Minimum Wage Increase: They Never Talks About the SALES

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's just look at the 1.6 million at exactly the minimum.
Pretend they all work 2000 hours a year.
We hike their wages from $7.25 to $9.25 an hour.
That's a wage increase of $6.4 billion a year.

What will the increased sales be from this hike?

Considerably more than the increased wages.

Prove it. Walk thru the steps, Prof.

 

[protectionist]

I see you flunked...well school.

Didn't understand what I said about the bell-shaped curve, did you ? Not a clue, right ?

 

[protectionist]

Increased wages won't cause any business to shut down?
Did you read that in a book?

I already explained it to you. You're not a very good student. And you keep confiming what I said in the OP title >>
Minimum Wage Increase: They Never Talks About the SALES

 

[protectionist]

Let's just look at the 1.6 million at exactly the minimum.
Pretend they all work 2000 hours a year.
We hike their wages from $7.25 to $9.25 an hour.
That's a wage increase of $6.4 billion a year.

What will the increased sales be from this hike?

Considerably more than the increased wages.

Prove it. Walk thru the steps, Prof.

No need to prove it. I suggested exemption for large businesses with large numbers of MW workers, IF need be. So what's your problem ?

 

[protectionist]

major corps are looking forward to the forced increase. They know most small biz will go under and make it vastly harder for competition to rise.


just think of all the products that have the priced printed on them. The retailer can sell for that or less, no more.

You have it backwards. The smaller businesses with less MW workers are under the least stress. It's the big corps you speak of that are under the gun.

 

[protectionist]

If the rest of the conservative crowd has a bad idea, or can't do the math, I'm still going to point out their error.

Barrack Obama thanks you. Hillary Clinton thanks you. Nancy Pelosi thanks you. Harry Reid thanks you. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If the rest of the conservative crowd has a bad idea, or can't do the math, I'm still going to point out their error.

Barrack Obama thanks you. Hillary Clinton thanks you. Nancy Pelosi thanks you. Harry Reid thanks you. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

If idiots vote for the Dems, I can't help them.
Doesn't make your OP any less wrong.
Raise the minimum wage all you want, the libs will get credit from the winners and the losers will blame the conservatives. It's a lose-lose.

 

[Two Thumbs]

major corps are looking forward to the forced increase. They know most small biz will go under and make it vastly harder for competition to rise.


just think of all the products that have the priced printed on them. The retailer can sell for that or less, no more.

You have it backwards. The smaller businesses with less MW workers are under the least stress. It's the big corps you speak of that are under the gun.

uhm, no

The net is full of small companies fighting to stay afloat in WA after they passed the $15 min wage

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's just look at the 1.6 million at exactly the minimum.
Pretend they all work 2000 hours a year.
We hike their wages from $7.25 to $9.25 an hour.
That's a wage increase of $6.4 billion a year.

What will the increased sales be from this hike?

Considerably more than the increased wages.

Prove it. Walk thru the steps, Prof.

No need to prove it. I suggested exemption for large businesses with large numbers of MW workers, IF need be. So what's your problem ?

Because your math doesn't work.

 

[2aguy]

He said it would cause jobs to be lost. FALSE! Employers function with a number of employees that bring them the most income/profit. They CANNOT reduce staff. Any more or less employees results in SALES and income reduction. Layoffs result in losses, not gains.

Where is the chart that shows employers the precise number of employees they should hire in order to get the most income/profit?


He (and Banderas too) said prices would be raised (or fees created) to compensate for the wage losses, and these losses would just be "passed on" to the customers. More FALSE! scare talk. Businesses CANNOT raise prices because they are already fixed at a market price, related to maximization of sales/income. Any change in price (up or down) results in reduction of SALES and income.
Where is the chart that shows employers the precise price level they need in order to get the most sales/income?

He said businesses will move away from LA. FALSE! (in most cases). Does Gamm think that closing down a business and moving to another location can be done scott (no pun intended) free ?

