And Zep, out of the many many sound arguments against the minimum wage, I’ll simply ask you this: why shouldn’t people have the right of freedom to contract?
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
ah yes lieawatha herself Liz Warren she talk about how she teaches one class at Harvard, as their first woman of color, to tune of $300000.00 a semester? I’m with those who feel minimum wage shouldn’t be the desired wage for an adult[/quote]
Not the issue.
[/quote]
yes actually it is when you talk out of your ass constantly you show that you aren’t worth listening too. the old story of the boy who cried wolf this cunt because really that’s all she is a cunt lied to get a head, then works as a lawyer to deny medical claims through travelers, when called out on her cuntiness she claims to have been a double agent or some bullshit. see as an intelligent person I can take the whole picture and realize the shit this cunt spews is sht, so yeah it’s kind of the issue.
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
ah yes lieawatha herself Liz Warren she talk about how she teaches one class at Harvard, as their first woman of color, to tune of $300000.00 a semester? I’m with those who feel minimum wage shouldn’t be the desired wage for an adult[/quote]
Not the issue.
[/quote]
yes actually it is when you talk out of your ass constantly you show that you aren’t worth listening too. the old story of the boy who cried wolf this cunt because really that’s all she is a cunt lied to get a head, then works as a lawyer to deny medical claims through travelers, when called out on her cuntiness she claims to have been a double agent or some bullshit. see as an intelligent person I can take the whole picture and realize the shit this cunt spews is sht, so yeah it’s kind of the issue.[/quote]
The contrast between what I’ve emboldened and the rest of your post–it’s glorious; it’s like the shining North Star of irony.
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
yes actually it is when you talk out of your ass constantly you show that you aren’t worth listening too. [/quote]
This.
She is a low information/non-thinking lefties wet dream. She is a woman, so she can all ways pull the sexest card if need be, and play coy and innocent when needed. She has HArvard attached to her name, this gives lefties an orgasim in and of itself. And she constantly says a bunch of things people that can’t or don’t think are awesome.
There was a peice on her asking the SEC why they haven’t brough anyone to court. The low information dolts went wild in her praise. No one took the time to look at the fact more often than not people complied with regulations without having to go to court, and that is cheaper and more effective than having to spend months and years in court…
I’m not suprised she won, because MA voters are by and large the lowest of low information voters. Liberals by blood, they don’t take two mins to think for themselves. They vote on name alone, and degree of drunkeness. They hold anyone south of the mason-dixon line in 100% contempt as slow, rasist, hillbilly morons who only watch NASCAR and marry their sister, all the while Boston is the most rasict city in the nation…
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
This is why I wanted to see the research. She was acting like the dollar menu burger was gonna be $1.02 if we increase minimum wage. I agree with you, intuitively I just don’t see it.
Beans,
I would challenge your assertion that Mass. voters are the lowest of the low information voters.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Beans,
I would challenge your assertion that Mass. voters are the lowest of the low information voters.[/quote]
Haha. I’m sure every state of every color has their dumbasses.
But I’m telling you. You could dress Hitler up and call him a Kennedy and he would win against Jesus himself in this state.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
This is why I wanted to see the research. She was acting like the dollar menu burger was gonna be $1.02 if we increase minimum wage. I agree with you, intuitively I just don’t see it.[/quote]
It could also be a misinterpretation of the statement on my part too. If they are looking at total wages earned as a factor in a much broader formula, then it may appear to be better for revenues on the whole, depending on how fast and lose they are playing with the word “revenues”. It may depend a whole hell of a lot on which balance sheet she is looking at and what these revenues are that she speaks of.
The thing I’ve learned with politicians though is that when they start using words like “reform” and “revenues” it is never what you think they are saying.
If she’s talking about state and federal revenues (taxes on income) then she’s totally right.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
This is why I wanted to see the research. She was acting like the dollar menu burger was gonna be $1.02 if we increase minimum wage. I agree with you, intuitively I just don’t see it.[/quote]
It could also be a misinterpretation of the statement on my part too. If they are looking at total wages earned as a factor in a much broader formula, then it may appear to be better for revenues on the whole, depending on how fast and lose they are playing with the word “revenues”. It may depend a whole hell of a lot on which balance sheet she is looking at and what these revenues are that she speaks of.
The thing I’ve learned with politicians though is that when they start using words like “reform” and “revenues” it is never what you think they are saying.
If she’s talking about state and federal revenues (taxes on income) then she’s totally right.
[/quote]
To believe she’s correct about business revenues, you would have to believe that business owners don’t try to maximize their profits; or that they try to, but an uninterested third party is better able to do that.
