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.

(CNN)   Massachusetts sets the state minimum wage to $11, suck it red state workers   (money.cnn.com) divider line 279
    More: Cool, Massachusetts, minimum wages, highest state  
•       •       •

735 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jun 2014 at 2:45 PM (12 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-20 03:05:12 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: what_now: Lucky LaRue: Massachusetts has finally conceded that the only way they can pay for their liberal government bloat is to collect more revenue, which they can only do if there are higher wages to tax.

It's brilliant, really.

You know, I pay taxes in Massachusetts, and I would be perfectly happy to see them raised slightly if it meant that my fellow massholes had a better standard of living.

Of course, this won't make my taxes higher.

Well, it will make you pay more sales tax to the extent the increased costs for businesses are passed on to consumers via higher prices.


Lemme lay some math on you.

WidgetCorp makes widgets, hence the name. WidgetCorp can make 100 widgets for $1,000. WidgetCorp then sells these at wholesale prices to ConMart. ConMart pays $1,050 for every 100 widgets. In order to break even, ConMart has to sell widgets for a price of $10.50. They mark it up to $19.99, which covers overhead for having the store open, marketing, workers salaries, etc. On that basis, ConMart makes $5.00 for every widget sold.

With the minimum wage increase, ConMart now makes $3.50 on every widget sold. Their profit margin goes down. ConMart hires an economist who tells them that the market will probably bear a $0.50 increase in widget prices. Sure, some outlying consumers might be priced out of the widget market, but most consumers will gladly shoulder a $0.50 increase. To top it off, the minimum wage hike has not priced in more consumers than ConMart lost, who can now afford the $20.49 cost of widgets. All of a sudden, ConMart's profit margins are even higher than before.

Which is not to say that there is not a point of diminishing returns. There obviously is. It's possible a minimum wage increase could price certain businesses out of the market and some employees would have to be let go. But for others, it will increase demand for their products and services as more people can afford them, which should (in theory) create new job opportunities for the people let go from businesses priced out of the marketplace.

You free-market types are supposed to respect this and say, "all is working as it should be."
 
2014-06-20 03:05:34 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Why "suck it red state workers"? This just means there will be more jobs for red staters. Red state workers should be psyched!!


Yeah, all those service jobs just gonna move out of state
 
2014-06-20 03:06:02 PM

somedude210: keylock71: This is going to improve the purchasing power of many folks in my area of the state (Fall River).

wouldn't anything increase the purchasing power of Fall River

/how the hell are you guys getting a casino?


Good point....

We're not getting a casino. Pipe dreams from the Flanagan Administration.

On a positive, we're having our first AHA! Night downtown tomorrow. Really looking forward to it.
 
2014-06-20 03:06:27 PM

palelizard: Obama's Reptiloid Master: palelizard: Gonz: FTFY. This will be overturned by popular demand within 6 months, because businesses will quit hiring.

When do you think business hire people?

Obviously businesses hire people when they are sitting on a nice chunk of profit and demand for their products is at market equilibrium, because that's when they have free time to conduct interviews.

That makes sense. Everyone knows time is money.


When demand is high and supply is low, there's just no time to hire additional workers or order additional production. Everyone is too busy lifting bootstraps to meet that available demand. Buckling down, as it were. Buckling down while lifting bootstraps. The Protestant work ethic.
 
2014-06-20 03:06:43 PM

Lucky LaRue: Massachusetts has finally conceded that the only way they can pay for their liberal government bloat is to collect more revenue, which they can only do if there are higher wages to tax.


Maybe Massachusetts can hire you a geographer.
 
2014-06-20 03:09:15 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Lemme lay some math on you.

WidgetCorp makes widgets, hence the name. WidgetCorp can make 100 widgets for $1,000. WidgetCorp then sells these at wholesale prices to ConMart. ConMart pays $1,050 for every 100 widgets. In order to break even, ConMart has to sell widgets for a price of $10.50. They mark it up to $19.99, which covers overhead for having the store open, marketing, workers salaries, etc. On that basis, ConMart makes $5.00 for every widget sold.

