Do republicans even know what they are voting for this election?

[EdwardBaiamonte]

you make no effort to defend republicans. It's ridiculous.

dear, if you have something against Republicans why not give us your most substantive example or admit you lack the IQ to be here??

 

[Billy000]

The negative effect on the market from raising the minimum wage depends on how it is done. If it is raised gradually over a few years and is indexed, the effect is smaller if you raised it all at once. Meaning, yes prices would go up, but it wouldn't offset the extra $500 dollars or so a month a worker would be making. He could easily afford the increase in price of services and products. Meaning, he could easily afford the extra $10 he would pay for that washer. Not only that, but if people have bigger paychecks, they are spending more money. That helps the overall economy. Businesses in general will do better.

Not really because it still creates inflation. Or let me put it another way:

Let's say we had an autocracy, and in this autocracy, I will be the leader.

To address our financial problems, I create a law that everything is worth half of it's current value.

If you have a $200,000 home, it is now worth $100,000. If you were paying $6.00 for your Big Mac combo, it now only costs you $3.00. If your wage is $22.00 per hour, your wages are now only $11.00 per hour.

Sure, if you had your eyes set on that $300,000 home, it will now only cost you $150,000. Or perhaps that car you wanted that used to cost $30,000. It now costs $15,000. But on the other hand, you are only making half of what you used to make and your bank account is also cut in half.

After you do all the calculations, you would say to me "Ray, yes, everything costs half of what it used to, but I also make only half of what I used to as well. In other words, I'm no better off today than I was yesterday."

To that I would reply correct, you are no better off today than yesterday. You're right at the same place. The only difference is that jobs will be coming back to America by the millions.

Where I live, if you make $20.00 per hour, you can do okay on that wage. You can rent a nice apartment, own a fairly comfortable house, and can go out from time to time. Not so if you make that wage in New York city, or many of the NE states. Even in places like California that wage is near poverty. Why? Because the cost of living is so much higher in other places.

It really doesn't matter if the government imposes a raise in the min wage or if the market does it on its own. Right now productivity in the lower classes is sky high compared to what it used to be. Corporate profits are at an all time high. The market could easily handle it. This idea that the market will raise wages on its own is ridiculous considering wages have remained flat for decades. It's not going to happen.

Here is an article I kept from economist Walter E Williams. It's a bit dated, but still makes the point today. It's a short read, but if you don't have time to read it, I just want to point to some of the highlights:

There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).


But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?

Walter Williams

Ok so technology has resulted in the loss manufacturing jobs. I buy that, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

The higher you make wages in this country, the more inviting automation becomes in America. Companies are looking all the time at how to cut costs. And as I said earlier, you can't just increase wages for one set group of people. If you increase wages for those at the bottom, everybody eventually sees an increase in their wages.

That's not to mention how this will not help anybody. According to the BLS, only 4.3% of our working population work for minimum wage or less. Well over half of this group are people under the age of 25. That means those over the age of 25 making minimum wage are less than 2% of our population.

So do we disrupt our business world and create inflation for those 2% who we are concerned about making poverty wages?

4.3% make the federal wage. 18 million people make less than 10.00 per hour. That's the problem. Don't you think? Raising the min wage high enough would benefit those 18 million people.

There probably would be a problem with more automation, but again, with higher wages comes more consumer spending. That helps the economy. Don't take my word for it. 600 economists- 7 of which are Nobel Prize winners - signed a letter to congress to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.

 

[sarahgop]

i will use my vote to keep an establishment republican from winning.

 

[BluesLegend]

I know what I'm not voting for, policies that will double the debt again to $36 trillion, policies that chase more good paying jobs out of this country, policies that allow millions of poor uneducated illegals to flood across our borders driving down wages and opportunities for our own citizens. Hence I'm not voting for 8 more years of either Democrat or Republican establishments.

the conservadope separates people into being a Democrat or a conservative

not to bright, a party versus an ideology

Another liberal starving for attention.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not really because it still creates inflation. Or let me put it another way:

Let's say we had an autocracy, and in this autocracy, I will be the leader.

To address our financial problems, I create a law that everything is worth half of it's current value.

