less at a higher wage or price.

Depends if you take depreciation or a one-time deduction. Then, if the Rolls Royce brings in $100k of additional continued revenue vs the Chevy, how would you factor in the net?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Having had many employees over time, I can attest a high percentage of minimum wage earners, are being overpaid.

When our pal wingy was gainfully employed, he was paid in beaver pelts.

His understanding of economics is at the same level of his understanding of politics....probably believes that the community organizer is doing a great job with the economy.


What he misses in your post is how minimum wage laws are at odds with value provided.




1. While legislative bodies have the power to order wage increases, they have not as of yet found a way to order commensurate increases in worker productivity that make the worker’s output worth the higher wage.

a. Further, while Congress can legislate the wage at which labor transactions occur, it cannot require that the transaction actually be made, and the worker hired.


2. Employers, of course, are free to make adjustments in their use of labor. Often said adjustments are at the expense of the workers who are most disadvantaged in terms of their marketable skills. They will lose their jobs, or not be hired in the first place.

a. The workers who suffer most are the most marginal, usually youths, and racial minorities, disproportionally represented among low-skilled workers.

b. Not only are the above made less employable by minimum wage laws, but they lose the opportunity to upgrade their skills via on-the-job training.
From “Race & Economics,” by Walter E. Williams, chapter three

When employees make you all of your money isn't their value 100%?

Only an imbecile or a Liberal (redundant?) would discount the risk and efforts of the entrepreneur.
Here comes my fav part: ripping morons like you to shreds.

Read and weep:


1. Businessmen, entrepreneurs, are the modern equivalent of the explorers or adventurers of old. They take the chances that move society forward.
Why don’t we have a special holiday for the small business owners, the ones who do most of the hiring in our nation, who don’t have set hours of work, or set salaries, but who put in whatever number of hours is necessary or reinvest their profits to keep the business going…who pay double the Social Security taxes, and their own health benefits…
Not even a postal stamp in their honor?


2. We have a President who encourages the young to avoid the risk that made our nation the envy of the world, and to pursue, instead, a government job.

a. Where is the reward for risk taking? Work in the private sector, where the tax revenues arise to pay for those in secure government work?

“Overall, federal workers earned an average salary of $67,691 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The average pay for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $60,046 in 2008, the most recent data available."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503983_162-20000137-503983.html



3. American capitalism is based on the entrepreneurs who risk their own capital, and produce the supply that causes demand as represented by Says Law of Economics.:

“Many European postal systems, telegraph lines and railroads were built with government money, and sometimes with insufficient capacity. But in the United States, instead of burdening taxpayers, we sell investors the equivalent of high-priced lottery tickets each time one of these technologies arrives.”
In Technology, Supply Precedes Demand - NYTimes.com
Regulation and taxation are impediments to these entrepreneurs.



4. Entrepreneurs of all types rate their well-being higher than any other professional group in America.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/the-self-employed-are-the-happiest/


5. Think it’s because they’re making beaucoup bucks? Wrong. Small business owners make 19% less than government managers.
Salary Search | CareerBuilder.com

a. Comparing Federal and Private Sector Compensation Comparing Federal and Private Sector Compensation - Economics - AEI

b. “WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Nearly half of self-employed Americans (49%) report working more than 44 hours in a typical work week, compared to 39% of American workers overall, 38% in government and in private business, …”
Self-Employed Workers Clock the Most Hours Each Week

c. The average small-business owner earns $44,576 per year. Salary Search | CareerBuilder.com




The work harder, risk more, earn less....yet they are happiest.

Liberals insult them, disparage them, and gripe, gripe, gripe.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As a response to Obama’s “You didn’t build that!” this from the founder of Black Entertainment Television, Robert Johnson, very liberal, very Democrat:

BET founder Robert Johnson on the "FOX News Sunday" program: "Well, I think the president has to recalibrate his message. You don't get people to like you by attacking them or demeaning their success. You know, I grew up in a family of 10 kids, first one to go to college, and I've earned my success. I've earned my right to fly private if I choose to do so.

"And by attacking me it is not going to convince me that I should take a bigger hit because I happen to be wealthy. You know, it is the old -- I think Ted and Fred and I we both sort of take the old Ethel Merman approach to life. I've tried poor and I tried rich and I like rich better. It doesn't mean that I am a bad guy.

"I didn't go in to business to create a public policy success for either party, Republican or Democrat. I went in business to create jobs and opportunity, create opportunity, create value for myself and my investors. And that's what the president should be praising, not demagoguing us simply because Warren Buffet says he pays more than his secretary. He should pay the secretary more and she will pay more." BET's Robert Johnson To Obama: Stop Attacking The Wealthy | RealClearPolitics