Minimum Wage Would Be $21.72 If It Kept Pace With Increases In Productivity

[tokeprep]

Our free market is completely manipulated by the banks and financial centers. The fact that 147 companies control 70% of the worlds business is an astounding fact. In a free market, the collusion of banks to manipulate the LIBOR rate to the tune of TRILLIONS of illegal profits seems to pass right over most people's heads. Not one bank has been indicted.

Trillions of illegal profits? You're hilarious, making those numbers up.

More than 20 large banks are currently being investigated or have been named in court cases; billions of dollars in fines have been paid; and government regulatory authorities have seized additional control over interest rate setting mechanisms.

What happened to the $700 Billion in TARP money? No one knows for sure since the FED won't release that information. They are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act, because they are not a government agency.

Ignorance at work again. The Fed had nothing to do with TARP, since the money was authorized for and spent by the treasury, which entered into direct transactions with all of the TARP banks. Indeed, we've discussed this before, and we looked at the report that disclosed exactly where all of the TARP money went. Any suggestion that we have no idea what happened to it is total bullshit--the vast majority of the money has been paid back, and you can easily learn exactly how much money remains outstanding and exactly who has it.

Just making more crap up though, right? Why not?

 

[canndo]

Increasing minimum wage actually decreases spending power by pushing up inflation even harder.

Numbers and such, they're a bitch.

Nice theory, too bad that everywhere it is examined, your premise is incorrect. You supposes that all raises in pay come from paying consumers, you might consider that it is possible that it comes from other sources, like owner's huge take. Look at Walmart for example. The family is worth a hundred billion. They pay their people crap wages, so crap in fact that the community loses what ever it might save shopping at Walmart through taxes that wind up going to support those who work for Walmart through government assistance - PLUS Wallmart demands perks for building their stores like tax breaks and incentives from the community to begin with. So your simplistic notion that a mandatory raise automatically results in inflation is specious at best.

 

[tokeprep]

Food, energy and housing.

Basically everything you need to live on is excluded.

Core CPI includes housing. CPI includes everything. But why not just lie and pretend instead of bothering to look at the truth, right?

 

[tokeprep]

Isn't food excluded from inflation figures anyways?

No. Headline inflation--the rate used to calculate everything that's inflation-adjusted--includes EVERYTHING. This point has been repeated over and over and over again in this forum to the people who keep repeating otherwise, and yet they continue to insist.

The idea that the inflation rate excludes food is a myth based on the fact that the government also publishes an inflation number that excludes food and energy. This is NOT the headline number and it is NOT used for anything.

Look at the CPI web site yourself and you'll immediately see it.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Sorry but healthy foods cost more......

Nice theory, too bad that everywhere it is examined, your premise is incorrect. You supposes that all raises in pay come from paying consumers, you might consider that it is possible that it comes from other sources, like owner's huge take. Look at Walmart for example. The family is worth a hundred billion. They pay their people crap wages, so crap in fact that the community loses what ever it might save shopping at Walmart through taxes that wind up going to support those who work for Walmart through government assistance - PLUS Wallmart demands perks for building their stores like tax breaks and incentives from the community to begin with. So your simplistic notion that a mandatory raise automatically results in inflation is specious at best.

And people think I'm mentally ill. How about people take charge of their own life and realize others aren't required to fix their fuck ups?

 

[Harrekin]

And people think I'm mentally ill. How about people take charge of their own life and realize others aren't required to fix their fuck ups?

Canna-dont thinks employers absorb increases in labour costs out of their bottom line...

He clearly has NEVER owned a business of ANY variety.

 

[Harrekin]

They don't use food or energy in coming up with the CORE CPI. Under the belief that food and energy are too volatile in price.

You hear about Core CPI all the time, especially on the financial channels, not that you would know what that is.

CORE CPI is used for all sorts of things,economists use it way more than any other CPI measure. its a total lie that it is used for nothing, if that were true, why even calculate it? You enjoy lying to people don't you Tokenprepforbankruptcy? The fact that you know nothing might be the reason.

I don't try post serious rebuttals to him anymore, he's a total fuck-wit.

 

[tokeprep]

What? LIBOR rigging was going on for decades, a single medium bank could profit 1 billion by adjusting the rate .25%. 1 bank in 1 year. LIBOR is used on over $380 TRILLION worth of derivatives and other financial instruments. This is not some one time deal for a short period, they were manipulating this for YEARS AND YEARS my uninformed and wholly ignorant associate.

Where are you getting your numbers from? Please show us!

Now tell us, how much revenue is actually generated from that $380 trillion in face value? Do you not know the difference?

