How Should We Pay For All This Stuff?

[Ernie S.]

The whole idea of raising the minimum wage to $23.50 is ludicrous. Consider low skilled assembly work where labor is 50% of cost.

3 people are assembling widgets and can make 100 each/day. We end an 8 hour shift with 300 widgets costing $180 to assemble, or $360 total. Assuming a 25% profit margin, the company sells it's 300 widgets for $450 or $1.50 each.

So now, we have to pay our assembler's $23.50 per hour to make his 100 widgets.
For 300 widgets, our labor cost is now $564. the raw materials, for the moment, still cost $180, but we can assume that the cost of manufacturing for those has risen as well, but we'll leave that out for the moment.
300 widgets now cost $744 plus the 25% margin. They now sell for $930 or $3.10 each.

You dummies will now bitch that you won't pay more than twice as much for your widgets, that the corporate robber barons are getting richer while poor people can't afford the bare necessities.
The corporation now has a choice. They can deal with reduced sales and lay off 25% of their labor force, or off shore assembly to Mexico or India, or China.
You will then end up with a widget that costs 2 bucks that is inferior to the one you used to buy for a buck and a half, but your taxes will have gone up to pay welfare and unemployment to the 300 greedy former widget assemblers.

Your arithmetic is flawed. Wages are subsidized at 100% for employers.

Huh????

 

[OnePercenter]

The whole idea of raising the minimum wage to $23.50 is ludicrous. Consider low skilled assembly work where labor is 50% of cost.

3 people are assembling widgets and can make 100 each/day. We end an 8 hour shift with 300 widgets costing $180 to assemble, or $360 total. Assuming a 25% profit margin, the company sells it's 300 widgets for $450 or $1.50 each.

So now, we have to pay our assembler's $23.50 per hour to make his 100 widgets.
For 300 widgets, our labor cost is now $564. the raw materials, for the moment, still cost $180, but we can assume that the cost of manufacturing for those has risen as well, but we'll leave that out for the moment.
300 widgets now cost $744 plus the 25% margin. They now sell for $930 or $3.10 each.

You dummies will now bitch that you won't pay more than twice as much for your widgets, that the corporate robber barons are getting richer while poor people can't afford the bare necessities.
The corporation now has a choice. They can deal with reduced sales and lay off 25% of their labor force, or off shore assembly to Mexico or India, or China.
You will then end up with a widget that costs 2 bucks that is inferior to the one you used to buy for a buck and a half, but your taxes will have gone up to pay welfare and unemployment to the 300 greedy former widget assemblers.

Your arithmetic is flawed. Wages are subsidized at 100% for employers.

Huh????

All employee expenses are deductible (subsidy). So you have a gross amount, and
an actual amount (effective). Business owners (except me) NEVER let you in on actual costs.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The mortgage interest deduction isn't all that big a deal now. Low as interest rates are, it's often no more than the standard deduction. (For me, it was a difference of <$50.)

 

[OnePercenter]

The mortgage interest deduction isn't all that big a deal now. Low as interest rates are, it's often no more than the standard deduction. (For me, it was a difference of <$50.)

Do to a homeowner that lives in his/her home only gets percentage of the mortgage interest. Investors get 100% of the interest.

Which is why (financially) you should never live in the home you own.

 

[OnePercenter]

You lost me when you went off on the typical leftwing moonbat rant about tax credits... that only works if you subscribe to the notion that the gubmint is entitled to 100% of your earnings. At the end of the day, the mortgage interest deduction doesn't lower your tax bill that much.

And noticeably absent was any mention of the EIC or the myriad of "tax credits" that people with a $0 tax bill get.

Whatever.

I have no problems with tax credits for the middle class. Money saved is placed directly into the economy.

 

[Antares]

Raise the minimum wage to $23.50/HR. Simple!

Might help.

However....................it would also decimate enlistments in the military. What kid out of high school is going to be willing to work for E-1 through E-3 pay for a year to a year and a half (assuming of course, they can make E-4 in a year and a half), when they can get jobs at 23.50/hr?

Me? I joined because I love this country and didn't care about what they were paying me. What I was looking for was being able to defend this country and travel around the world.

Nice thing about serving 20 years in the military? You get a pension for the rest of your life.

...and then, as in YOUR case you go Socialist and scream for everybody to pay for eberything for everybody esle.

 

[francoHFW]

OP- You grow the economy, and don't screw it up with phony crises like the debt ceiling, fighting law by shutting down the gov't. It's great the way Pub bombthrowers are imploding their bs party lol...

 

[Ernie S.]

The next time you make sense will be the first.

Who's going to pay that debt, son?

We're paying $400 billion a year on the near $17 trillion debt now and we're adding to the debt at about a trillion a year. What's YOUR solution?

 

[francoHFW]

You grow the economy, and don't screw it up with phony crises like the debt ceiling, fighting law by shutting down the gov't. It's great the way Pub bombthrowers are imploding their bs party lol...

 

[francoHFW]

The deficit is down to 500 billion, and without debt ceiling "crises" and sequesters, and with a Jobs Act we'd have a surplus. Thanks, a-holes and silly dupes.

 

[FA_Q2]

The deficit is down to 500 billion, and without debt ceiling "crises" and sequesters, and with a Jobs Act we'd have a surplus. Thanks, a-holes and silly dupes.

Without sequester, really.

So when did we get rid of the sequester?

 

[eagle1462010]

The Federal Government is spending at 25% of the GDP.
Federal Revenues are in the 17% range of the GDP.
Historical Federal Revenues average 18.1% since WWII.
The Interest on the debt is roughly 450 BILLION a year and rising.

We have to spend below the historical averages, which means who ever posted the cuts by 30% hit the nail on the head.

You don't do that by increasing Gov't, like Obamacare. That is the wrong direction to go.

Another thing to recognize is the unpaid bills coming up in Pensions, Social Security, and Medicare. There are TRILLIONS in unfunded mandates coming which will accelerate the problem even more.

Bottom line. We have got to cut the size of Gov't. History has proven that we will only get the 18% of revenues irregardless of Tax Rates. As we raise the rates businesses pull back their money, and the economy suffers. Look up the Liquidity Trap and look at Japan.

Anyway, the clock is ticking, and we need massive cuts.

 

[Mac1958]

We're gonna tax you. Deal with it.

For all the partisan bickering, this is pretty much it.

As a result of decades of foolish spending by both the American government and the American individual -- which, for those who don't realize it, was driven by borrowing in both cases -- it's now time to pay the piper.

So, we'll see a lower standard of living across the board. The only question now is how much lower.

Who's to blame? Well, that would be the people who (a) voted for the "leaders" who are responsible for this calamity and (b) participated in the non-stop narcissistic conspicuous consumption that has so polluted our culture on multiple levels.

That would be most of us. For the most part, the problem is in the mirror.

Self-inflicted wound.

.

 

[Antares]

The deficit is down to 500 billion, and without debt ceiling "crises" and sequesters, and with a Jobs Act we'd have a surplus. Thanks, a-holes and silly dupes.

Without sequester, really.

So when did we get rid of the sequester?

Don't confuse Franco for anyone with a brain.

 

[FA_Q2]

The deficit is down to 500 billion, and without debt ceiling "crises" and sequesters, and with a Jobs Act we'd have a surplus. Thanks, a-holes and silly dupes.

Without sequester, really.

So when did we get rid of the sequester?

Don't confuse Franco for anyone with a brain.

Don’t worry, I didn’t but every now and then I have to highlight the more asinine statements for the rest of us here.