this is one of those theoretical arguments. I get it, and I love the premise. I work in a large urban public school. This would A) Never happen because its political suicide , and B) very hard to remain objective (not saying the current system is even remotely feasible), and C) I would not trust any school system with administering data. The new trend is big data to drive decision making in education. The problem is, most of the workforce is literally too stupid to use it, use it correctly, or complains to their union. I cannot see any further thing occurring until idiots get out of public education.
ORDER!!! Unemployment going above 8% because the people not willing to work for $7.15 an hour come back to looking for a job at $9 but still no jobs so unemployment will sky rocket.[/quote]
I disagree and I am not the only one . Right now tax payers are subsidizing employers paying less than a livable wage
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So you would have Wendt’s go out of business? How many jobs would that kill?
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
[/quote]
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So you would have Wendt’s go out of business? How many jobs would that kill?[/quote]
You act as if Wendy’s went out of business people would starve to death. IMO Ma and PA Burger joints would be able to compete. I doubt any big people would go out of business . I agree some industries would be hit harder than others . But what you would see is small business and self employed flourish .
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
[/quote]
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So you would have Wendt’s go out of business? How many jobs would that kill?[/quote]
You act as if Wendy’s went out of business people would starve to death. IMO Ma and PA Burger joints would be able to compete. I doubt any big people would go out of business . I agree some industries would be hit harder than others . But what you would see is small business and self employed flourish .
Nice to see you post intelligently
[/quote]
You act as if the Steel companies go out of business people would starve to death. Wendy’s is a large company that employs a lot of entry level people. Just like the Steel industry did. The difference is Wendy’s does not have any union employees getting paid 4 times what they should be paid. Maybe at $9.00 an hour they would be paid 4 times what they should be paid.
No when steel companies go out of business they get a job at Wendy’s . They don’t make enough to support a family and they don’t make enough to leave to local economy so they collect food stamps and free medical (@ our expense) because Wendy’s pays below a livable standard. They will never make enough to open a burger joint that can go head to head with Wendy’s mostly because of the tax code and the subsidies Wendy’s gets for their dirt poor pay.
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
[/quote]
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
No when steel companies go out of business they get a job at Wendy’s . They don’t make enough to support a family and they don’t make enough to leave to local economy so they collect food stamps and free medical (@ our expense) because Wendy’s pays below a livable standard. They will never make enough to open a burger joint that can go head to head with Wendy’s mostly because of the tax code and the subsidies Wendy’s gets for their dirt poor pay. [/quote]
I am sorry that happened to your family because it really sucks. Do you think that the Steel companies went under because they were over paying their employees? I know the chinese under cut the prices, and the US did nothing to help the steel companies. It might have been a liveable wage for the steel workers, but not a sustainable liveable wage.
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
[/quote]
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
[/quote]
They are already picking HAHAHAHA:)
[/quote]
And they are really bad at it. Solindra?[/quote]
you forgot to mention Enron
[/quote]
The US government did nothing to help Enron.[/quote]
you should check out the oil . gas and coal subsidies
The political posturing behind such a minimum wage law is asanine. First, minimum wage jobs are low skilled. This means the staff is replaceable and you can generally invest in operational efficiency improvements if the cost of labor is increased.
The firms will either A) cut costs, which means higher unemployment or B) increase prices or C) both.
Now if we take a fast food example, they employ many of these low wage workers, who in turn are more likely to frequent these establishments through purchasing power parity, lack of nutritional knowledge or accessible grocery stores. So now, these same people will face greater prospects of unemployment, and higher prices at wendy’s. [/quote]
I agree it is posturing , I however think it would be the prudent thing to do . Maybe if Wendy’s had to charge more people would quit eating there and eat some real food. That would open a whole new economy [/quote]
So the government gets to pick which economy wins and which economy looses? They are really good at that. hahahahahahaha!!!
[/quote]
They are already picking HAHAHAHA:)
[/quote]
And they are really bad at it. Solindra?[/quote]
you forgot to mention Enron
[/quote]
The US government did nothing to help Enron.[/quote]
you should check out the oil . gas and coal subsidies [/quote]
Can you please list those subsidies? They are the same subsidies that all businesses get. Also all of these subsidies over the past 100 years equal the same amount that Obama has given to the clean energy companies in the past 4 years. At least the oil and gas companies pay good wages and do not go out of business leaving taxpayers on the hook for their loans.
I’m in the Houston area and was laid off 2 days before Enron went under. I found another job a month later. Texas has all the good jobs. Move to Texas if you can, just leave your liberal politics where you are now. Conservative values are why jobs are here, and Liberal Politics are why jobs are not there.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I’m in the Houston area and was laid off 2 days before Enron went under. I found another job a month later. Texas has all the good jobs. Move to Texas if you can, just leave your liberal politics where you are now. Conservative values are why jobs are here, and Liberal Politics are why jobs are not there.[/quote]
I don’t get your point I had a cousin lose their job at Enron and got a job almost immediately she is very liberal .
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I’m in the Houston area and was laid off 2 days before Enron went under. I found another job a month later. Texas has all the good jobs. Move to Texas if you can, just leave your liberal politics where you are now. Conservative values are why jobs are here, and Liberal Politics are why jobs are not there.[/quote]
I don’t get your point I had a cousin lose their job at Enron and got a job almost immediately she is very liberal .
[/quote]
Right now Texas and Conservative states have more jobs than Liberal Blue states. People are moving to Texas for the jobs, and low tax rates. People are welcome to move here just leave your liberal politics in the place you are leaving. If you dont then the current Conservative states will go liberal and wreak the entire economy.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I’m in the Houston area and was laid off 2 days before Enron went under. I found another job a month later. Texas has all the good jobs. Move to Texas if you can, just leave your liberal politics where you are now. Conservative values are why jobs are here, and Liberal Politics are why jobs are not there.[/quote]
I don’t get your point I had a cousin lose their job at Enron and got a job almost immediately she is very liberal .
[/quote]
Right now Texas and Conservative states have more jobs than Liberal Blue states. People are moving to Texas for the jobs, and low tax rates. People are welcome to move here just leave your liberal politics in the place you are leaving. If you dont then the current Conservative states will go liberal and wreak the entire economy.[/quote]
