Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Philly.com)   Remember all that good will Christie has been building the past couple months? About that   (philly.com) divider line 131
    More: Asinine, good wills, Chris Christie, Earned Income Tax Credit, minimum wages  
•       •       •

6088 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Jan 2013 at 11:04 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



131 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-29 10:28:55 AM  
 
2013-01-29 10:43:34 AM  
He sure likes that veto stamp.
 
2013-01-29 11:12:37 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: 9.6%


S&P Earnings are the highest since 2007.
 
m00
2013-01-29 11:13:13 AM  
"New Jersey is one of 23 states whose minimum wage is $7.25, the same as the federal minimum. An increase to $8.50 would have put New Jersey third highest, behind Washington state and Oregon."


He agreed to raise it by $1 instead of $1.25.Just over three years. I can understand the fear that going from lowest to third highest minimum wage all at once will shock the economy in a bad way.
 
2013-01-29 11:13:33 AM  
He still has an (R) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppression.
 
2013-01-29 11:14:52 AM  
Christie said in his veto message. "We can only build our State's earnings if we foster an environment that lifts up the working poor and struggling small businesses alike."

And we all know that the working poor are best uplifted when we kick them in the teeth, gradually, over 4 years.

/ Or did I miss something there?
 
2013-01-29 11:17:52 AM  
Republicans, even poor Republicans, are greatly in favor of screwing the poor so this doesn't really hurt him at all.
 
2013-01-29 11:18:19 AM  
Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm
 
2013-01-29 11:19:49 AM  
So he provided a counter offer? In a negotiation on policy? And that makes him a villain?

I think we have the problem identified. Any attempts to negotiate like rational human beings is vilified, where pig-headed stubbornness is lauded as heroic.

Negotiations are how adults make decisions.
 
2013-01-29 11:20:18 AM  
weird, I thought republicans were out there talking about they cared about everyone, not just the rich?

"hey, here's a chance to show we care about the working people"
"fark 'um"
 
2013-01-29 11:20:23 AM  
So... instead of $1.25 now, and being raised each year by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), he wants it to be $1.00 over 3 years, not indexed to the CPI.

I'm not seeing any justified outrage over this. Sure, it's not what the Democrats want (which, in fairness, isn't nearly as big as Republican talking heads will likely make it out to be) but his counter-proposal is... *gasp* ... apparently an attempt to be a reasonable conservative? If he was saying "I won't raise the minimum wage at all! Think of all the poor small business owners!" and vetoing this bill, I'd be on board with the "sad day for the middle class" group. But he's on board with raising the minimum wage slowly, methodically, letting businesses have time to adjust to it.

If anything, this response from Christie should get him even more goodwill, not cost him any.

/Oh, and raising the minimum wage isn't going to help the middle class much - it'll help the working poor a great deal, particularly those unlucky souls who are on the cusp of being officially "in poverty" but are just a few thousand dollars a year above that level. But the middle class... this isn't going to help them much.
 
2013-01-29 11:22:34 AM  

skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm


Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?
 
2013-01-29 11:24:23 AM  

Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?


No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way
 
2013-01-29 11:25:05 AM  

skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm


considering how much wages in this country have been gutted... yeah her statement sorta makes sense.

at the same time.. he made a not terribly unreasonable counter offer. don't get your panties in a bind submitter.
 
2013-01-29 11:25:52 AM  
Somehow I don't think this is going to ruin his goodwill.
 
2013-01-29 11:26:55 AM  

SN1987a goes boom: He still has an (R) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppression.


And we're back to seeing a prime example of the level of discourse we're reduced to in this day and age. An "R" next to your name suddenly means you support rape and crushing the middle class. Good to know. Let me try:

He still has an (R)(D) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppressiongodlessness and oppressive government intervention.

See how easy that was? Life if much easier when you mentally box people up in nice little packages, but that isn't how life works. Chris Christie may be a Republican, and it may surprise folks here on Fark, but there is still some sane aspects to the party. Granted the crazy train is running amok and muddying up the water a bit, but to project their crazy on a man just because the letter next to his name is quite unbecoming of you.
 