With the minimum wage increase, ConMart now makes $3.50 on every widget sold. Their profit margin goes down. ConMart hires an economist who tells them that the market will probably bear a $0.50 increase in widget prices. Sure, some outlying consumers might be priced out of the widget market, but most consumers will gladly shoulder a $0.50 increase. To top it off, the minimum wage hike has not priced in more consumers than ConMart lost, who can now afford the $20.49 cost of widgets. All of a sudden, ConMart's profit margins are even higher than before.


LOL!  Math is *hard*!
 
2014-06-20 03:10:01 PM

keylock71: Good point....

We're not getting a casino. Pipe dreams from the Flanagan Administration.


Hey, it may be a pipedream but it's the most viable plan as the rest of them as actually getting passed
 
2014-06-20 03:11:50 PM
Massachusetts
Area    Ranked 44th
Total    10,555 sq mi
Population    Ranked 14th
 - Total    6,692,824 (2013 est)
 - Density    840/sq mi  (324/km2)


The United States Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that the Massachusetts gross state product in 2012 was US $404 billion. The per capita personal income in 2012 was $53,221, making it the third highest state in the nation.

Yeah, not to worried.  Also come in the top 5 for quality of life and education consistently.

Spending on education, infrastructure, and well being goes a long way to providing the inputs and employees businesses need to thrive. Thats a proactive, progressive approach, not a negative regressionary one.
 
2014-06-20 03:12:12 PM

CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: Why "suck it red state workers"? This just means there will be more jobs for red staters. Red state workers should be psyched!!

Yeah, all those service jobs just gonna move out of state


I heard Wal-Mart is going to have a lottery system where every hour they work, the workers have to buy a ticket for a $1.  Then they'll draw all the tickets out, and if your number is called, you get to keep working. Anyone who doesn't will be dragged out back and shot or maybe fired.
 
2014-06-20 03:13:51 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Debeo Summa Credo: what_now: Lucky LaRue: Massachusetts has finally conceded that the only way they can pay for their liberal government bloat is to collect more revenue, which they can only do if there are higher wages to tax.

It's brilliant, really.

You know, I pay taxes in Massachusetts, and I would be perfectly happy to see them raised slightly if it meant that my fellow massholes had a better standard of living.

Of course, this won't make my taxes higher.

Well, it will make you pay more sales tax to the extent the increased costs for businesses are passed on to consumers via higher prices.

Lemme lay some math on you.

WidgetCorp makes widgets, hence the name. WidgetCorp can make 100 widgets for $1,000. WidgetCorp then sells these at wholesale prices to ConMart. ConMart pays $1,050 for every 100 widgets. In order to break even, ConMart has to sell widgets for a price of $10.50. They mark it up to $19.99, which covers overhead for having the store open, marketing, workers salaries, etc. On that basis, ConMart makes $5.00 for every widget sold.

With the minimum wage increase, ConMart now makes $3.50 on every widget sold. Their profit margin goes down. ConMart hires an economist who tells them that the market will probably bear a $0.50 increase in widget prices. Sure, some outlying consumers might be priced out of the widget market, but most consumers will gladly shoulder a $0.50 increase. To top it off, the minimum wage hike has not priced in more consumers than ConMart lost, who can now afford the $20.49 cost of widgets. All of a sudden, ConMart's profit margins are even higher than before.

Which is not to say that there is not a point of diminishing returns. There obviously is. It's possible a minimum wage increase could price certain businesses out of the market and some employees would have to be let go. But for others, it will increase demand for their products and services as more people can afford them, which should (in theory) create new job opportunities for the people let go from businesses priced out of the marketplace.

You free-market types are supposed to respect this and say, "all is working as it should be."


Your magical fairy dust doesn't apply in real life. They will lose more customers due to increased prices than they gain due to a small segment of their potential customer base getting a raise, believing anything else is economically illiterate fantasy.

If I had time or the photo posting ability on my phone I'd post a graph showing the deadweight loss to the economy that results from artificial price floors or ceilings such as minimum wages.