I said there were no indictments, and then you say there were fines and court cases. Maybe, but no indictments were made, any fines were handed out with the banks agreeing to not say they were guilty. Any court cases are civil cases. Once again you prove that not only do you not have one iota of a clue, but that you don't even care to look up anything before spewing your shit allover the place.

No indictments yet. I literally just said that investigations are ongoing in more than a dozen countries. If investigations are ongoing, how can there be indictments? Do you not understand what an indictment is? That's the only explanation I can think of.

Any other bloviating full of shit ideas you want to push forth?

The only thing more full of shit than you is a thousand head of cattle on a all bran diet.

you know nothing and have the capacity to know even less.

no one has talked about TARP, you have provided NOTHING at ALL ever, you have never provided anything to back up your ridiculous claims. You are a one note song bird that everyone is tired of listening to. Now go back to your little apartment on the third floor and whine and cry about how stupid you are.

Yes we have. I believe it was in the "IMPOSSIBLE" thread, way back. The discussion was abandoned by the person who started it because I provided exactly the information he asked for; he never responded to it. You were posting at the same time and may have even chimed in, so I'll just roll my eyes at this.

You cannot possibly substantiate your claim that the Fed is keeping TARP a secret or that we have no idea where the money went because it is total bullshit--a pure and vicious lie. If you bothered to read the legislation that created TARP, you would know that.

Here, I'll give you some help: "The purposes of this Act are-- (1) to immediately provide authority and facilities that the Secretary of the Treasury can use to restore liquidity and stability to the financial system of the United States; and...

TITLE I--TROUBLED ASSETS RELIEF PROGRAM SEC. 101. <<NOTE: 12 USC 5211.>>

PURCHASES OF TROUBLED ASSETS. (a) Offices; Authority.-- (1) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to establish the Troubled Asset Relief Program (or ``TARP'') to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, troubled assets from any financial institution, on such terms and conditions as are determined by the Secretary, and in accordance with this Act and the policies and procedures developed and published by the Secretary. (2) Commencement of program.--Establishment of the policies and procedures and other similar administrative requirements imposed on the Secretary by this Act are not intended to delay the commencement of the TARP. (3) Establishment of treasury office.-- (A) In general.--The Secretary shall implement any program under paragraph (1) through an Office of Financial Stability, established for such purpose within the Office of Domestic Finance of the Department of the Treasury, which office shall be headed by an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, except that an interim Assistant Secretary may be appointed by the Secretary."

Here's the last monthly TARP report issued by the treasury, in June 2013: http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/reports/Documents/June 2013 Monthly Report to Congress.pdf. You will find complete details on where the money went as well as a list of every bank that still has TARP money outstanding.

Obviously it is your claim that is baseless, and anyone who read your post and reads this one can plainly see that you had no idea what you were talking about.

 

[tokeprep]

They don't use food or energy in coming up with the CORE CPI. Under the belief that food and energy are too volatile in price.

Core CPI. Core CPI is not headline CPI.

You hear about Core CPI all the time, especially on the financial channels, not that you would know what that is.

When the government reports inflation numbers, it headlines CPI, not core CPI. If you bothered to look at the government's web sites and publications, you would know that.

I watch CNBC all the time, thanks. Their purported interest in core CPI has nothing to do with the fact that the government calculates a headline CPI that includes everything.

CORE CPI is used for all sorts of things,economists use it way more than any other CPI measure. its a total lie that it is used for nothing, if that were true, why even calculate it? You enjoy lying to people don't you Tokenprepforbankruptcy? The fact that you know nothing might be the reason.

Obviously economists use it, that's why they calculate it. That doesn't mean the federal government uses it for things like adjusting benefit payments. If not, why are you trumpeting core CPI? Why are you pretending the government asserts core CPI to be the real inflation rate? The government does no such thing, except in your own head.

 

[tokeprep]

I don't try post serious rebuttals to him anymore, he's a total fuck-wit.

You couldn't possibly rebut me because you never have any evidence to substantiate any of the moronic bullshit you spout. That's why you don't--you've got zilch.

And yet at the same time you tell me that you have no obligation to support the claims you make, you run around this forum demanding that other people prove the claims they make to you. It's hilarious.

 

[tokeprep]

Oh yeah?

Where did treasury get the $700 billion to begin with?

I suppose your going to post a wall of text with the words "Piggy Bank" and "Government Penny Pinchers" in bold oversize letters too eh?

You are a total tool honey.

That's a totally different and completely irrelevant question. Your claim was that the Fed was responsible for TARP and that we could not obtain any information on where the TARP money went because the Fed is not a government agency.

 

[tokeprep]

Did you just contradict yourself? why yes you did.

stop while your ahead already, there is like 1 person on this forum who actually believes anything that you type. Maybe.

Hell we don't even have to spend hours coming up with witty posts as rebuttals like you do, just get you wound up a bit and you will undo all your own arguments in due time.