2013-01-29 11:29:56 AM  

CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way


No, I learned about this yesterday. There's one guy growing apples, and there's only 50 of them, so if a poor person can afford one, the price goes up. Supply is always inelastic, only demand can change. So if we don't keep the poors behind a dollar, we won't get apples. Or bananas. I forget which fruit it was.


/I don't see the big deal about Christie's counteroffer, a modest increase in the minimum wage as opposed to a slightly larger increase? Wake me when it's time to be outraged.
 
2013-01-29 11:30:01 AM  

Techhell: So... instead of $1.25 now, and being raised each year by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), he wants it to be $1.00 over 3 years, not indexed to the CPI.

I'm not seeing any justified outrage over this. Sure, it's not what the Democrats want (which, in fairness, isn't nearly as big as Republican talking heads will likely make it out to be) but his counter-proposal is... *gasp* ... apparently an attempt to be a reasonable conservative? If he was saying "I won't raise the minimum wage at all! Think of all the poor small business owners!" and vetoing this bill, I'd be on board with the "sad day for the middle class" group. But he's on board with raising the minimum wage slowly, methodically, letting businesses have time to adjust to it.

If anything, this response from Christie should get him even more goodwill, not cost him any.

/Oh, and raising the minimum wage isn't going to help the middle class much - it'll help the working poor a great deal, particularly those unlucky souls who are on the cusp of being officially "in poverty" but are just a few thousand dollars a year above that level. But the middle class... this isn't going to help them much.


If he was a republican legislator bargaining I would agree his counter offer is a reasonable one.

But a veto of a legitimately passed bill so he can force his way? Fark that.

And raising the minimum wage DOES help the middle class. They do not live in a separate economy from the poor, and raising the minimum wage helps the economy as a whole.
 
2013-01-29 11:30:36 AM  
Sounds like he offered a reasonable compromise. I might disagree with him, I can't say since I know nothing about the economy of NJ but let's not pretend he's taken a fringe position.
 
2013-01-29 11:30:38 AM  

CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way


careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"
 
2013-01-29 11:31:23 AM  
Did some people think that all the positive things he said about Obama after the storm meant he was suddenly going to stop being a Republican?
 
2013-01-29 11:32:09 AM  
I'm capable of liking chris christie and not liking all or most of his policies (okay, maybe not all).

/booker 2016
//fer gubenor
///or senator
////boy needs to wait for president
//SLASHIES!!!
 
2013-01-29 11:32:37 AM  

Kazan: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

considering how much wages in this country have been gutted... yeah her statement sorta makes sense.

at the same time.. he made a not terribly unreasonable counter offer. don't get your panties in a bind submitter.


There is no one earning minimum wage in NJ who is living either a middle class lifestyle or earning close to the median income for NJ.
 
2013-01-29 11:32:38 AM  

SkittlesAreYum: Somehow I don't think this is going to ruin his goodwill.


The dynamic in NJ between Christie and the state legislature is getting close to being the same dynamic that exists between Obama and the GOP on the federal level.

That obviously means Christie is black.
 
2013-01-29 11:32:45 AM  
Wait a minute, we were nice to him on fark that one time, so doesn't that mean he's required to do what we say from now on?
 
2013-01-29 11:33:03 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

No, I learned about this yesterday. There's one guy growing apples, and there's only 50 of them, so if a poor person can afford one, the price goes up. Supply is always inelastic, only demand can change. So if we don't keep the poors behind a dollar, we won't get apples. Or bananas. I forget which fruit it was.


/I don't see the big deal about Christie's counteroffer, a modest increase in the minimum wage as opposed to a slightly larger increase? Wake me when it's time to be outraged.


