“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

[danielpalos]

new set of gold tooth caps or something useful like that

King David has the right prescription for all dentists, all orthodontists and all oral surgeons.

Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O Lord.

All that's needed is a sledgehammer.

Right Wing morality even in modern times?

Vote blue not red!

 

[danielpalos]

I'll make anyone a deal. We end the Federal Reserve and I'll quit sticking up for the poor.

Why should we end the Federal Reserve?
How is making unskilled workers permanently unemployable "sticking up for the poor"?

Trump said we had full employment so I have no idea what you are talking about. The work still needs done whether it's $8 or $12.

Nobody should take the right wing seriously about economics, the law, morals, or political solutions to our national problems.

/----/ Yeah, you libtards decided America had seen it's best days and it was all downhill. Your brand of socialism has failed everywhere in the world it's been tried. You call for corporate tax hikes without considering the harm it does including inflation. Draconian enviro laws that kill businesses and costs jobs. So you clowns are the ones who can't be taken seriously about economics.
View attachment 381149

LOL. Too bad you are not that great.
The Greatest of the Great, will always have you beat.

/---/ "Too bad you are not that great. The Greatest of the Great, will always have you beat."

Word for the day: A non sequitur is a statement that doesn't follow logically from the statements/premises that came before it.

That would actually mean something if you actually had valid arguments for equal work for equal pay; slacker nanny-Statist.

 

[Markle]

lol. Raise the minimum wage until they pay their share of taxes, right wingers. Or, do you believe in the nanny-State subsidizing the Rich with social services for the Poor, merey for the bottom line of the Rich? Persons Working minimum wage jobs should need no social services.

So you should not to subsidize the Rich with Nanny-Statism for the Poor. But, you don't. Worked instead of learning more at school?

It might not be too late for you to edit this into something that makes sense.

 

[Markle]

And, paying persons fifteen dollars an hour generates around five times more in federal (income) tax revenue than someone making the current minimum wage.

You make no sense.

 

[task0778]

Right wingers only have right wing fantasy not any economic common sense.

And, paying persons fifteen dollars an hour generates around five times more in federal (income) tax revenue than someone making the current minimum wage.

You make no sense.

I sometimes wonder if he really believes that nonsense or whether he's just screwing with us. Either way, I'm done with him.

 

[danielpalos]

And, paying persons fifteen dollars an hour generates around five times more in federal (income) tax revenue than someone making the current minimum wage.

You make no sense.

You have no sense. Worked instead of read a work about the Abbe Faria?

 

[DustyInfinity]

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

The last minimum wage bill that was proposed and considered in congress, was H.R. 258, “Raise the Wage Act”. It was passed by the Democratic majority house, then passed on to the Republican majority senate, (where it now lies effectively dead).
Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR 258 interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold;

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.]
Respectfully, Supposn

/—-/ Hey let’s set minimum wage at $120,000 a year. Then everybody gets rich.

I was surprised when Wal Mart raised wages, and forced everyone else to compete with those wages, that inflation did not rise at all. I believed the argument that you couldn't address lower end wages without making prices go through the roof, but that is proven not to be true. I don't like artificial wage tinkering like Seattle and leftists cities, and going against market forces, and worry about people getting fired and job losses, like Seattle. However, It is still evident that lower wages can rise without runaway inflation. Either the experts were wrong, or they lied.

