Obama wants to raise the minimum wage when we're on the verge of a second recession?

[Dubya]

that's right you guys didn't have all of Congress for a couple of years, now did you? Always someone elses fault, according to you. Everyone spent too much but your guys had a huge hand in that. A huge hand.

Oh, and you can look at this link to see the shortage SS had, dear.
http://www.ssa.gov/finance/2012/Financial Statements.pdf

Bush had both houses of Congress for his first six years. What does any of that have to do with SS? Wasn't Reagan President in 1984 and who was in Congress?

You can't play the blame game with people who know more than you do. You brought up SS being in deficit and I showed you why. Why didn't you bring up the facts yourself?

NOW that is simply a joke!
Did I state that everyone over spent? Ignored that factoid, didn't ya? So who actually made those cuts to SS? I posted the balance sheet to show that SS had to call in an iou this past year from the government which has nothing left due to its high rate of expenditure. And who made that asinine decision to cut it? To sit here and blame only the right is just nothing more than asinine. Until you are willing to admit your side is culpable, you don't have one grain of truth in your little finger.
I sure hope the narcissist mold is destroyed soon as there seems to be alot of it going around.

Bush and the Republicans cut revenue to the government and left the next President with the worst recession since the Great Depression. When you destroy an economy, the federal government has to spend it's way out of that destruction. Now, consider the Obama stimulus! How many times have you heard how much was spent and only about a half a billion was spent. Tax cuts are not spending, so the Republicans after blowing a surplus all of a sudden want to be fiscal conservatives, while cutting revenues. Since SS was in surplus, they chose to cut funding for SS to give a payroll tax cut and stimulate the economy with the extra spending. If you want to find out who controlled Congress at the time, look it up, but figure this out and stop being a clown! When you trash an economy, you are going to have to keep pouring money into it until it recovers. That is the price of trashing the economy and not the price of the cure. If you don't cure it, revenue will stay low and it will take decades to recover to the point of putting the government on budget. In the mean time unemployment will plague the land.

The Republicans also kept the tax cuts for the rich and threatened to stop unemployment benefits if they didn't get their way. The Republican have held our economy hostage since they fucked it up.

 

[Dubya]

Again, DUMB ASSES:
What is the minimum wage OF THE UNEMPLOYED:

ZERO

You can't prove raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, so shut the fuck up, fool!

 

[Gadawg73]

Again, DUMB ASSES:
What is the minimum wage OF THE UNEMPLOYED:

ZERO

You can't prove raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, so shut the fuck up, fool!

You can not prove that raising the minimum wage will raise unemployment.
Because you know it WILL NOT!

You do not give a shit about the unemployed. Everyone agrees that raising the minimumk wage will NOT help the unemployed find work.

 

[Dubya]

Again, DUMB ASSES:
What is the minimum wage OF THE UNEMPLOYED:

ZERO

You can't prove raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, so shut the fuck up, fool!

You can not prove that raising the minimum wage will raise unemployment.
Because you know it WILL NOT!

You do not give a shit about the unemployed. Everyone agrees that raising the minimumk wage will NOT help the unemployed find work.

I don't support the idiots who caused this unemployment and you do. You can lie about not being a Republican, but you have the exact same warped policies.

Work on your double negatives!

 

[Gadawg73]

You can't prove raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, so shut the fuck up, fool!

You can not prove that raising the minimum wage will raise unemployment.
Because you know it WILL NOT!

You do not give a shit about the unemployed. Everyone agrees that raising the minimumk wage will NOT help the unemployed find work.

I don't support the idiots who caused this unemployment and you do. You can lie about not being a Republican, but you have the exact same warped policies.

Work on your double negatives!

High taxes and massive government deficits cause unemployment.
Econ 101.

 

[Dubya]

You can not prove that raising the minimum wage will raise unemployment.
Because you know it WILL NOT!

You do not give a shit about the unemployed. Everyone agrees that raising the minimumk wage will NOT help the unemployed find work.

I don't support the idiots who caused this unemployment and you do. You can lie about not being a Republican, but you have the exact same warped policies.

Work on your double negatives!

High taxes and massive government deficits cause unemployment.
Econ 101.

If the rich didn't get their tax cuts and Republicans used the SEC to do it's job, there wouldn't be deficits and unemployment now. It's your bullshit policies that created the deficit and caused this economic downturn. If those bonds were worth a triple A rating, why are they junk bonds now? What is the job of the SEC?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Well, that would be a little more the poor would have to spend to help stimulate the economy. Sounds good...

No...but see...its good when a rich person has extra money to spend. But put that extra money into the hands of several poorer people to spend and..well, thats bad. See....rich money goes into the US economy. Poor people money goes into the economy of the Planet Nibiru orbitting out in deep space somewhere. See how that works now?

What you people do not realize is there is no magic wand that one simply waves to grant a wish..Higher wages. In the private sector, wages have to be budgeted. In the federal public sector, money is printed.
Of course you ignore the difference.

 

[dblack]

Are you void of thought?

No. i'm just thinking of circumstances you're glossing over.

