$15 minimum wage would destroy 1.4 Million jobs

[hadit]

Then no lawyer has ever attempted to take it to court, no company has ever tried to get it overturned. That should tell you that you're chasing imaginary things. Give it up, you're wrong. Better yet, since you're so doggedly convinced, get a lawyer and take it to court yourself. Surely you have right on your side, correct?

Not true at all under our form of Capitalism where rich guys can simply and merely afford enough justice to file scores of frivolous suits only to them dismissed for having nothing but "legal fallacy".

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with you believing so strongly that the law is not being applied equally. If you really believed it wasn't and that you were right, you should be able to walk into court and come out with a favorable ruling with no problem. Why don't you? You don't because you know that you're making it all up in your head and you WISH it were that way, but it's just not that way.

Because I am not rich or I would have simply hired an attorney to initiate a class action. Capitalism can be wonderful when one has enough capital.

I expect to win any ruling regarding this concept. I have already won all of the arguments on political forums.

No, you haven't. All you have managed to do is state your fantasy, then repeat your fantasy ad nauseum. Truly, it is to hurl. You have failed to explain how UC being means tested is unequal protection of the law while qualifying for Medicaid is not. You have failed to find one legal scholar who has expressed an opinion supporting your fantasy. You have failed to acknowledge how UC would have to fundamentally change in order to cover everyone under the sun who has not and will not hold a job. You can't articulate how changing UC to do what you want would not simply be creating another massive welfare program. You pretend that human nature no longer applies and miraculously people will go to school and back to work instead of doing nothing and living off $28/hr. In short, you have won nothing except in your own mind.

And the pigeon goes around the board again.

 

[hadit]

I expect to win any ruling regarding this concept.

Because you're a useless stoner.

Not at all. Merely because you only have fallacy not any valid arguments.

Besides, only right wingers believe that . Why do you believe someone who has recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would not do anything other than be a "useless", positive multiplier engendering stoner? I think anyone would want to try to do something since they would have an income to do it with. You don't have any convincing arguments as to why someone on unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would not want to go to school or learn a skill that would be more capitally rewarding than simply be poor but not in poverty on unemployment.

Human nature. Why would anyone spend money to go to school then take a job at $20/hr and have to provide his own benefits when he can do nothing for the rest of his life and collect $28/hr in salary and benefits and have it seasonally adjusted upward?

 

[hadit]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

We've never doubled it overnight and effected 50% of the work force, which is what you want to do.

 

[Supposn]

Whining Toddsterpatriot I believe the election of Donald Trump was an unfortunate anomaly. He received the majority of votes within critical states.
Until a democracy is no longer a democracy, the voters’ can remedy their prior poor judgement.
Democratic republics are fragile; they’re dependent upon their voting citizens’ better judgements. The voters’ remedied their errors and Donald Trump was not re-elected.

You disagree with my contending the majority of U.S. voters have always been in favor of the federal minimum wage laws and they're now favoring that minimum rate’s purchasing power be gradually increased to a proportionally greater extent and thereafter annually retained.
If we’re both correct, the stability of our nation’s type of government, our democratic republic is very much more endangered. I believe it's you and those agreeing with you that are very wrong, and the majority opinions of our nation’s citizens and voters are more correct regarding this matter.
Respectfully, Supposn

Where did the CBO say the “Raise the Rate” bill is "an act that would be an improvement of our nation’s economic and social wellbeing"?
Give a specific link where they said that.

Whining ToddsterPatriot, you apparently don’t understand the English language.
Your request for a link should be addressed to someone that attributes that statement to the Congressional Budget Office.
As I explained within many posted responses, I’m not that person.
Respectfully, Supposn

 

[danielpalos]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

 

[danielpalos]

Then no lawyer has ever attempted to take it to court, no company has ever tried to get it overturned. That should tell you that you're chasing imaginary things. Give it up, you're wrong. Better yet, since you're so doggedly convinced, get a lawyer and take it to court yourself. Surely you have right on your side, correct?

Not true at all under our form of Capitalism where rich guys can simply and merely afford enough justice to file scores of frivolous suits only to them dismissed for having nothing but "legal fallacy".