$11 is not that much in Massachusetts, so the negative impact will be marginal. But it will be negative, as it nearly always is.
 
2014-06-20 03:14:01 PM
This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working
 
2014-06-20 03:14:59 PM
 
2014-06-20 03:16:00 PM

somedude210: keylock71: Good point....

We're not getting a casino. Pipe dreams from the Flanagan Administration.

Hey, it may be a pipedream but it's the most viable plan as the rest of them as actually getting passed


I think Foxwoods has pretty much shut the door on the Fall River deal due to the location being unsuitable. I think they're looking at New Bedford now.

I'm not against a casino, mind you. Jobs are jobs and we'll take what we can get down in this neck of the woods.

I'm more interested in getting Fall River connected to Boston by rail, to be honest.
 
2014-06-20 03:16:10 PM

Almost Everybody Poops: SauronWasFramed: /another shing example of meaningless feel good legislation.

lol wut


Maybe MA should make it meaningful by raising the minimum wage rate to $25/hr.
 
2014-06-20 03:16:13 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: much in Massachusetts, so the negative impact will be marginal. But it will be negative, as it nearly always is.


http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/job-loss

Don't bother. Your data is outdated and based on flawed methodological assumptions, just like the research done on austerity.
 
2014-06-20 03:16:27 PM

chimp_ninja: A group of Chicago aldermen and community activists introduced a plan in May to also raise Chicago's minimum wage to $15. That coalition released a statement praising Seattle and calling on officials here to take the same step.


*cue teenage kid throwing tantrum in bedroom*
 
2014-06-20 03:17:18 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Obama's Reptiloid Master: Debeo Summa Credo: what_now: Lucky LaRue: Massachusetts has finally conceded that the only way they can pay for their liberal government bloat is to collect more revenue, which they can only do if there are higher wages to tax.

It's brilliant, really.

You know, I pay taxes in Massachusetts, and I would be perfectly happy to see them raised slightly if it meant that my fellow massholes had a better standard of living.

Of course, this won't make my taxes higher.

Well, it will make you pay more sales tax to the extent the increased costs for businesses are passed on to consumers via higher prices.

Lemme lay some math on you.

WidgetCorp makes widgets, hence the name. WidgetCorp can make 100 widgets for $1,000. WidgetCorp then sells these at wholesale prices to ConMart. ConMart pays $1,050 for every 100 widgets. In order to break even, ConMart has to sell widgets for a price of $10.50. They mark it up to $19.99, which covers overhead for having the store open, marketing, workers salaries, etc. On that basis, ConMart makes $5.00 for every widget sold.

With the minimum wage increase, ConMart now makes $3.50 on every widget sold. Their profit margin goes down. ConMart hires an economist who tells them that the market will probably bear a $0.50 increase in widget prices. Sure, some outlying consumers might be priced out of the widget market, but most consumers will gladly shoulder a $0.50 increase. To top it off, the minimum wage hike has not priced in more consumers than ConMart lost, who can now afford the $20.49 cost of widgets. All of a sudden, ConMart's profit margins are even higher than before.

Which is not to say that there is not a point of diminishing returns. There obviously is. It's possible a minimum wage increase could price certain businesses out of the market and some employees would have to be let go. But for others, it will increase demand for their products and services as more people can afford them, which should (in theory) create new job opportunities for the people let go from businesses priced out of the marketplace.

You free-market types are supposed to respect this and say, "all is working as it should be."

Your magical fairy dust doesn't apply in real life. They will lose more customers due to increased prices than they gain due to a small segment of their potential customer base getting a raise, believing anything else is economically illiterate fantasy.

If I had time or the photo posting ability on my phone I'd post a graph showing the deadweight loss to the economy that results from artificial price floors or ceilings such as minimum wages.

$11 is not that much in Massachusetts, so the negative impact will be marginal. But it will be negative, as it nearly always is.


Speaking of magical fairy dust, where is your evidence for such claims? Or is this a gut feeling?
 