Did anyone say moving was free?

Depending on the business, moving costs can vary from just barely economical, to completely UNeconomical, and the latter is much more often the case. Imagine a machine shop with over 100 large production machines, having to pack then all up and move miles away.

Imagine a machine shop with over 100 large production machines, having to pay higher wages than the business could support. Imagine that business running at a loss, just because some politicians, who couldn't pass an Econ 101 class, created a stupid law.

Do you even realize how hollow this response is? You don't even have an argument. Any idiot taking an Econ class knows that consumer spending is what drives this economy. Consumer spending comes from paychecks. This isn't hard to grasp.

You guys have no clue......just raise the minimum wage and that means paychecks will go up.....as if that was the only thing keeping the salary at that level...just a simple decision to put more money in the pay check...who knew? You guys are geniuses........sure...they won't lay off or fire employees because they can't afford them...they won't raise prices to cover the wages...they will just go out to the back of their business to their money tree, and just shake it a little more......why didn't they fucking think of that before...thanks guys...problem fucking solved......

 

[2aguy]

major corps are looking forward to the forced increase. They know most small biz will go under and make it vastly harder for competition to rise.


just think of all the products that have the priced printed on them. The retailer can sell for that or less, no more.

You have it backwards. The smaller businesses with less MW workers are under the least stress. It's the big corps you speak of that are under the gun.

No...the big corporations support higher wages to force out their competitors.....because their smaller competitors can't just raise their salaries the way the big corporations can....

 

[2aguy]

And here we are.....

Big Business Support for Minimum Wage Hikes Michigan Capitol Confidential


A few years ago, the conservative chief executive at Wal-Mart went public advocating for an increase in the minimum wage. A short time later, the “maverick” left-wing Costco CEO Jim Sinegal followed suit. Was it out of the goodness of their hearts? Maybe, but the more likely reason is that this would help their bottom-line.

While small businesses tend to be only marginally profitable and would have to spend a greater proportion of time and money dealing with this increase, larger corporations face no such predicament. Wal-Mart and Costco already pay significantly higher hourly wages than the current federal minimum — an average wage of $10-$13 an hour at Wal-Mart and $17 an hour at Costco as of a few years ago.

But minimum wage workers generally work for smaller, locally owned operations. These jobs tend to be temporary and help get low-skilled and first-time workers into the workforce. Many readers have undoubtedly started out with a similar experience. So while a higher mandated minimum would barely touch larger corporations, it would certainly hurt their small business competition.

 

[protectionist]

If idiots vote for the Dems, I can't help them.
Doesn't make your OP any less wrong.
Raise the minimum wage all you want, the libs will get credit from the winners and the losers will blame the conservatives. It's a lose-lose.

But YOU ARE helping the Democrats to get more votes by opposing popular issue and wrongly creating the appearance thast the Democrats are wrong to support it, instead of saying that Conservatives mostly support it too (as we do).
You are stuck in 2006 mindset. MW raise is no longer a liberal issue. It is clearly favored by conservatives, and there is nothing logical to be said against it, and you haven't presented anything that way either.

 

[2aguy]

If idiots vote for the Dems, I can't help them.
Doesn't make your OP any less wrong.
Raise the minimum wage all you want, the libs will get credit from the winners and the losers will blame the conservatives. It's a lose-lose.

That is 2006 mindset. MW raise is no longer a liberal issue. It is clearly favored by conservatives, and there is nothing logical to be said against it, and you haven't presented anything that way either.

yes, there is only logic against it.....it will cost jobs, it will put small businesses out of business and people will end up working more jobs because they are only getting so many hours to compensate for the increased salary......

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If idiots vote for the Dems, I can't help them.
Doesn't make your OP any less wrong.
Raise the minimum wage all you want, the libs will get credit from the winners and the losers will blame the conservatives. It's a lose-lose.