It’s important to remember that people don’t usually argue to have their pay or power either remain stagnant or decreased.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
To believe she’s correct about business revenues,
[/quote]
Skyz is on the right track.
Anything having to do with this topic that looks at anything other than pricing, and pricing only is bullshit.
They can’t look at tax reveunes, because every business on Earth is trying to suppress this number through any accounting avenue possible.
They can’t look at Financial Statement revenues because companies (particularly public) will use every accounting rule in their favor to show these higher and ever increasing.
You would have to litterally look at pricing, week over week, month over month and year over year in order to get an accurate description of the effects.
All things aside, her statement could also be taken as: “inflation eats up the increases in costs”. Which it does. Which is a net zero gain. But god damn does the way she say it sound better than, “in the end MW raises will actually cost the economy more, if it has any change at all, on the economy or life at large in America.”
Like I said, low information wetdream. Perfect for people that can’t think.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Anything having to do with this topic that looks at anything other than pricing, and pricing only is bullshit.
[/quote]
I take this part back, it isn’t this white or black.
There are shifts and reallocations of other expenses that would happen too…
[quote]NickViar wrote:
To believe she’s correct about business revenues, you would have to believe that business owners don’t try to maximize their profits; or that they try to, but an uninterested third party is better able to do that.
It’s important to remember that people don’t usually argue to have their pay or power either remain stagnant or decreased.
[/quote]
I hear you on that. No business that I’ve ever heard of is in the habit of leaving money on the table. They usually prescribe to the old “Push the price to what the market will bear” mantra.
Nor would any management or ownership group want to give up their management rights (ie- someone else telling them how much they have to pay employees).
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
To believe she’s correct about business revenues, you would have to believe that business owners don’t try to maximize their profits; or that they try to, but an uninterested third party is better able to do that.
It’s important to remember that people don’t usually argue to have their pay or power either remain stagnant or decreased.
[/quote]
I hear you on that. No business that I’ve ever heard of is in the habit of leaving money on the table. They usually prescribe to the old “Push the price to what the market will bear” mantra.
Nor would any management or ownership group want to give up their management rights (ie- someone else telling them how much they have to pay employees).
[/quote]
I’m not sure if you are responding to both parts of my post or just the first(it’s hard to tell over the internet), but just to clarify, the second part was in reference to government workers(politicians-pretty much any argument they make is ultimately meant to increase their power and control over others).
[quote]NickViar wrote:
I’m not sure if you are responding to both parts of my post or just the first(it’s hard to tell over the internet), but just to clarify, the second part was in reference to government workers(politicians-pretty much any argument they make is ultimately meant to increase their power and control over others).[/quote]
Both parts. I’m in agreement. I don’t think it is good at all for government to step in and tell a company that they are forced to pay their employees any amount.
If a person doesn’t like what they are getting paid for doing what they do, they should either do something else or the same thing for someone else.
That shouldn’t require govt. intervention.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
Too bad for your argument the exact opposite is what happens…
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
Too bad for your argument the exact opposite is what happens…
[/quote]
Zeppelin, shhh…If you tell business owners they can raise prices without losing business, then we’ll have to pay more for everything! Keep that on the down low, man. Silly business owners are offering all their products at sale prices and don’t even know it. LMAO at them.
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
Too bad for your argument the exact opposite is what happens…
[/quote]
Too bad blah de blah de bhah!
You sound like a nine year old.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
Like I said:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Her MO:
Say shit low information voters will love because they don’t think, they feel. [/quote]
It is “rarely discussed” because it is a meaningless statement at best, and total idiocy at worst.
[/quote]
You can deny the studies if you want but this is the information that has come out.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
She is saying that the recent studies of the past decade do not support the argument that if you raise minimum wage that the economy has a net loss in jobs and hurts employers. To the contrary any increase in business cost is made up by increased revenues. A concept that is lost on neo-conservative economics. And in fact very rarely discussed.[/quote]
That is idiotic, and here is why-
I eat at McDonalds a couple of times a year. Lets say they raise the minimum wage to $12.00/hour.
That doesn’t mean that I am going to eat there more often.
Quite the contrary. I wouldn’t pay a dime more for that crap than I have to. They will not increase revenue and they will loose the $4.75/hour that they were paying the same person for the same work the day before.
[/quote]
Too bad for your argument the exact opposite is what happens…
[/quote]
Too bad blah de blah de bhah!
You sound like a nine year old.
[/quote]
Maybe you think I sound immature, but here you are denying the outcome of the studies with your learned credentials. Who is the child?