Surprise! Leftist Minimum Wage Policy Backfires in Seattle Suburb

earnest_voice

earnest_voice

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
WTF are you even talking about?..pills?..keep my kids?:lol:

EDIT: this fight belongs to me and red, echelon, so stay out of it.
Click to expand...
Mocking the deaths of children is a fight to you?

God damn women (and i use that term loosely) like you are disgustingly shallow and transparent.

Is this a by product of all the mind bending SSRI you take?
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
earnest_voice said:
Mocking the deaths of children is a fight to you?

God damn women (and i use that term loosely) like you are disgustingly shallow and transparent.

Is this a by product of all the mind bending SSRI you take?
Click to expand...
i beg your pardon? red was treated with respect by me until he chose to show his true color.
 
earnest_voice

earnest_voice

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
are you drunk or high or both?

pathetic.

and you know echelon, i'm always in support of you staying here even after you get your ass banned:wall:
Click to expand...
LOL... Your opinions are just awesome. I mean what would i do without the approval of an aging, menopausal woman who's only qualification is failed housewife.

People around here only get banned because they want to be.
 
heckler73

heckler73

Well-Known Member
god1 said:
Re distribution plot: of course it’s skewed. What do you expect would happen if you were to use the mean value? More or less skewing? The data isn’t symmetrical.
Click to expand...

...yah...12 minutes to Wapner...counting cards... I'm an excellent driver... K-Mart sucks.
Bet 1 if Gauss, 2 if Poisson.

As far as incomes go in open-economies under capitalism, the mean will always be greater than the median (ergo, the perceived qualitative skew would be less sans histogram).
It's the degree of separation which is the issue (i.e. GINI).
BTW if the data isn't symmetrical, it makes it difficult to consider income distributions as properly Gaussian (i.e. "normal"), so I'm not sure how that is resolved in your hypothesis. Perhaps we have differences in definition?

Question to you is, would you like to see a long term fix or a diversion? The naked pylon observer won’t cut it. I haven’t searched, but I’d bet; neither you or Buck have found a single creditable[sic] economist who believes a bump in the minimum wage is the long term solution to the income/wealth disparity issue.
Click to expand...

Long-term? What does that mean in this case--5 years, 20 years, more? You know what Keynes said about that, right?
A min. wage increase isn't the only tool required in addressing the inequality issue, so I trust you aren't trying to pigeon-hole the discussion as such.

Here are two sets of economists I can think of, at the moment, who have shown the benefit of minimum wage increases and the fact they don't lead to employment losses:
  1. Card & Krueger (must-read fundamental studies)
  2. Wicks-Lim et al. (more recent)

I already demonstrated how giving everyone a cash injection decreases the inequality (it's elementary math), so one should be able to extrapolate the outcome based on that rationale, coupled with the aforementioned studies from credible economists under a ceteris paribus condition. The following should give you an idea where I stand as far as a most efficacious, short-term tool goes (one of the few times I agree with Uncle Milt):



(Warning: the following has Buckley, Kynes will be excited. Also, it is from 1968, so the values and paradigm are going to be different. But the principle is still valid.)

From another perspective, since the "upper-crust" will go to extreme lengths in order to avoid their fiduciary responsibilities in society (i.e. paying taxes, etc.), the other option is to lift the lower strata by legislation, forcing the upper levels to either "trickle down" or replace the labour with capital (precluding shutdown). The latter case being the driver in my dark hypothesis. It gets tricky trying to balance demand with willingness to pay; however, that is a matter perhaps better reserved for later discussion.

I suppose if you are looking for a Holy Grail of Macroeconomics, you can forget that (despite a book of similar title from Richard Koo, another credible economist). And it would be foolish for anyone to suggest one tool as the great equalizer, as it is equally foolish to suggest private industry gives two shits in regards to the well-being of its labour force, beyond the minimum.
However, every little bit helps; Little steps vs Big shocks.

Ultimately, I would prefer to see a Technocracy, but I suspect I will be dead long before that even becomes an option. As well, considering the direction of "culture", I doubt we'll have the collective intelligence--or critical mass of consciousness--to manage a transition to such a system.
No cognizance, no initiative.
Now if we're talking about colonizing Mars, on the other hand... ;)
 
earnest_voice

earnest_voice

Well-Known Member
So sky, your old mans a cop he leaves you and then cops rock up at your house and you don't know why?

I'm surprised they make 'em this stupid. (not your husband)
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
The only way the USA will become a haven for the middle class again is by creating wealth. I.E. Manufacturing things. A service only economy will only have a huge disparity between social and economic classes due to the minimal amounts of capital sloshing around in a system which is centrally controlled. Those with the closest relationships or with the biggest companies will be the beneficiaries of that money, not the poor and downtrodden. 80% of all government contracts go to large multinational companies, not the little guys.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
i beg your pardon? red was treated with respect by me until he chose to show his true color.
Click to expand...
Don't lie now. Your opinion of me was given to you by your master. You remember, the impotent guy you keep begging to give you some?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top