Let's say you have two people and one goes to a construction job and another to a retail job. The bosses try to get them to work out, but they just can't cut it. Neither are worth their pay, so they are let go.

But if they are worth less, and they are willing to accept less, why aren't they allowed? Why should government dictate that the can't work at a job they want until they are good enough to earn the higher wages?

The next day, the two that were let go apply for the job the other had and they both work out fine. The point is just being bad a one job doesn't mean you are bad at all jobs. If someone sucks at everything, don't you think getting fired all the time will teach them not to suck?

Not really. People get better at a job by doing it, not by collecting unemployment.

So, I've addressed your scenario. I have one for you. Two employees, one is fifty percent more productive, and earns fifty percent more. Let's say the first makes $10/hr, the second makes $15/hr. The state comes along and bumps the minimum wage up to $15/hr. What should happen in that case, in your view?

Should the $10/hr employee be fired because he's not productive enough to warrant $15/hr?

If not, should the second employee also be given a raise (to $20/hr)? If so, doesn't that just cascade through all wages, raising wages for everyone and devaluing the currency? What's the point in that?

Or should the more productive employee just take one for the team and accept the fact that their superior skill/effort is for naught?

 

[JimH52]

The GOP has gotten their wish. With the sequester, we most certainly will head for a second recession. Yup, they have finally crashed the economy. It is too bad they couldn't get it done before Obama was re-elected...so sad.

 

[dblack]

I wouldn't be surprised if the sequester turns out to be one of the best things to happen economy wise.

 

[depotoo]

Bush had both houses of Congress for his first six years. What does any of that have to do with SS? Wasn't Reagan President in 1984 and who was in Congress?

You can't play the blame game with people who know more than you do. You brought up SS being in deficit and I showed you why. Why didn't you bring up the facts yourself?

NOW that is simply a joke!
Did I state that everyone over spent? Ignored that factoid, didn't ya? So who actually made those cuts to SS? I posted the balance sheet to show that SS had to call in an iou this past year from the government which has nothing left due to its high rate of expenditure. And who made that asinine decision to cut it? To sit here and blame only the right is just nothing more than asinine. Until you are willing to admit your side is culpable, you don't have one grain of truth in your little finger.
I sure hope the narcissist mold is destroyed soon as there seems to be alot of it going around.

Bush and the Republicans cut revenue to the government and left the next President with the worst recession since the Great Depression. When you destroy an economy, the federal government has to spend it's way out of that destruction. Now, consider the Obama stimulus! How many times have you heard how much was spent and only about a half a billion was spent. Tax cuts are not spending, so the Republicans after blowing a surplus all of a sudden want to be fiscal conservatives, while cutting revenues. Since SS was in surplus, they chose to cut funding for SS to give a payroll tax cut and stimulate the economy with the extra spending. If you want to find out who controlled Congress at the time, look it up, but figure this out and stop being a clown! When you trash an economy, you are going to have to keep pouring money into it until it recovers. That is the price of trashing the economy and not the price of the cure. If you don't cure it, revenue will stay low and it will take decades to recover to the point of putting the government on budget. In the mean time unemployment will plague the land.

The Republicans also kept the tax cuts for the rich and threatened to stop unemployment benefits if they didn't get their way. The Republican have held our economy hostage since they fucked it up.

you really believe everything you are fed don't you? Sad you can't think and research for yourself. Either that or you wish to spread disinformation. Or you have no true understanding of economics. Some just can't be bothered with actually studying all the details - not just hand picked ones.

 

[Bern80]

Are you void of thought? Let's say you have two people and one goes to a construction job and another to a retail job. The bosses try to get them to work out, but they just can't cut it. Neither are worth their pay, so they are let go. The next day, the two that were let go apply for the job the other had and they both work out fine. The point is just being bad a one job doesn't mean you are bad at all jobs. If someone sucks at everything, don't you think getting fired all the time will teach them not to suck? Unless someone is mentally retarded or has a very bad attitude, they are going to find some job they can do. Retarded people are supported by society to a degree, but a bad attitude is something the person has to change.

None of my questions have anything to do with the employee fulfilling their job duties. Please answer my questions. How will you justify paying to of your employees that are of equal merit that do the same job, different wages? Ho do you morally justify the fact that someone else must earn for themselves plus you that which you think you are owed from them for the most basic of tasks?


P.S. Listen to yourself. You're practically making my argument. All I have to do is substitute a couple of words. "Unless someone sucks at everything don't you think just making minimum wage all the time might teach them to do something that earns more than minimum wage?" The attitude that it's your employers duty to provide you enough to live on is the attitude that has to change.

Listen to yourself and translate that shit into English!

Is there something about the questions you don't understand?

 

[iolo]

If you want to avoid a recession, double the minimum wage fast!

 

[Bern80]

If you want to avoid a recession, double the minimum wage fast!

Yeah because businesses won't react to that at all. Be like nothing happened right?

 

[Bern80]

Are you void of thought?

No. i'm just thinking of circumstances you're glossing over.