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with you believing so strongly that the law is not being applied equally. If you really believed it wasn't and that you were right, you should be able to walk into court and come out with a favorable ruling with no problem. Why don't you? You don't because you know that you're making it all up in your head and you WISH it were that way, but it's just not that way.

Because I am not rich or I would have simply hired an attorney to initiate a class action. Capitalism can be wonderful when one has enough capital.

I expect to win any ruling regarding this concept. I have already won all of the arguments on political forums.

No, you haven't. All you have managed to do is state your fantasy, then repeat your fantasy ad nauseum. Truly, it is to hurl. You have failed to explain how UC being means tested is unequal protection of the law while qualifying for Medicaid is not. You have failed to find one legal scholar who has expressed an opinion supporting your fantasy. You have failed to acknowledge how UC would have to fundamentally change in order to cover everyone under the sun who has not and will not hold a job. You can't articulate how changing UC to do what you want would not simply be creating another massive welfare program. You pretend that human nature no longer applies and miraculously people will go to school and back to work instead of doing nothing and living off $28/hr. In short, you have won nothing except in your own mind.

And the pigeon goes around the board again.

That is just You claiming what you do. You can't explain how any State or Agency of a State can enact any laws or rules which have the effect of denying or disparaging equal protection of the laws. The law is employment at the Will of Either party not just one party for any benefits administered by the State for the general welfare.

 

[Wyatt earp]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

 

[danielpalos]

I expect to win any ruling regarding this concept.

Because you're a useless stoner.

Not at all. Merely because you only have fallacy not any valid arguments.

Besides, only right wingers believe that . Why do you believe someone who has recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would not do anything other than be a "useless", positive multiplier engendering stoner? I think anyone would want to try to do something since they would have an income to do it with. You don't have any convincing arguments as to why someone on unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would not want to go to school or learn a skill that would be more capitally rewarding than simply be poor but not in poverty on unemployment.

Human nature. Why would anyone spend money to go to school then take a job at $20/hr and have to provide his own benefits when he can do nothing for the rest of his life and collect $28/hr in salary and benefits and have it seasonally adjusted upward?

It is just right wing nature to simply make up their propaganda and rhetoric and insist they must be Right simply because they are on the right wing. How did you reach your conclusion regarding the numbers you manufactured from right wing fantasy?

 

[danielpalos]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

We've never doubled it overnight and effected 50% of the work force, which is what you want to do.

Means nothing to true capitalists who must seek a profit regardless.

 

[danielpalos]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

Fast food workers make a minimum of $20 hourly in Denmark, while in the US, their average hourly wage is $8.90, according to the Times report.

The Big Mac costs about $4.80 in the US and $5.60 in Denmark, according to the Times report.

Denmark McDonald's Workers Get Paid Vastly Higher Wages

McDonald's has warned that wage increases in the U.S. would force franchisees to raise menu prices.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Wyatt earp]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

No shit sherlock but your weekly budget will go up 20% for people making $15 an hour

 

[hadit]

Then no lawyer has ever attempted to take it to court, no company has ever tried to get it overturned. That should tell you that you're chasing imaginary things. Give it up, you're wrong. Better yet, since you're so doggedly convinced, get a lawyer and take it to court yourself. Surely you have right on your side, correct?

Not true at all under our form of Capitalism where rich guys can simply and merely afford enough justice to file scores of frivolous suits only to them dismissed for having nothing but "legal fallacy".

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with you believing so strongly that the law is not being applied equally. If you really believed it wasn't and that you were right, you should be able to walk into court and come out with a favorable ruling with no problem. Why don't you? You don't because you know that you're making it all up in your head and you WISH it were that way, but it's just not that way.

Because I am not rich or I would have simply hired an attorney to initiate a class action. Capitalism can be wonderful when one has enough capital.

I expect to win any ruling regarding this concept. I have already won all of the arguments on political forums.

