What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

[hadit]

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

So basically what you're doing is turning businesses into welfare agencies.

 

[hadit]

There's a rather simple answer to this.

Person A makes $9.50 an hour. Person B makes $14 an hour. Person C makes $25 an hour.

Person A Gross Pay = $380
Person B Gross Pay = $560
Person C Gross Pay = $1000.

Person A will get a $4.50/hour raise, persons B&C will get a $0.00/hour raise while prices double. So more people will be making minimum wage than ever. Nearly 50% of the population actually. I barely know anyone who makes more than $14 an hour...

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A "solution" in which most jobs disappear is not a solution, unless you want to call it a "final solution". Tell us straight, do you honestly think raising the MW to $100/hr tomorrow would eliminate poverty in the US?

 

[danielpalos]

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

And not everyone making less that that receives social services.

that is what social services cost, for rational choice theory purposes, not diversionary anecdote purposes.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

So basically what you're doing is turning businesses into welfare agencies.

nope; simply advocating for fixing more rational Standards for our Union.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

And not everyone making less that that receives social services.

that is what social services cost, for rational choice theory purposes, not diversionary anecdote purposes.

So if people who are making less than 15 an hour aren't receiving social services why do we need to offset the cost with a higher wage

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There's a rather simple answer to this.

Person A makes $9.50 an hour. Person B makes $14 an hour. Person C makes $25 an hour.

Person A Gross Pay = $380
Person B Gross Pay = $560
Person C Gross Pay = $1000.

Person A will get a $4.50/hour raise, persons B&C will get a $0.00/hour raise while prices double. So more people will be making minimum wage than ever. Nearly 50% of the population actually. I barely know anyone who makes more than $14 an hour...

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A more efficient economy can simply compensate unemployed labor for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, through unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

So what if most jobs disappear.

LOL!
Excellent!!!

 

[Skull Pilot]

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

So basically what you're doing is turning businesses into welfare agencies.

nope; simply advocating for fixing more rational Standards for our Union.

no one is stopping you or anyone else from making 15 an hour. It's actually quite easy. Become skilled in an area that pays 15 an hour for labor.
If you want to stuff burgers in a bag for the rest of your life it's your problem

 

[danielpalos]

There's a rather simple answer to this.

Person A makes $9.50 an hour. Person B makes $14 an hour. Person C makes $25 an hour.

Person A Gross Pay = $380
Person B Gross Pay = $560
Person C Gross Pay = $1000.

Person A will get a $4.50/hour raise, persons B&C will get a $0.00/hour raise while prices double. So more people will be making minimum wage than ever. Nearly 50% of the population actually. I barely know anyone who makes more than $14 an hour...

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A "solution" in which most jobs disappear is not a solution, unless you want to call it a "final solution". Tell us straight, do you honestly think raising the MW to $100/hr tomorrow would eliminate poverty in the US?

no, it wont. the left is learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its worth. we still have Capitalism's "natural rate of inefficiency" that can Only be "bailed out" by Socialism's, "true love" for free.

we simply need equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will.

 

[danielpalos]

There's a rather simple answer to this.

Person A makes $9.50 an hour. Person B makes $14 an hour. Person C makes $25 an hour.

Person A Gross Pay = $380
Person B Gross Pay = $560
Person C Gross Pay = $1000.

Person A will get a $4.50/hour raise, persons B&C will get a $0.00/hour raise while prices double. So more people will be making minimum wage than ever. Nearly 50% of the population actually. I barely know anyone who makes more than $14 an hour...

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A more efficient economy can simply compensate unemployed labor for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, through unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

So what if most jobs disappear.

LOL!
Excellent!!!

you make it seem like you could not pursue some hobby or entrepreneurial venture, on unemployment. you could stay poor as long as you want, as long as you don't complain about how rich the rich can get, by solving simple poverty in our republic.

 

[hadit]

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

So basically what you're doing is turning businesses into welfare agencies.

nope; simply advocating for fixing more rational Standards for our Union.

Forcing businesses to pay artificially high wages is giving employees more than they actually earn, ie, welfare.

 

[hadit]

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A "solution" in which most jobs disappear is not a solution, unless you want to call it a "final solution". Tell us straight, do you honestly think raising the MW to $100/hr tomorrow would eliminate poverty in the US?

no, it wont. the left is learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its worth. we still have Capitalism's "natural rate of inefficiency" that can Only be "bailed out" by Socialism's, "true love" for free.

we simply need equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will.

Yes, you can quit at any time for any reason or be fired at any time for any reason. Anything beyond that should require a contract.

 

[Wyatt earp]

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

Lower social services...


.

 

[danielpalos]

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

So basically what you're doing is turning businesses into welfare agencies.

nope; simply advocating for fixing more rational Standards for our Union.