No, see, here's how it works. The poor, in your example, think they are entitled to having an apple and should pay for it, and the apple farmer wants to sell his apples, but there's a guy in the middle who takes the apples and throws them all in a ditch, then stomps on them, then says "GOD HATES APPLES"

Or something... I'm behind on my demonizing the opposition straw man arguments.
 
2013-01-29 11:33:14 AM  

epocalypse: I'm capable of liking chris christie and not liking all or most of his policies (okay, maybe not all).

/booker 2016
//fer gubenor
///or senator
////boy needs to wait for president
//SLASHIES!!!


uhoh
 
2013-01-29 11:33:24 AM  

Super Chronic: Did some people think that all the positive things he said about Obama after the storm meant he was suddenly going to stop being a Republican?


It worries me that moderates and independents see him a some sort of compromise king, and either ignore, forgive, or are unaware of some of the more assholeish things he's done.
 
2013-01-29 11:33:35 AM  

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"


Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.
 
2013-01-29 11:34:43 AM  

WMCB: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

No, I learned about this yesterday. There's one guy growing apples, and there's only 50 of them, so if a poor person can afford one, the price goes up. Supply is always inelastic, only demand can change. So if we don't keep the poors behind a dollar, we won't get apples. Or bananas. I forget which fruit it was.


/I don't see the big deal about Christie's counteroffer, a modest increase in the minimum wage as opposed to a slightly larger increase? Wake me when it's time to be outraged.

No, see, here's how it works. The poor, in your example, think they are entitled to having an apple and should pay for it, and the apple farmer wants to sell his apples, but there's a guy in the middle who takes the apples and throws them all in a ditch, then stomps on them, then says "GOD HATES APPLES"

Or something... I'm behind on my demonizing the opposition straw man arguments.


Don't forget about the part where the farmer gets paid not to produce apples for the guy to throw in the ditch. That's important, too.
 
2013-01-29 11:36:03 AM  

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"

Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.


perhaps there isn't a dollar for dollar relationship but there is little reason to believe that an increase in costs do not get born by the end customer at least in part. Of course it all depends on the product and business environment but if it ain't a commodity, you're probably going to see some pass along
 
2013-01-29 11:36:58 AM  

Le Grand Inquisitor: SN1987a goes boom: He still has an (R) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppression.

And we're back to seeing a prime example of the level of discourse we're reduced to in this day and age. An "R" next to your name suddenly means you support rape and crushing the middle class. Good to know. Let me try:

He still has an (R)(D) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppressiongodlessness and oppressive government intervention.

See how easy that was? Life if much easier when you mentally box people up in nice little packages, but that isn't how life works. Chris Christie may be a Republican, and it may surprise folks here on Fark, but there is still some sane aspects to the party. Granted the crazy train is running amok and muddying up the water a bit, but to project their crazy on a man just because the letter next to his name is quite unbecoming of you.


The problem with your example is godlessness isnt a bad thing, and oppressive government intervention is pretty subjective. Rape is always bad, and the worker suppression efforts of the GOP are obvious and well documented.
 
2013-01-29 11:37:16 AM  

Le Grand Inquisitor: SN1987a goes boom: He still has an (R) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppression.

And we're back to seeing a prime example of the level of discourse we're reduced to in this day and age. An "R" next to your name suddenly means you support rape and crushing the middle class. Good to know. Let me try:

He still has an (R)(D) next to his name, so no matter how "good" he may appear to be for a while it still means he aligns himself with the party of rape and worker suppressiongodlessness and oppressive government intervention.

See how easy that was? Life if much easier when you mentally box people up in nice little packages, but that isn't how life works. Chris Christie may be a Republican, and it may surprise folks here on Fark, but there is still some sane aspects to the party. Granted the crazy train is running amok and muddying up the water a bit, but to project their crazy on a man just because the letter next to his name is quite unbecoming of you.


They earned the "rape and worker oppression"labels. They even continued getting money to mr. legitimaterape after finally showing us just how rapey one had to get before they would speak out too.

False comparison is false.