No, you haven't. All you have managed to do is state your fantasy, then repeat your fantasy ad nauseum. Truly, it is to hurl. You have failed to explain how UC being means tested is unequal protection of the law while qualifying for Medicaid is not. You have failed to find one legal scholar who has expressed an opinion supporting your fantasy. You have failed to acknowledge how UC would have to fundamentally change in order to cover everyone under the sun who has not and will not hold a job. You can't articulate how changing UC to do what you want would not simply be creating another massive welfare program. You pretend that human nature no longer applies and miraculously people will go to school and back to work instead of doing nothing and living off $28/hr. In short, you have won nothing except in your own mind.

And the pigeon goes around the board again.

That is just You claiming what you do. You can't explain how any State or Agency of a State can enact any laws or rules which have the effect of denying or disparaging equal protection of the laws. The law is employment at the Will of Either party not just one party for any benefits administered by the State for the general welfare.

Yes I absolutely can do that, and I have many times. I have pointed out to you multiple examples of laws that do not apply equally to all people because they are specifically written to apply only to a subset of people. You have completely ignored those examples and pretend they do not exist because you cannot counter them.

Means tested laws exist everywhere. I cannot legally be on a sidewalk if I am sitting in a car, but everyone else who is walking can be. I cannot collect Social Security if I am too young while everyone else who is old enough can. Under your standard, these are unequal protection of the law. In fact, you ARE unequally applying the law because you want only ONE law to be expanded to cover those it expressly does not while you want all the other ones to remain exclusive, as they current are.

You really didn't think this through very well, did you?

 

[danielpalos]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

No shit sherlock but your weekly budget will go up 20% for people making $15 an hour

Shouldn't be a problem for labor whose income went up by 100%

 

[danielpalos]

Then no lawyer has ever attempted to take it to court, no company has ever tried to get it overturned. That should tell you that you're chasing imaginary things. Give it up, you're wrong. Better yet, since you're so doggedly convinced, get a lawyer and take it to court yourself. Surely you have right on your side, correct?

Not true at all under our form of Capitalism where rich guys can simply and merely afford enough justice to file scores of frivolous suits only to them dismissed for having nothing but "legal fallacy".

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with you believing so strongly that the law is not being applied equally. If you really believed it wasn't and that you were right, you should be able to walk into court and come out with a favorable ruling with no problem. Why don't you? You don't because you know that you're making it all up in your head and you WISH it were that way, but it's just not that way.

Because I am not rich or I would have simply hired an attorney to initiate a class action. Capitalism can be wonderful when one has enough capital.

I expect to win any ruling regarding this concept. I have already won all of the arguments on political forums.

No, you haven't. All you have managed to do is state your fantasy, then repeat your fantasy ad nauseum. Truly, it is to hurl. You have failed to explain how UC being means tested is unequal protection of the law while qualifying for Medicaid is not. You have failed to find one legal scholar who has expressed an opinion supporting your fantasy. You have failed to acknowledge how UC would have to fundamentally change in order to cover everyone under the sun who has not and will not hold a job. You can't articulate how changing UC to do what you want would not simply be creating another massive welfare program. You pretend that human nature no longer applies and miraculously people will go to school and back to work instead of doing nothing and living off $28/hr. In short, you have won nothing except in your own mind.

And the pigeon goes around the board again.

That is just You claiming what you do. You can't explain how any State or Agency of a State can enact any laws or rules which have the effect of denying or disparaging equal protection of the laws. The law is employment at the Will of Either party not just one party for any benefits administered by the State for the general welfare.

Yes I absolutely can do that, and I have many times. I have pointed out to you multiple examples of laws that do not apply equally to all people because they are specifically written to apply only to a subset of people. You have completely ignored those examples and pretend they do not exist because you cannot counter them.

Means tested laws exist everywhere. I cannot legally be on a sidewalk if I am sitting in a car, but everyone else who is walking can be. I cannot collect Social Security if I am too young while everyone else who is old enough can. Under your standard, these are unequal protection of the law. In fact, you ARE unequally applying the law because you want only ONE law to be expanded to cover those it expressly does not while you want all the other ones to remain exclusive, as they current are.

You really didn't think this through very well, did you?

means nothing since you only have false analogies but believe you must be Right simply because you are on the right wing.