2014-06-20 03:18:07 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Debeo Summa Credo: much in Massachusetts, so the negative impact will be marginal. But it will be negative, as it nearly always is.

http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/job-loss

Don't bother. Your data is outdated and based on flawed methodological assumptions, just like the research done on austerity.


Your opponent has gone on record here saying the rich deserve to be rich, and that Wall Street didn't do anything wrong that caused the 2008 (what recession?) Recession, so I'm getting a kick, etc...
 
2014-06-20 03:18:25 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Your magical fairy dust doesn't apply in real life. They will lose more customers due to increased prices than they gain due to a small segment of their potential customer base getting a raise, believing anything else is economically illiterate fantasy.


That doesn't make any sense. If that were true, every other minimum wage increase ever would have tanked the economy.  Your logic means reducing the minimum wage would result in more customers from reduced prices.  The logical end of that means near-slavery (people having more or less NO MONEY TO SPEND) would be your best customers if your prices are cheap enough.
 
2014-06-20 03:18:31 PM

RowYourBoat: SauronWasFramed: Who can live on $11 an hour?  If the argument is to pay a living wage, minimum wage should be $25 an hour.

/another shing example of meaningless feel good legislation.

You feel that $25/hr is the minimum livable wage?  That is...cool man.  Good stuff.


Seems about 10 dollars too low.
 
2014-06-20 03:18:49 PM

whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working


It is getting tiresome.

1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply
2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.
 
2014-06-20 03:18:50 PM

Lucky LaRue: Obama's Reptiloid Master: Lemme lay some math on you.

WidgetCorp makes widgets, hence the name. WidgetCorp can make 100 widgets for $1,000. WidgetCorp then sells these at wholesale prices to ConMart. ConMart pays $1,050 for every 100 widgets. In order to break even, ConMart has to sell widgets for a price of $10.50. They mark it up to $19.99, which covers overhead for having the store open, marketing, workers salaries, etc. On that basis, ConMart makes $5.00 for every widget sold.

With the minimum wage increase, ConMart now makes $3.50 on every widget sold. Their profit margin goes down. ConMart hires an economist who tells them that the market will probably bear a $0.50 increase in widget prices. Sure, some outlying consumers might be priced out of the widget market, but most consumers will gladly shoulder a $0.50 increase. To top it off, the minimum wage hike has not priced in more consumers than ConMart lost, who can now afford the $20.49 cost of widgets. All of a sudden, ConMart's profit margins are even higher than before.

LOL!  Math is *hard*!


Huh?  If ConMart is selling more units at $4 profit, they may make more money than selling fewer units at $5 profit.

This isn't rocket science.  The minimum wage increase isn't applied to one company.  Many other companies would also raise the pay of many workers, and for people right at the poverty line, nearly all of that additional salary is likely to be expended.

Math isn't that hard.  When you go back for your GED in Law, make sure to sign up for some after you finish North American Geography.
 
2014-06-20 03:18:54 PM

CPennypacker: Enjoy your $11 hamburgers, Massholes


1-media-cdn.foolz.us

That is not how economies work stupid human.
 
2014-06-20 03:19:29 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Or is this a gut feeling?


It's not even that. It's an outright falsehood not supported by the actual research.

It's funny how you never see Republicans posting anything substantive on economics. Oh sure, they'll link a Heritage Foundation or Von Mises Institute screed, which is more ideology than data and interpretation, and they'll whine about how Krugman or DeLong are meanypants who say mean and unprofessional things about conservatives. They'll toss out a term like "Laffer curve," but when you ask them to back anything up with hard numbers, they turn tail and run because the data simply does not support the efficacy of conservative economics.
 
2014-06-20 03:19:33 PM

keylock71: I'm more interested in getting Fall River connected to Boston by rail, to be honest.


now *that's* a pipedream :P

/sadly, it's been in the works for half a century
//and not actually worked on
///also, would it have killed them to connect North and South station?
////we could go from DC to Maine without switching trains!
 