Now tgat doesn't mean there aren't sane pockets left within the GOP but so long as those people continue keeping their dissent mostly off the radar so they don't scare off the whackjobs... well they get what they get.

You will not that in the Democratic party the extremes (both the blue dogs and far leftists) openly speak their opinions with no qualms.

I am sure you will now cherry a couple examples and claim both sides are the same on this.
 
2013-01-29 11:37:19 AM  

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"

Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.


Well either you will eat the entire 5 in cost or you will increase your price between 0 and 4.99 if you arent increasing your price by 5.
 
2013-01-29 11:37:34 AM  

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"

Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.

perhaps there isn't a dollar for dollar relationship but there is little reason to believe that an increase in costs do not get born by the end customer at least in part. Of course it all depends on the product and business environment but if it ain't a commodity, you're probably going to see some pass along


Probably, but I guess that's the price of living in a society. They would be even cheaper if they were made by slaves.
 
2013-01-29 11:37:55 AM  
Looking for the outrage.

/still looking
 
2013-01-29 11:38:48 AM  
Cherry-pick, that is.
 
2013-01-29 11:39:27 AM  

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"

Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.

perhaps there isn't a dollar for dollar relationship but there is little reason to believe that an increase in costs do not get born by the end customer at least in part. Of course it all depends on the product and business environment but if it ain't a commodity, you're probably going to see some pass along

Probably, but I guess that's the price of living in a society. They would be even cheaper if they were made by slaves.


oh cmon now dude
 
2013-01-29 11:39:48 AM  
If the GOP were not intent on dismantling private unions the need for minimum wages would be moot. Why is it that the free market is the best form of capitalism except when the workers want to sell their skills.
 
2013-01-29 11:40:02 AM  
Chris Christie is fat
/first?
 
2013-01-29 11:40:43 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

No, I learned about this yesterday. There's one guy growing apples, and there's only 50 of them, so if a poor person can afford one, the price goes up. Supply is always inelastic, only demand can change. So if we don't keep the poors behind a dollar, we won't get apples. Or bananas. I forget which fruit it was.


/I don't see the big deal about Christie's counteroffer, a modest increase in the minimum wage as opposed to a slightly larger increase? Wake me when it's time to be outraged.


The question to ask/be concerned about is that with the smaller increase and a 3 year phase in time, will inflation outstrip the potential actual gains to be had from the increase in minimum wage, leaving the workers in the same position they were before the "increase"?
 
2013-01-29 11:40:48 AM  

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"

Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.

perhaps there isn't a dollar for dollar relationship but there is little reason to believe that an increase in costs do not get born by the end customer at least in part. Of course it all depends on the product and business environment but if it ain't a commodity, you're probably going to see some pass along

Probably, but I guess that's the price of living in a society. They would be even cheaper if they were made by slaves.

oh cmon now dude


Did I lib too hard there? :/
 
2013-01-29 11:42:10 AM  

Citrate1007: If the GOP were not intent on dismantling private unions the need for minimum wages would be moot. Why is it that the free market is the best form of capitalism except when the workers want to sell their skills.


Because if poor people spend money to affect their world it is always bad, much like when poor people vote in their own best interest.
 
2013-01-29 11:43:53 AM  

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way

careful, penny. You're treading dangerously close to the "Simple economic principles of supply, demand and equilibrium pricing apply when pricing goods but those exact same principles don't apply when hiring labor"

Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that "if our labor costs increase $5, we will increaase our prices $5" is a myth.

perhaps there isn't a dollar for dollar relationship but there is little reason to believe that an increase in costs do not get born by the end customer at least in part. Of course it all depends on the product and business environment but if it ain't a commodity, you're probably going to see some pass along

Probably, but I guess that's the price of living in a society. They would be even cheaper if they were made by slaves.

oh cmon now dude

Did I lib too hard there? :/


I don't usually go for the stereotype of liberal-as-hand-wringing-histronic-ninny but in this case, yeah ;)
 
2013-01-29 11:44:31 AM  

CPennypacker: Giltric: skullkrusher: Christie called the legislative approach "lopsided," while Sen. Barbara Buono, a Democratic candidate for governor, described Christie's action as "not shocking, it's expected, but it's a sad day for the middle class."

hmm

Yeah.... that means wealthy is around 45k a year in income or something.
Would't the middle class be paying more for goods if the dollar is worth less because low skilled or unskilled labor just got a dollar an hour raise?