If you have a $200,000 home, it is now worth $100,000. If you were paying $6.00 for your Big Mac combo, it now only costs you $3.00. If your wage is $22.00 per hour, your wages are now only $11.00 per hour.

Sure, if you had your eyes set on that $300,000 home, it will now only cost you $150,000. Or perhaps that car you wanted that used to cost $30,000. It now costs $15,000. But on the other hand, you are only making half of what you used to make and your bank account is also cut in half.

After you do all the calculations, you would say to me "Ray, yes, everything costs half of what it used to, but I also make only half of what I used to as well. In other words, I'm no better off today than I was yesterday."

To that I would reply correct, you are no better off today than yesterday. You're right at the same place. The only difference is that jobs will be coming back to America by the millions.

Where I live, if you make $20.00 per hour, you can do okay on that wage. You can rent a nice apartment, own a fairly comfortable house, and can go out from time to time. Not so if you make that wage in New York city, or many of the NE states. Even in places like California that wage is near poverty. Why? Because the cost of living is so much higher in other places.

It really doesn't matter if the government imposes a raise in the min wage or if the market does it on its own. Right now productivity in the lower classes is sky high compared to what it used to be. Corporate profits are at an all time high. The market could easily handle it. This idea that the market will raise wages on its own is ridiculous considering wages have remained flat for decades. It's not going to happen.

Here is an article I kept from economist Walter E Williams. It's a bit dated, but still makes the point today. It's a short read, but if you don't have time to read it, I just want to point to some of the highlights:

There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).


But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?

Walter Williams

Ok so technology has resulted in the loss manufacturing jobs. I buy that, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

The higher you make wages in this country, the more inviting automation becomes in America. Companies are looking all the time at how to cut costs. And as I said earlier, you can't just increase wages for one set group of people. If you increase wages for those at the bottom, everybody eventually sees an increase in their wages.

That's not to mention how this will not help anybody. According to the BLS, only 4.3% of our working population work for minimum wage or less. Well over half of this group are people under the age of 25. That means those over the age of 25 making minimum wage are less than 2% of our population.

So do we disrupt our business world and create inflation for those 2% who we are concerned about making poverty wages?

4.3% make the federal wage. 18 million people make less than 10.00 per hour. That's the problem. Don't you think? Raising the min wage high enough would benefit those 18 million people.

There probably would be a problem with more automation, but again, with higher wages comes more consumer spending. That helps the economy. Don't take my word for it. 600 economists- 7 of which are Nobel Prize winners - signed a letter to congress to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.

How is there more consumer spending when things cost more to buy? If you raise their wages but everything costs more, you aren't buying any more than you did before. That's the point.

Do you think those people that make $10.00 an hour will do much with an extra ten cent per hour increase? That's $4.00 a week before taxes.

 

[Billy000]

It really doesn't matter if the government imposes a raise in the min wage or if the market does it on its own. Right now productivity in the lower classes is sky high compared to what it used to be. Corporate profits are at an all time high. The market could easily handle it. This idea that the market will raise wages on its own is ridiculous considering wages have remained flat for decades. It's not going to happen.

Here is an article I kept from economist Walter E Williams. It's a bit dated, but still makes the point today. It's a short read, but if you don't have time to read it, I just want to point to some of the highlights:

There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).


But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?

Walter Williams

Ok so technology has resulted in the loss manufacturing jobs. I buy that, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

The higher you make wages in this country, the more inviting automation becomes in America. Companies are looking all the time at how to cut costs. And as I said earlier, you can't just increase wages for one set group of people. If you increase wages for those at the bottom, everybody eventually sees an increase in their wages.

That's not to mention how this will not help anybody. According to the BLS, only 4.3% of our working population work for minimum wage or less. Well over half of this group are people under the age of 25. That means those over the age of 25 making minimum wage are less than 2% of our population.

So do we disrupt our business world and create inflation for those 2% who we are concerned about making poverty wages?

4.3% make the federal wage. 18 million people make less than 10.00 per hour. That's the problem. Don't you think? Raising the min wage high enough would benefit those 18 million people.