Its pathetic to watch, but we are a hardcore bunch here.

When you take things out of context, sure. When you put the rest of the first sentence in, obviously I meant the governmentdoesn't use it for things like calculating benefit adjustments.

But I realize you have little grasp of context, so no worries.

 

[tokeprep]

So the source of the money has nothing to do with the money?

Have you taken your meds today?

I suppose next you'll tell me that LIBOR was no big deal and the banks got fined more than they stole.

LIBOR was the biggest scam in the history of financial scams, it absolutely DWARFS any scam ever perpetrated. The amounts of Money stolen from the public at large is simply staggering. what is .25% of $500 Trillion multiplied by 6? Its more than one trillion my mathematically challenged village idiot.

Banks were fined a mere fraction of what they STOLE, only a few billion and you sit there and defend them and apologize for them. What a piece of excrement. Die a bitter old lonely wench, a more deserving fate for someone I never met.

The Fed wasn't the source of the money. Even if it were, that wouldn't mean that the Fed gets to make TARP a huge secret. I literally just posted a report that tells you exactly where all of the TARP money went, who paid it back, and who still has it, so your original claim was total bullshit.

As for LIBOR: I already asked you to substantiate your numbers; I already asked you how much in REVENUE the banks generated from that FACE VALUE. I can do nothing but repeat the same requests.

If we establish a contract to trade $1 billion in cash flows based on LIBOR, the actual amount of cash that could ever trade hands is a tiny fraction of the $1 billion face value of the contract. To multiply an interest rate by the face value of a contract is laughably ridiculous. Where did you get that finance degree again?

 

[NoDrama]

put the rest of the first sentence in, obviously I meant

.....blah blah blah, excuses, excuses. How quickly your one note song changes into a defensive stance just as soon as you get caught makin shit up over and over and over again. Like I said, wind you up and let you crash around for a while, its always the same ending, you argue against your own arguments and start contradicting your earlier arguments. Then when someone brings it up you make some quick excuse like you MEANT something else OBVIOUSLY. Its just you trying to cover your ass so no one finds out that you are just a big fat phoney.

 

[NoDrama]

I already asked you to substantiate your numbers

You did? you did.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/07/23/libor-fraud-may-be-the-mother-of-all-bank-scandals

 

[tokeprep]

.....blah blah blah, excuses, excuses. How quickly your one note song changes into a defensive stance just as soon as you get caught makin shit up over and over and over again. Like I said, wind you up and let you crash around for a while, its always the same ending, you argue against your own arguments and start contradicting your earlier arguments. Then when someone brings it up you make some quick excuse like you MEANT something else OBVIOUSLY. Its just you trying to cover your ass so no one finds out that you are just a big fat phoney.

You're accusing me of contradicting myself by taking my statement out of context. All I did was point out that you sliced most of my sentence off the words you chose to quote, because that part didn't make your point.

The government doesn't use core CPI for anything. Social security and disability benefits? Adjusted with headline CPI. Federal employee retirement benefits? Adjusted with headline CPI. School lunch prices? Adjusted with headline CPI. Food stamps? Adjusted with headline CPI. Income tax brackets? Adjusted with headline CPI. The main inflation number the government reports, highlights, and trumpets? Shockingly, it's headline CPI.

Your argument is that core CPI is used to distort inflation. If it's not used for anything and not highlighted by the government, how is that possible? Oh, right, it's not.

 

[tokeprep]

You did? Quote it, if unable, then go cry.

You quoted it in your reply, actually, but I'll be happy to reproduce it (again) for you:

"Where are you getting your numbers from? Please show us!

Now tell us, how much revenue is actually generated from that $380 trillion in face value? Do you not know the difference?"

 

[NoDrama]

The big mac index has zero to do with inflation. Your own argument says that inflation adjusted the big mac costs less than it did 13 years ago. The big mac index has to do with currency valuations, like a FOREX market that gives the relative value of the currency through a simple method of using the big mac. They aren't even sort of the same thing.

You quoted it in your reply, actually, but I'll be happy to reproduce it (again) for you:

"Where are you getting your numbers from? Please show us!

Now tell us, how much revenue is actually generated from that $380 trillion in face value? Do you not know the difference?"

I edited it you little sniveling simpleton, now go pound sand, or your boyfriend or whatever it is you pound.

 

[NoDrama]

You're accusing me of contradicting myself by taking my statement out of context.

Its not taken out of context. You contradicted yourself, making your argument void and moot. Go pound it.

 

[NoDrama]

If it's not used for anything

There ya go again, contradicting yourself.

Who is the biggest employer of economists?

Man this fact is gonna make your ass prolapse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_employers#2010_Economist

Idiots would have an easier time of not making themselves look like idiots.