Forcing businesses to pay artificially high wages is giving employees more than they actually earn, ie, welfare.

it is politics, not welfare. and, it is not, artificially high; it is just right wing fantasy, that is all.

wages should compete favorably with the cost of social services.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A "solution" in which most jobs disappear is not a solution, unless you want to call it a "final solution". Tell us straight, do you honestly think raising the MW to $100/hr tomorrow would eliminate poverty in the US?

no, it wont. the left is learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its worth. we still have Capitalism's "natural rate of inefficiency" that can Only be "bailed out" by Socialism's, "true love" for free.

we simply need equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will.

Yes, you can quit at any time for any reason or be fired at any time for any reason. Anything beyond that should require a contract.

yes, you can quit; but try collecting unemployment compensation. edd should have to prove, for-Cause employment to deny benefits.

 

[Wyatt earp]

62% of American workers make $20/hr or less. All of them will demand a raise if the MW is jacked to $15/hr. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think their would be no negative effects from such an event?

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A more efficient economy can simply compensate unemployed labor for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, through unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

So what if most jobs disappear.

LOL!
Excellent!!!

you make it seem like you could not pursue some hobby or entrepreneurial venture, on unemployment. you could stay poor as long as you want, as long as you don't complain about how rich the rich can get, by solving simple poverty in our republic.

Raising the MW will never ever solve poverty...I never know why you dont comprehend that..you are a another one that dont have a clue what wealth is.

If you make MW you will always be poor no mater what the number is .


.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

Lower social services...


.

this is why, no one takes the right seriously about economics.

what you are saying, in effect, is "lower our standard living to lower our costs".

we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage to compete favorable with our First World forms of welfare.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A "solution" in which most jobs disappear is not a solution, unless you want to call it a "final solution". Tell us straight, do you honestly think raising the MW to $100/hr tomorrow would eliminate poverty in the US?

no, it wont. the left is learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its worth. we still have Capitalism's "natural rate of inefficiency" that can Only be "bailed out" by Socialism's, "true love" for free.

we simply need equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will.

Yes, you can quit at any time for any reason or be fired at any time for any reason. Anything beyond that should require a contract.

yes, you can quit; but try collecting unemployment compensation. edd should have to prove, for-Cause employment to deny benefits.

Do what us normal people do get another job first before you quit



.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, our standard of living will go up and we will be privatizing costs not socializing costs.

Baloney. You might as well try to eliminate poverty by raising the MW to $100/hr overnight. We will never do that because it is beyond obvious that most jobs would disappear. Thus, there is a limit beyond which you can't impose an artificial wage increase without negative impact.

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A more efficient economy can simply compensate unemployed labor for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, through unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

So what if most jobs disappear.

LOL!
Excellent!!!

you make it seem like you could not pursue some hobby or entrepreneurial venture, on unemployment. you could stay poor as long as you want, as long as you don't complain about how rich the rich can get, by solving simple poverty in our republic.

Raising the MW will never ever solve poverty...I never know why you dont comprehend that..you are a another one that dont have a clue what wealth is.

If you make MW you will always be poor no mater what the number is .


.

reading comprehension issues as well? it is about a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation that is one dollar an hour less, for rational choice purposes.

 

[danielpalos]

So what if most jobs disappear. The left has a solution not merely a fossil plan from the fossil record, like the right with their insistence on sinking more costs into fossil fuels, instead of advancing fusion (an energy with a future).

A "solution" in which most jobs disappear is not a solution, unless you want to call it a "final solution". Tell us straight, do you honestly think raising the MW to $100/hr tomorrow would eliminate poverty in the US?

no, it wont. the left is learning how to use Capitalism, for all of its worth. we still have Capitalism's "natural rate of inefficiency" that can Only be "bailed out" by Socialism's, "true love" for free.

we simply need equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will.

Yes, you can quit at any time for any reason or be fired at any time for any reason. Anything beyond that should require a contract.

yes, you can quit; but try collecting unemployment compensation. edd should have to prove, for-Cause employment to deny benefits.

Do what us normal people do get another job first before you quit



.

still missing the point; wage slave. try collecting unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed in any at-will employment State.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Arbitrary salary increases will not do that.

All that will happen is that costs across the board will go up while most people's incomes will not thereby resulting in a decrease in purchasing power, less demand for products and services produced by lower paying industries and less demand for those industries means less employment in those industries

it is not arbitrary or capricious, like charity.

A minimum wage that competes favorably with the cost of social services is simply, more rational for rational choice theory purposes.

You assume everyone working for less than 15 an hour is receiving some sort of welfare. That's simply untrue

i am saying social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison, according to some estimates. It is the rationale for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, to induce labor to work instead of apply for social services.

Lower social services...


.

this is why, no one takes the right seriously about economics.

what you are saying, in effect, is "lower our standard living to lower our costs".

we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage to compete favorable with our First World forms of welfare.

No the left has no clue about economics..so tell me did GOD set the social Service rate?


Again for the millionth time 50% of working americans make $15 or less..


Will workers now making $15 an hour then be making $30 an hour? No they mighy get a $3 dollar raise


Its just trickle up poor..


You dont want admit it because you want socialism.


.