2014-06-20 03:20:48 PM

palelizard: Debeo Summa Credo: Your magical fairy dust doesn't apply in real life. They will lose more customers due to increased prices than they gain due to a small segment of their potential customer base getting a raise, believing anything else is economically illiterate fantasy.

That doesn't make any sense. If that were true, every other minimum wage increase ever would have tanked the economy.  Your logic means reducing the minimum wage would result in more customers from reduced prices.  The logical end of that means near-slavery (people having more or less NO MONEY TO SPEND) would be your best customers if your prices are cheap enough.


isn't that essentially how you go from Capitalism to Communism?
 
2014-06-20 03:21:03 PM
I see the waterboy for the 1% has arrived to explain how there should be no minimum wage because of magical fairy dust.
 
2014-06-20 03:21:36 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.


In the meantime, what is our minimum wage worker supposed to eat? Bootstraps? Unicorn steaks?

Do you even externalities, bro?
 
2014-06-20 03:22:06 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working

It is getting tiresome.

1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply
2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.


1. Appealing to authority is a well-employed fallacy. Thanks for playing. You have no proof that wage increases cause price increases. Drop the busted talking point, please.
2. Or labor will organize as in this case and get a mandate passed that employers hire at $11 an hour. Suck it up.
 
2014-06-20 03:22:22 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working

It is getting tiresome.

1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply
2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.


Okay, name one. Show us the work.
 
2014-06-20 03:22:38 PM

whidbey: Your opponent has gone on record here saying the rich deserve to be rich, and that Wall Street didn't do anything wrong that caused the 2008 (what recession?) Recession, so I'm getting a kick, etc...


I know. I took him off my ignore list because I thought, "I have got to see which hole in the chicken this numbskull is farking today."

I didn't expect the answer to be, "All of them, Katie."
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-06-20 03:23:15 PM

whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working


I know how tiresome this is, but it's 2014.  The only thing that one side can do is parrot false talking points in hopes they become true and the only thing the other side can do is try to point out the poor reasoning to people who are willfully deaf.
 
2014-06-20 03:23:35 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: whidbey: Your opponent has gone on record here saying the rich deserve to be rich, and that Wall Street didn't do anything wrong that caused the 2008 (what recession?) Recession, so I'm getting a kick, etc...

I know. I took him off my ignore list because I thought, "I have got to see which hole in the chicken this numbskull is farking today."

I didn't expect the answer to be, "All of them, Katie."


Say it ain't so, Joe.
 
2014-06-20 03:24:26 PM

d23: whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working

I know how tiresome this is, but it's 2014.  The only thing that one side can do is parrot false talking points in hopes they become true and the only thing the other side can do is try to point out the poor reasoning to people who are willfully deaf.


1.bp.blogspot.com

*obligatory*
 
2014-06-20 03:24:36 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Debeo Summa Credo: whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working

It is getting tiresome.

1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply
2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.

Okay, name one. Show us the work.


Arguing with Debeo is like arguing with a retarded cockroach. Kind of like arguing with me, except I can be funny
 
2014-06-20 03:25:14 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Debeo Summa Credo: much in Massachusetts, so the negative impact will be marginal. But it will be negative, as it nearly always is.

http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/job-loss

Don't bother. Your data is outdated and based on flawed methodological assumptions, just like the research done on austerity.


DERP!! Your data is biased and would only be believed by left wing idiots.

Google "deadweight loss of minimum wage".
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-06-20 03:25:14 PM

somedude210: palelizard: Debeo Summa Credo: Your magical fairy dust doesn't apply in real life. They will lose more customers due to increased prices than they gain due to a small segment of their potential customer base getting a raise, believing anything else is economically illiterate fantasy.

That doesn't make any sense. If that were true, every other minimum wage increase ever would have tanked the economy.  Your logic means reducing the minimum wage would result in more customers from reduced prices.  The logical end of that means near-slavery (people having more or less NO MONEY TO SPEND) would be your best customers if your prices are cheap enough.

isn't that essentially how you go from Capitalism to Communism?



communism
 noun

1.
a theory or system of social  based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the  as a whole or to the state.