There's much muttering around and about as it appears that Walmart has been cutting the working hours for some associates after the recently raised wages for them. Quite why there should be such muttering is unknown: for Walmart actually told us that this is what they were hoping would happen. Not quite flat out "we're raising wages so we can cut hours" but that was the obvious intention of the plan in the first place. For they did tell us that they wanted to raise wages so as to get less jobs churn and thus a more productive workforce. And a more productive workforce is the same as getting the same amount of work done while also using fewer labor hours. That's the definition of increased productivity in fact.
.
.
So, what was it that Walmart was actually trying to achieve with the pay raise? Well, part of this is the same reason that Henry Ford did his $5 a day thing. It was nothing at all to do with either it being just and righteous that people made more, nor was it the hope that the employees would spend more on the companies' products. Rather, turnover of employees costs money. You've got to find the new person to replace the one who has left, got to train them to get them up to speed. And thus reducing that jobs churn can save money overall: and one obvious way to reduce churn is to pay people better in the first place so they're less likely to leave. Now, this is all something of a delicate balance, the costs of the higher wages against the savings from the lower churn, but Walmart effectively said they were shifting their model a little. Paying slightly higher amounts in order to get less churn. Great.

Of Course Walmart Cut Hours After Raising Pay--What Did You Expect?

There's much muttering around and about as it appears that Walmart has been cutting the working hours for some associates after the recently raised wages for them. Quite why there should be such muttering is unknown: for Walmart actually told us that this is what they were hoping would happen. [...]

www.forbes.com

Hey, I got no problem with any company who voluntarily raises wages for business reasons or any other reasons for that matter. They can do whatever they want but notice also that they cut the number of employees or the number of hours worked per employee. So, how much did they actually increase their labor costs? And did they get a more productive workforce? Dunno, but it should be their call and NOT the gov'ts.

I suspect that as big as Walmart is, the overall increase in labor costs wasn't enough to move the needle nationally, cuz they also cut the hours worked of employees. Plus, they are BIG but they ain't THAT big.

Walmart could probably just absorb it on its size alone. Especially since low wage jobs don't offer benefits anymore(Obamacare). It must have been tough for fast food, groceries, and retail to keep up. I think Walmart is the most likely reason wages started to GAIN on inflation. It was a dramatic shot. It makes me wonder why they did it?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Because $6.00 an hour is far better for the poor.

For an unskilled worker with no experience, $6 is better for the employee than no job.

No, not really. They can get more than that on welfare.

How does one build up skills a resume on welfare?

 

[DustyInfinity]

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

The last minimum wage bill that was proposed and considered in congress, was H.R. 258, “Raise the Wage Act”. It was passed by the Democratic majority house, then passed on to the Republican majority senate, (where it now lies effectively dead).
Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR 258 interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold;

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.]
Respectfully, Supposn

/—-/ Hey let’s set minimum wage at $120,000 a year. Then everybody gets rich.

I was surprised when Wal Mart raised wages, and forced everyone else to compete with those wages, that inflation did not rise at all. I believed the argument that you couldn't address lower end wages without making prices go through the roof, but that is proven not to be true. I don't like artificial wage tinkering like Seattle and leftists cities, and going against market forces, and worry about people getting fired and job losses, like Seattle. However, It is still evident that lower wages can rise without runaway inflation. Either the experts were wrong, or they lied.

Raising the Minimum wage has never been an inflationary concern. It only affects the microeconomic, bottom line for employers not our economy.

The experts are also telling us that American Manufacturing can't compete because we pay our workers. US goods would be priced so far out of the market that no one could afford them. They haven't been right in a very long time, so I have doubts about that little nugget of wisdom too.

 

[Markle]

Raising the Minimum wage has never been an inflationary concern. It only affects the microeconomic, bottom line for employers not our economy.

It "ONLY" affects the bottom line for employers, NOT our economy.

Oh Grand Economist danielpalos, please explain to all of us how the bottom line of companies does NOT affect our economy.

If the bottom line of any company is reduced, does that not affect the net profit of that company? If that drops, what happens to the stock prices?

 

[Markle]

Right wingers only have right wing fantasy not any economic common sense.

And, paying persons fifteen dollars an hour generates around five times more in federal (income) tax revenue than someone making the current minimum wage.

You make no sense.

I sometimes wonder if he really believes that nonsense or whether he's just screwing with us. Either way, I'm done with him.

I agree with you 100%.

He reminds me of "Professor" Irwin Corey. A very well known comedian before you were born!