There probably would be a problem with more automation, but again, with higher wages comes more consumer spending. That helps the economy. Don't take my word for it. 600 economists- 7 of which are Nobel Prize winners - signed a letter to congress to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.

How is there more consumer spending when things cost more to buy? If you raise their wages but everything costs more, you aren't buying any more than you did before. That's the point.

Do you think those people that make $10.00 an hour will do much with an extra ten cent per hour increase? That's $4.00 a week before taxes.

Again the rise in prices would not offset the extra money per month a person would be making. Something at McDonald's will go up 10 cents while the person with a higher wage could afford more items on the menu regardless. Everyone else especially would be making enough money to not care if that Big Mac went up a dime.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here is an article I kept from economist Walter E Williams. It's a bit dated, but still makes the point today. It's a short read, but if you don't have time to read it, I just want to point to some of the highlights:

There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).


But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?

Walter Williams

Ok so technology has resulted in the loss manufacturing jobs. I buy that, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

The higher you make wages in this country, the more inviting automation becomes in America. Companies are looking all the time at how to cut costs. And as I said earlier, you can't just increase wages for one set group of people. If you increase wages for those at the bottom, everybody eventually sees an increase in their wages.

That's not to mention how this will not help anybody. According to the BLS, only 4.3% of our working population work for minimum wage or less. Well over half of this group are people under the age of 25. That means those over the age of 25 making minimum wage are less than 2% of our population.

So do we disrupt our business world and create inflation for those 2% who we are concerned about making poverty wages?

4.3% make the federal wage. 18 million people make less than 10.00 per hour. That's the problem. Don't you think? Raising the min wage high enough would benefit those 18 million people.

There probably would be a problem with more automation, but again, with higher wages comes more consumer spending. That helps the economy. Don't take my word for it. 600 economists- 7 of which are Nobel Prize winners - signed a letter to congress to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.

How is there more consumer spending when things cost more to buy? If you raise their wages but everything costs more, you aren't buying any more than you did before. That's the point.

Do you think those people that make $10.00 an hour will do much with an extra ten cent per hour increase? That's $4.00 a week before taxes.

Again the rise in prices would not offset the extra money per month a person would be making. Something at McDonald's will go up 10 cents while the person with a higher wage could afford more items on the menu regardless. Everyone else especially would be making enough money to not care if that Big Mac went up a dime.

This is true because the increase in wages is spread out through hundreds if not thousands of items McDonald's sells every day. It has more impact on mom and pop shops like hardware stores, flower shops, ice cream shops, lawnmower shops, lawn care companies and startup businesses.

You are a business owner and want to open up another operation. You narrowed it down to two choices: one is a city that has a $15.00 minimum wage. The other uses the federal standard of $7.50 or whatever it is today. Which city do you think you would choose?

What is the first thing a city does to attract a business that are considering their city to start a new or existing company? They offer tax exemptions.

 

[amrchaos]

Republicans are voting for new and better leadership in the party. Right now, they are really trying to get their ducks lined up and trash taken out.

It is a rebuilding election for them. the Oval office is the grand prize, but getting the right people to head their party is more important now.

 

[Contumacious]

Conservatism by defintion is adhering to the same shit over and over without NEW ideas. Republicans are no different that's for damn sure. The candidates, once again, offer the same shit like MORE tax breaks for the rich which will do NOTHING to help the middle class and poor. The EFFECTIVE tax rate for corporations is 13%. That's low enough don't you think? Do you people have no concept of loopholes?

I mean seriously, do you people still buy into the lie that is trickle down economics? By now you must know it's a failure. Why do you punish yourselves and the rest of the country?

The large majority of the income gains have gone to the top 1% of the nation's earners in the last several decades. Corruption on Wall Street is rampant . Doesn't that bother you? Do you really think republicans in this race will do ANYTHING about it?

I'm seriously embarrassed for republican voters. Fox News and congressional repubs have you people by the balls and you are too dumb to realize it. You would rather bitch about Planned Parenthood, Benghazi and Hillary's fucking emails than focus on shit that actually matters. You're so busy demonizing democrats that you make no effort to defend republicans. It's ridiculous.

Of course they do.