I guess for some non-standard definition of the word...
 
2014-06-20 03:26:09 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working

It is getting tiresome.

1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply
2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.


Society as a whole has to foot the bill of picking up the slack of poor wages, so it makes sense for society to set a price floor. If you need labor, you have to pay X, not just for the benefit of the person being hired but also to ease the burdon that purson puts on society. Labor is an input, inputs cost money and unfortunately can be and is regulated.
 
2014-06-20 03:26:27 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Obama's Reptiloid Master: Debeo Summa Credo: much in Massachusetts, so the negative impact will be marginal. But it will be negative, as it nearly always is.

http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/job-loss

Don't bother. Your data is outdated and based on flawed methodological assumptions, just like the research done on austerity.

DERP!! Your data is biased and would only be believed by left wing idiots.

Google "deadweight loss of minimum wage".


How can data be biased? Because it doesn't confirm your unscientific worldview?
 
2014-06-20 03:26:36 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: believed by left wing idiots.


memedepot.com

Oh Debbie, you're such a sinking ship.
 
2014-06-20 03:26:53 PM

somedude210: isn't that essentially how you go from Capitalism to Communism?


Or feudalism, which is how trickle-down economics work.

Obama's Reptiloid Master: When demand is high and supply is low, there's just no time to hire additional workers or order additional production. Everyone is too busy lifting bootstraps to meet that available demand. Buckling down, as it were. Buckling down while lifting bootstraps. The Protestant work ethic.


If they were Puritan Pilgrims like the first people in this country, their boots AND hats would have buckles on the straps already.  It's how you can tell who actually deserves to be here.
 
2014-06-20 03:27:40 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Debeo Summa Credo: If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.

In the meantime, what is our minimum wage worker supposed to eat? Bootstraps? Unicorn steaks?

Do you even externalities, bro?


Whatever he eats isn't the concern of the economist. If you want welfare or foodstamps or EITC so higher income people will subsidize lower income people, that's another topic.

It's completely independent of the economics of minimum wages and fair market wages.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-06-20 03:28:49 PM

cman: 2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.


No, but they do owe you a fair wage.  Every idiot that parrots this b.s. conveniently forgets that we these massive corporations hold orders of magnitude higher power.  When the corporations have enough power to pay starvation wages instead of free market wages and let the government pick up the tab with food stamps, it's DAMN SURE the government has an interest in making sure that fairness is restored.
 
2014-06-20 03:29:02 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: 1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply


"Sara Lemos has conducted a comprehensive review of the 30 or so academic papers on the price effects of the minimum wage. She concludes: "Despite the different methodologies, data periods and data sources, most studies reviewed above found that a 10% US minimum wage increase raises food prices by no more than 4% and overall prices by no more than 0.4%"; and "[t]he main policy recommendation deriving from such findings is that policy makers can use the minimum wage to increase the wages of the poor, without destroying too many jobs or causing too much inflation." Neumark and Wascher agree with Lemos's assessment about the likely price effects (while disagreeing with her conclusions about the overall usefulness of the minimum wage): "Both because of the relatively small share of production costs accounted for by minimum wage labor and because of the limited spillovers from a minimum wage increase to wages of other workers, the effect of a minimum wage increase on the overall price level is likely to be small." Other recent research by Daniel Aaronson, Eric French, and James MacDonald on restaurant pricing, a sector with a high share of low-wage workers suggests that the price effects are likely to be lower than the upper bounds suggested by Lemos. Aaronson, French, and MacDonald "find that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage increases prices by roughly 0.7 percent."

Source: Schmitt, J. (2013) "Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?"

So, oooh.  0.4-0.7% price increases in exchange for lifting hundreds of thousands of people over the poverty line.  Everybody panic.
 