 

[Cellblock2429]

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

The last minimum wage bill that was proposed and considered in congress, was H.R. 258, “Raise the Wage Act”. It was passed by the Democratic majority house, then passed on to the Republican majority senate, (where it now lies effectively dead).
Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR 258 interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold;

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.]
Respectfully, Supposn

/—-/ Hey let’s set minimum wage at $120,000 a year. Then everybody gets rich.

I was surprised when Wal Mart raised wages, and forced everyone else to compete with those wages, that inflation did not rise at all. I believed the argument that you couldn't address lower end wages without making prices go through the roof, but that is proven not to be true. I don't like artificial wage tinkering like Seattle and leftists cities, and going against market forces, and worry about people getting fired and job losses, like Seattle. However, It is still evident that lower wages can rise without runaway inflation. Either the experts were wrong, or they lied.

Raising the Minimum wage has never been an inflationary concern. It only affects the microeconomic, bottom line for employers not our economy.

/—-/ Take some business classes so you don’t sound like a blithering idiot.

 

[initforme]

Any place worth working for even as a kid offers at least $15 per hour.

 

[Dick Foster]

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

The last minimum wage bill that was proposed and considered in congress, was H.R. 258, “Raise the Wage Act”. It was passed by the Democratic majority house, then passed on to the Republican majority senate, (where it now lies effectively dead).
Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR 258 interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold;

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.]
Respectfully, Supposn

No it absolutely would not. Just as soon as the minimum wage goes up the printing press is cranked up to negate it. All it does is to effectively pick everyone pocket leaving less for everyone, especially those who supposedly benefit. When in fact they're made even worse off than they were before by the higher prices on everything. Only a compete simple minded fool believes a higher minimum wage benefits anyone.

 

[danielpalos]

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

The last minimum wage bill that was proposed and considered in congress, was H.R. 258, “Raise the Wage Act”. It was passed by the Democratic majority house, then passed on to the Republican majority senate, (where it now lies effectively dead).
Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR 258 interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold;

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.]
Respectfully, Supposn

Please explain why a Federal Minimum Wage is beneficial to the country.

Please include how the cost of living in New York City is the same as that in Gainesville Florida, Dallas Texas, and say, San Francisco, California.

Because means testing for social services is more expensive.

 

[danielpalos]

In a society it does. If there is a need for a job they deserve to be able to survive.

Why?

Then stop complaining about social services from the nanny-State, right wingers.

 

[danielpalos]

I'll make anyone a deal. We end the Federal Reserve and I'll quit sticking up for the poor.

Why should we end the Federal Reserve?
How is making unskilled workers permanently unemployable "sticking up for the poor"?

Trump said we had full employment so I have no idea what you are talking about. The work still needs done whether it's $8 or $12.

/——/ If your landscaper said he’d do your lawn for $25, would you say that’s not a living wage and pay him $50?

No but if the workers did a good job I very well may tip them. We just had a piano moved. Three guys. I gave them $20 each because they did a great job.

And that was your choice, as it should be. The gov't didn't tell you you had to give them the $20 apiece whether they did a good job or not, did they? But you think that's a good idea, right?

Labor as the wealthy under our form of Capitalism also can't afford to hire lobbyists to get more corporate welfare.
From 1978 to 2018, inflation-adjusted compensation based on realized stock options of the top CEOs increased 940.3%. The increase was more than 25–33% greater than stock market growth (depending on which stock market index is used) and substantially greater than the painfully slow 11.9% growth in a typical worker’s annual compensation over the same period. Measured using the value of stock options granted, CEO compensation rose 1,007.5% from 1978 to 2018.

CEO compensation has grown 940% since 1978: Typical worker compensation has risen only 12% during that time

The latest report in EPI’s annual series analyzing current and long-term trends in CEO compensation.

www.epi.org

/----/ It's none of your business how much companies pay their CEOs. If you don't like it, then buy enough company stock so you can attend the meetings and vote down the pay raises.