Or are businesses supposed to eat the increase in the cost of doing business and not pass it on to consumers?

No, not necessarily, because prices don't work that way


Right! It is well known that the cost of a product has absolutely no bearing on the price of a product.

It is all randomly determined.
That is why some businesses don't do well - they accidentally set their price below the costs (that leads to government handouts to help them).
Some businesses do better by having the luck of a price that is HIGHER than the cost (that leads to profits which are evil).
 
2013-01-29 11:44:51 AM  

Citrate1007: Why is it that the free market is the best form of capitalism except when the workers want to sell their skills.


What skills would that be? Having a pulse? The workers aren't selling their skills. If they were they would be getting better than minimum wage.
 
2013-01-29 11:44:58 AM  

orlandomagik: The question to ask/be concerned about is that with the smaller increase and a 3 year phase in time, will inflation outstrip the potential actual gains to be had from the increase in minimum wage, leaving the workers in the same position they were before the "increase"?


It's a fair question, but inflation is so low (and has been for awhile) that I'm not too worried about it. What I would hope is that an increase in inflation would indicate a strengthening economy and a commiserate rise in wages. My concern is that we HAVE seen an improving economy with little increase in labor salary, so I may be completely wrong.
 
2013-01-29 11:45:45 AM  

Techhell: So... instead of $1.25 now, and being raised each year by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), he wants it to be $1.00 over 3 years, not indexed to the CPI.

I'm not seeing any justified outrage over this. Sure, it's not what the Democrats want (which, in fairness, isn't nearly as big as Republican talking heads will likely make it out to be) but his counter-proposal is... *gasp* ... apparently an attempt to be a reasonable conservative? If he was saying "I won't raise the minimum wage at all! Think of all the poor small business owners!" and vetoing this bill, I'd be on board with the "sad day for the middle class" group. But he's on board with raising the minimum wage slowly, methodically, letting businesses have time to adjust to it.

If anything, this response from Christie should get him even more goodwill, not cost him any.

/Oh, and raising the minimum wage isn't going to help the middle class much - it'll help the working poor a great deal, particularly those unlucky souls who are on the cusp of being officially "in poverty" but are just a few thousand dollars a year above that level. But the middle class... this isn't going to help them much.


This.

Not to mention: 'while encouraging the Democratic-led Legislature to restore a tax credit to the working poor.'
 
2013-01-29 11:46:11 AM  

Techhell: So... instead of $1.25 now, and being raised each year by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), he wants it to be $1.00 over 3 years, not indexed to the CPI.

I'm not seeing any justified outrage over this. Sure, it's not what the Democrats want (which, in fairness, isn't nearly as big as Republican talking heads will likely make it out to be) but his counter-proposal is... *gasp* ... apparently an attempt to be a reasonable conservative? If he was saying "I won't raise the minimum wage at all! Think of all the poor small business owners!" and vetoing this bill, I'd be on board with the "sad day for the middle class" group. But he's on board with raising the minimum wage slowly, methodically, letting businesses have time to adjust to it.

If anything, this response from Christie should get him even more goodwill, not cost him any.


Pretty much my thoughts as well.

If a Democratic Governor did this, the GOP would be calling them a socialist Marxist communist wealth-redistributor handing out gifts to takers.
 
2013-01-29 11:49:05 AM  

Citrate1007: Why is it that the free market is the best form of capitalism except when the workers want to sell their skills.


uhhh, it is was a free market for workers selling their skills, there would be no government mandated minimum wage or unions for that matter.

do you understand how minimum wage works?
 
Displayed 50 of 131 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report