Let's say you have two people and one goes to a construction job and another to a retail job. The bosses try to get them to work out, but they just can't cut it. Neither are worth their pay, so they are let go.

But if they are worth less, and they are willing to accept less, why aren't they allowed? Why should government dictate that the can't work at a job they want until they are good enough to earn the higher wages?

The next day, the two that were let go apply for the job the other had and they both work out fine. The point is just being bad a one job doesn't mean you are bad at all jobs. If someone sucks at everything, don't you think getting fired all the time will teach them not to suck?

Not really. People get better at a job by doing it, not by collecting unemployment.

So, I've addressed your scenario. I have one for you. Two employees, one is fifty percent more productive, and earns fifty percent more. Let's say the first makes $10/hr, the second makes $15/hr. The state comes along and bumps the minimum wage up to $15/hr. What should happen in that case, in your view?

I've been asking him questions like this for half a dozen pages and still no answer. Wait your turn

Should the $10/hr employee be fired because he's not productive enough to warrant $15/hr?

If not, should the second employee also be given a raise (to $20/hr)? If so, doesn't that just cascade through all wages, raising wages for everyone and devaluing the currency? What's the point in that?

Or should the more productive employee just take one for the team and accept the fact that their superior skill/effort is for naught?

I've been asking him questions like this for half a dozen pages without any answers. Don't hold your breath.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If you want to avoid a recession, double the minimum wage fast!

And the money to pay these wages comes from where?

 

[Ame®icano]

I red first 4 pages and since things started repeating I'll just skip to the rest and give my opinion.

Maybe a year ago I stated on this forum, minimum wage should be a zero. Yeah, ZERO.

Why? Here is why: Min. wage increase always reduce number of jobs and increase unemployment, especially among young and unskilled. Raising min. wage also increase control over the access to available jobs.

I've never seen min. wage to be applied to high skilled jobs and it will never be. It's always set for the "introductory level" jobs, or trainees and it never stays at that level. Those tho are worth keeping get promoted and higher wage, those who are not productive are let go. If you understand this part, then you will most likely agree that what sets the wage is simply - marketplace. If there is demand for one kind of job, wage for that kind of labor will go up. If is too expensive to pay for worker's wage, worker will either lose the job or get lower wage.
If you involve government and artificially enforce higher pay, what will happen? Your work become more expensive for the employer, and if is not high demanding job (that is as I said above never paid low), you're most likely lose it.

Someone said that some states have higher min. wage then federal. If you look for those states you'll also find out that in those states the market sets pay at a higher wage than the laws demand. If your work is not worth how much government (or union) demand to pay for it, you become burden for the employer, simple as that.

Min. wage is subsidy to young, inexperienced, or unskilled workers that gov't levied on small businesses, just like the tax increase and every time gov't increase min. wage, unemployment rise as well. There could be short term benefit to those who get pay increase, but it wont last or it will last as long the employer find the solution to make up for the loses.

M2c.

Minimum wage applies to all jobs, even high skill jobs. Having minimum wage too low is a subsidy to the business allowed to get away with it and requires social programs to make up the difference.

Yet I would like to see high skilled to accept minimum wage.

Oh, do you know what subsidy is?

 

[Ame®icano]

Again you are dodging. This is about YOUR position that peole should earn LIVING wages. Thus the questions I've posed.

How do you morally justify paying two employees of equal merit the different wages your position would require?

How is it moral to insist that you are entitled to that which someone else must first earn in order to provide it to you?

Have you really looked at how much a person would need to survive? Are you sure the min wage isn't already there?

What the fuck are you talking about, fool? If the person can't do the job, then the business shouldn't hire them. The business isn't running a charity and it needs that labor to be in business.

Hmm... so, if a worker can't do a job well enough to warrant your proposed minimum wage, they should not be allowed to work?

They should be fired.

 

[Ame®icano]

Again, DUMB ASSES:
What is the minimum wage OF THE UNEMPLOYED:

ZERO

You can't prove raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, so shut the fuck up, fool!

But it does.

I explained HERE

 

[Gadawg73]

The GOP has gotten their wish. With the sequester, we most certainly will head for a second recession. Yup, they have finally crashed the economy. It is too bad they couldn't get it done before Obama was re-elected...so sad.

You have it backwards.
The sequester is exactly what the Democrats want so they can blame the Republicans once again.
Maximum pain for political gain is their plan.
The Democrats have plastered the airwaves with scare tactics for political gain only.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
They ran an ad that the Federal Drug Investigation Agency would lose many jobs and it would eliminate many jobs. They forgot to mention they are liars as this agency was closed years ago. Fraud is what the Democrats are doing.
All they have to do is make some cuts to waste and fraud in this overbloated government.
GAO released a study that many union workers do nothing all day as a Federal employee other than union business, over 100 million dollars over the last 10 years.
And why not have a freeze on Federal hiring in management?
And force government workers to work 4 hours EXTRA every week for the same pay or lose their job?
That would save TEN % OF THE SALARIES PAID.
Where are the Obama cuts? Where are they?