Then, stop whining about the Poor, right wingers. You don't complain about bailouts for the Richest who are merely too rich to fail and get bailed out by the Nanny-State right wingers are hypocritical about but only for the Poor.

/---/ What bailouts for the richest? If you can't supply specifics then stop with the strawman arguments.

"Privatizing profits and socializing losses" refers to the idea that corporations want to reserve financial gains for themselves and pass along losses to the rest of society, potentially through lobbying the government for assistance. This practice was criticized in the Wall Street bailout of 2008--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_welfare#%22Socialism_for_the_rich,_capitalism_for_the_poor%22

 

[danielpalos]

The truth about minimum wage...

The real minimum wage is a rational choice to provide labor input to the economy. Means tested social services cost the equivalent to fourteen dollars an hour and is a rational choice reason for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

 

[danielpalos]

... (The minimum rate bolsters other wage rates, but it much more beneficial to lower rather than higher wage rate earners.)

Prove it.

Show how much wages would increase at the $100,000 level, if the Federal Minimum Wage
went from $7.25 up to $8.25. Do the same for the $50,000 level. Thanks!!!

Toddsterpatriot, the CBO did essentially demonstrate the validity of that concept. Respectfully, Supposn

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes. … Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR [258, error; 582 is correct], interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold.

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.] … [/QUOTE

Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes,

Except for the ones made unemployed or unemployable.

Unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in an at-will employment State could solve simple poverty. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment which means even if persons had to obtain a doctorate to participate in the market for Labor, some would still be unemployed.

 

[danielpalos]

“Raise the Wage Act”, (H.R. 582) would have increased most USA’s wage-earning families’ incomes.

The last minimum wage bill that was proposed and considered in congress, was H.R. 258, “Raise the Wage Act”. It was passed by the Democratic majority house, then passed on to the Republican majority senate, (where it now lies effectively dead).
Refer to the Congressional Budget office’s, (i.e. CBO’s) minimum wage rate report,
How Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage Could Affect Employment and Family Income | Congressional Budget Office, and follow the link’s instructions to obtain the HR 258 interactive graphs.

Referring to the graph entitled “Average Percentage Change in Real Family Income, by Income Group”: The graph indicates average incomes of families earning less than 3 times the poverty threshold increase. Average incomes of higher income families do not perceivably begin to decrease until those incomes achieve 6 more times the poverty threshold;

(i.e. CBO’s study confirms minimum wage rate’s beneficial effects upon job’s rates are inversely related. Employees within the lowest wage rate brackets most benefit in proportion to their incomes, and those benefits (proportional to incomes) are incrementally lesser as incomes increase. Thus, the wage incomes of most USA’s wage earners would have benefit or would not be detrimentally affected by passage of H.R. 582.

[Six, (6) times a family of three’s income equal or exceeding 6 times the poverty threshold would be $122,000 per year and for a family of four it would well exceed $125,00 per year expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars.]
Respectfully, Supposn

/—-/ Hey let’s set minimum wage at $120,000 a year. Then everybody gets rich.

I was surprised when Wal Mart raised wages, and forced everyone else to compete with those wages, that inflation did not rise at all. I believed the argument that you couldn't address lower end wages without making prices go through the roof, but that is proven not to be true. I don't like artificial wage tinkering like Seattle and leftists cities, and going against market forces, and worry about people getting fired and job losses, like Seattle. However, It is still evident that lower wages can rise without runaway inflation. Either the experts were wrong, or they lied.

Raising the Minimum wage has never been an inflationary concern. It only affects the microeconomic, bottom line for employers not our economy.

The experts are also telling us that American Manufacturing can't compete because we pay our workers. US goods would be priced so far out of the market that no one could afford them. They haven't been right in a very long time, so I have doubts about that little nugget of wisdom too.

So what. They are for the bottom line not what is good for our economy. And, why would they not be able to compete? You make it sound like slavery would be more profitable for them.