More laws like the "Patriot" and CISA Acts. In a nutshell, the slow but certain abolition of the Bill of Rights.


.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

the conservadope separates people into being a Democrat or a conservative

not to bright, a party versus an ideology

Another liberal starving for attention.

Another right winger starving for credibility

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Republicans are voting for new and better leadership in the party. Right now, they are really trying to get their ducks lined up and trash taken out.

It is a rebuilding election for them. the Oval office is the grand prize, but getting the right people to head their party is more important now.

what bullshit. The Republicans are not doing any such thing. It is the right wingers who attempting a coup and failing over, and over , and over again, and again, and again...

 

[Kondor3]

...You complain about the middle-class and support the party that approves of amnesty and worker VISA's which keep American wages down...

 

[BluesLegend]

the conservadope separates people into being a Democrat or a conservative

not to bright, a party versus an ideology

Another liberal starving for attention.

Another right winger starving for credibility

You're like a lost puppy following me around.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Conservatism by defintion is adhering to the same shit over and over without NEW ideas. ...[sic]

LOL! That's because what what you refer to as 'shit'... is OKA: American Principle and principle doesn't change.

What's more, there are no 'new' ideas. Avoiding responsibility is an age old 'idea'... bilking producers of the product of their labor as a means to subsidize non-producers, also... nothing either new, unique or valid about any of that and THAT is the full measure of the scope of would-be 'new ideas', to which you are referring.

All of which is rejected by Americans, as all of it rest in opposition to American Principle.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

They're voting to abolish, deregulate and destroy. They don't care how much damage it does to this nation.

Republicans at one time supported science and infrastructure. No more.

ROFLMNAO! Reader, where you see a Leftist use the word 'science', they're actually referring to "SCIENCE!".

As you know... science is the objective search of the truth. Left-think, rests entirely in the species of reasoning OKA: Relativism, which rejects wholesale, the very existence of objectivity, thus the would-be "SCIENCE!" is not science at all, but a populist deception posing as science, used as an illicit means to acquire political power.

Such is a form of terrorism... as are all forms of addle-minded populism.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

the conservadope separates people into being a Democrat or a conservative

not to bright, a party versus an ideology

Another liberal starving for attention.

Another right winger starving for credibility

You're like a lost puppy following me around.

Huh? Check how many posts Dante actually responds to that you are in.

You're a sad sac of shit you silly wabbit

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Conservatism by defintion is adhering to the same shit over and over without NEW ideas. Republicans are no different that's for damn sure. The candidates, once again, offer the same shit like MORE tax breaks for the rich which will do NOTHING to help the middle class and poor. The EFFECTIVE tax rate for corporations is 13%. That's low enough don't you think? Do you people have no concept of loopholes?

I mean seriously, do you people still buy into the lie that is trickle down economics? By now you must know it's a failure. Why do you punish yourselves and the rest of the country?

The large majority of the income gains have gone to the top 1% of the nation's earners in the last several decades. Corruption on Wall Street is rampant . Doesn't that bother you? Do you really think republicans in this race will do ANYTHING about it?

I'm seriously embarrassed for republican voters. Fox News and congressional repubs have you people by the balls and you are too dumb to realize it. You would rather bitch about Planned Parenthood, Benghazi and Hillary's fucking emails than focus on shit that actually matters. You're so busy demonizing democrats that you make no effort to defend republicans. It's ridiculous.

BoT

 

[whitehall]

Progressives by definition do not recognize traditional values or religion or patriotism or even the Constitution as the law of the land. Did sane democrats understand what they were getting when they elected Barry Hussein?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Progressives by definition do not ...

enough with your dribble

you have no idea what is and is not progressive

 

[BluesLegend]

the conservadope separates people into being a Democrat or a conservative

not to bright, a party versus an ideology

Another liberal starving for attention.

Another right winger starving for credibility

You're like a lost puppy following me around.

Huh? Check how many posts Dante actually responds to that you are in.

You're a sad sac of shit you silly wabbit

Is there some void in your life that you feel the need to run around insulting people? I mean did that make you feel less crappy about your life? How sad, I hope you get feeling better.