Employment at the will of either party means no State or Agency of a State can deny or disparage that right for any benefits administered by the State.

 

[Wyatt earp]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

No shit sherlock but your weekly budget will go up 20% for people making $15 an hour

Shouldn't be a problem for labor whose income went up by 100%

We already established they will lose hours

 

[danielpalos]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

No shit sherlock but your weekly budget will go up 20% for people making $15 an hour

Shouldn't be a problem for labor whose income went up by 100%

We already established they will lose hours

There is no law requiring it. Those employers can simply pass on costs to their consumers to remain profitable.

 

[Wyatt earp]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

No shit sherlock but your weekly budget will go up 20% for people making $15 an hour

Shouldn't be a problem for labor whose income went up by 100%

We already established they will lose hours

There is no law requiring it. Those employers can simply pass on costs to their consumers to remain profitable.

So you want me to pay more, and why?

 

[danielpalos]

While the arguments for wage-push inflation are appealing, the empirical evidence is not so solid. In fact, looking back at the history of minimum wage increases has only a very weak association with inflationary pressures on prices in an economy.--https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/does-raising-minimum-wage-increase-inflation.asp

Bwahaha, minimum wage used to be 25 cents an hour.

So what. The minimum wage was not adjusted for around a decade and inflation still happened.

So in your mind inflation wouldn't of happened if we raised minimum wage?

However did you reach that conclusion? I am saying inflation happens anyway. It should not be a problem if wages outpace inflation.

How can minimum wage ever outpace inflation when minimum wage is one of the reasons for inflation?

It helps if you understand micro or macroeconomics. Only a fraction of the labor force makes the minimum wage; thus, even the dollar menu at a fast food place won't double even if the minimum wage does.

No shit sherlock but your weekly budget will go up 20% for people making $15 an hour

Shouldn't be a problem for labor whose income went up by 100%

We already established they will lose hours

There is no law requiring it. Those employers can simply pass on costs to their consumers to remain profitable.

So you want me to pay more, and why?

You pay more anyway, the minimum wage used to be twenty-five cents, remember. Why do you "hate on the Poor"?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Whining Toddsterpatriot I believe the election of Donald Trump was an unfortunate anomaly. He received the majority of votes within critical states.
Until a democracy is no longer a democracy, the voters’ can remedy their prior poor judgement.
Democratic republics are fragile; they’re dependent upon their voting citizens’ better judgements. The voters’ remedied their errors and Donald Trump was not re-elected.

You disagree with my contending the majority of U.S. voters have always been in favor of the federal minimum wage laws and they're now favoring that minimum rate’s purchasing power be gradually increased to a proportionally greater extent and thereafter annually retained.
If we’re both correct, the stability of our nation’s type of government, our democratic republic is very much more endangered. I believe it's you and those agreeing with you that are very wrong, and the majority opinions of our nation’s citizens and voters are more correct regarding this matter.
Respectfully, Supposn

Where did the CBO say the “Raise the Rate” bill is "an act that would be an improvement of our nation’s economic and social wellbeing"?
Give a specific link where they said that.

Whining ToddsterPatriot, you apparently don’t understand the English language.
Your request for a link should be addressed to someone that attributes that statement to the Congressional Budget Office.
As I explained within many posted responses, I’m not that person.
Respectfully, Supposn

You disagree with my contending the majority of U.S. voters have always been in favor of the federal minimum wage laws

I do? Prove it.

you apparently don’t understand the English language.

You apparently believe something with all those negatives is a net positive.
I guess that makes sense, based on your previously displayed weak math skills.

As I explained within many posted responses, I’m not that person.

Right, you're the idiot who believes that all on his own.

 

[Who_Me?]

Instead of bettering one-self to be worthy of higher wages, what we did is legislate incompetence. Pay them $15 an hour for work a blind toddler can do better and quicker than what is out there. Do you think that there will be high inflation and higher unemployment? Great, then we can pay them unemployment.

It is a cost of living adjustment, it really is that simple. It has nothing to do with microeconomics.

An $8.00 cost of living adjustment? Nope.