2014-06-20 03:30:03 PM

chimp_ninja: Debeo Summa Credo: 1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply

"Sara Lemos has conducted a comprehensive review of the 30 or so academic papers on the price effects of the minimum wage. She concludes: "Despite the different methodologies, data periods and data sources, most studies reviewed above found that a 10% US minimum wage increase raises food prices by no more than 4% and overall prices by no more than 0.4%"; and "[t]he main policy recommendation deriving from such findings is that policy makers can use the minimum wage to increase the wages of the poor, without destroying too many jobs or causing too much inflation." Neumark and Wascher agree with Lemos's assessment about the likely price effects (while disagreeing with her conclusions about the overall usefulness of the minimum wage): "Both because of the relatively small share of production costs accounted for by minimum wage labor and because of the limited spillovers from a minimum wage increase to wages of other workers, the effect of a minimum wage increase on the overall price level is likely to be small." Other recent research by Daniel Aaronson, Eric French, and James MacDonald on restaurant pricing, a sector with a high share of low-wage workers suggests that the price effects are likely to be lower than the upper bounds suggested by Lemos. Aaronson, French, and MacDonald "find that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage increases prices by roughly 0.7 percent."

Source: Schmitt, J. (2013) "Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?"

So, oooh.  0.4-0.7% price increases in exchange for lifting hundreds of thousands of people over the poverty line.  Everybody panic.


Mmm, science.
 
2014-06-20 03:30:03 PM

d23: cman: 2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.

No, but they do owe you a fair wage.  Every idiot that parrots this b.s. conveniently forgets that we these massive corporations hold orders of magnitude higher power.  When the corporations have enough power to pay starvation wages instead of free market wages and let the government pick up the tab with food stamps, it's DAMN SURE the government has an interest in making sure that fairness is restored.


Nice quote fail

Attributing a comment that I didn't make is always a good way to start drama
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-06-20 03:30:05 PM

CPennypacker: Society as a whole has to foot the bill of picking up the slack of poor wages, so it makes sense for society to set a price floor. If you need labor, you have to pay X, not just for the benefit of the person being hired but also to ease the burdon that purson puts on society. Labor is an input, inputs cost money and unfortunately can be and is regulated.


Well, it's corporations right now like Wal-Mart that are the takers at the moment.  They've offloaded huge amounts of their labor costs on the public.
 
2014-06-20 03:30:08 PM

CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: whidbey: This is getting tiresome.

1. There is no evidence that raising a minimum wage will suddenly "make everything more expensive"
2. People deserve to be paid decent wages or they shouldn't be working

It is getting tiresome.

1) every economist in the world will tell you that the cost of inputs will work its way into the cost of outputs, either directly as producers raise prices or indirectly as increased costs drive producers or potential producers from the market, reducing supply
2) people deserve to be paid whatever they can mutually agree with an employer. If you think you deserve $11 but can only get $9, don't take the job. Nobody owes you a living.

Society as a whole has to foot the bill of picking up the slack of poor wages, so it makes sense for society to set a price floor. If you need labor, you have to pay X, not just for the benefit of the person being hired but also to ease the burdon that purson puts on society. Labor is an input, inputs cost money and unfortunately can be and is regulated.


I agree that it is unfortunate that it is regulated(in regard to minimum wages). It's harmful regulation that does more damage to society than it helps.

The government shouldn't decide the price of an input, the market should.

Why should an employer pay someone $11 per hour when that person is only bringing $10 per hour in benefit to the employer?
 
2014-06-20 03:30:28 PM

somedude210: keylock71: I'm more interested in getting Fall River connected to Boston by rail, to be honest.

now *that's* a pipedream :P

/sadly, it's been in the works for half a century
//and not actually worked on
///also, would it have killed them to connect North and South station?
////we could go from DC to Maine without switching trains!


Not entirely true...

MassDOT board approves South Coast Rail contract for up to $210 million"

They also did lay new track in Fall River and New Bedford and built the platform for the Fall River stop on Davol St.

though, it has been a long time coming... I'm 43 and this has "been in the works" since at least the late 80s.
 
2014-06-20 03:30:35 PM
Oh great now hamburgers will cost $1,000 each!
 
Displayed 50 of 279 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report