But YOU ARE helping the Democrats to get more votes by opposing popular issue and wrongly creating the appearance thast the Democrats are wrong to support it, instead of saying that Conservatives mostly support it too (as we do).
You are stuck in 2006 mindset. MW raise is no longer a liberal issue. It is clearly favored by conservatives, and there is nothing logical to be said against it, and you haven't presented anything that way either.

The politics is very interesting, I'm still waiting for you to prove your economics claim.
8 pages and you're still avoiding the main issue.
I'm shocked.

 

[protectionist]

uhm, no

The net is full of small companies fighting to stay afloat in WA after they passed the $15 min wage

Um yes. Who has a more difficult time with a MW increase ? > A diner with 5 MW workers, or a supermarket with 105 of them ?

 

[protectionist]

Because your math doesn't work.

Well you don't HAVE any math except the wages side of it (and that's isn't sure), while you don't don't HAVE any math on the INCREASED SALES side, so you're not ready to judge anything.

 

[rdean]

Republicans think "Supply and demand" is some ridiculous liberal policy that has no chance of ever working. They think it's the "job creators" who run the economy. You only need to make sure the "job creators" have enough money and they will create jobs.

Republicans simply don't understand that when people have money and spend it, that drives the economy. You can try to explain it to them, but like science, they not only don't get it, they won't get it.

 

[protectionist]

No...the big corporations support higher wages to force out their competitors.....because their smaller competitors can't just raise their salaries the way the big corporations can....

Oh yeah. You've arrived on the scene here with some real big stuff, all right. Gonna blow us all way, right ?

EARTH TO 2AGUY: Target pays federal minimum wage of dozens of employees ($7,25.hour). Walmart doesn't pay much more.

 

[protectionist]

He said it would cause jobs to be lost. FALSE! Employers function with a number of employees that bring them the most income/profit. They CANNOT reduce staff. Any more or less employees results in SALES and income reduction. Layoffs result in losses, not gains.

Where is the chart that shows employers the precise number of employees they should hire in order to get the most income/profit?


He (and Banderas too) said prices would be raised (or fees created) to compensate for the wage losses, and these losses would just be "passed on" to the customers. More FALSE! scare talk. Businesses CANNOT raise prices because they are already fixed at a market price, related to maximization of sales/income. Any change in price (up or down) results in reduction of SALES and income.
Where is the chart that shows employers the precise price level they need in order to get the most sales/income?

He said businesses will move away from LA. FALSE! (in most cases). Does Gamm think that closing down a business and moving to another location can be done scott (no pun intended) free ?

Did anyone say moving was free?

Depending on the business, moving costs can vary from just barely economical, to completely UNeconomical, and the latter is much more often the case. Imagine a machine shop with over 100 large production machines, having to pack then all up and move miles away.

Imagine a machine shop with over 100 large production machines, having to pay higher wages than the business could support. Imagine that business running at a loss, just because some politicians, who couldn't pass an Econ 101 class, created a stupid law.

Do you even realize how hollow this response is? You don't even have an argument. Any idiot taking an Econ class knows that consumer spending is what drives this economy. Consumer spending comes from paychecks. This isn't hard to grasp.

You guys have no clue......just raise the minimum wage and that means paychecks will go up.....as if that was the only thing keeping the salary at that level...just a simple decision to put more money in the pay check...who knew? You guys are geniuses........sure...they won't lay off or fire employees because they can't afford them...they won't raise prices to cover the wages...they will just go out to the back of their business to their money tree, and just shake it a little more......why didn't they fucking think of that before...thanks guys...problem fucking solved......

Oh we have no clue, huh? HA HA HA. Uh EARTH TO 2AGUY: Try reading item # 1 and 2 in the OP. the ones that refuted what you just said, before you even arrived here.

Let me tell it to you like this. My ex-wife owned a boutique in a mall. She had a certain # of employees. And what do you think got her to choose that # of them ? You think maybe it was her lucky number ? Her birthday number ? It was the number at which she makes the most money. Get it ? So if she lays people off, she than has less employees, less sales, less income. Starting to focus for you ?