Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What do those businesses do when their rent increases? How about when their real estate taxes go up? How about when they have to pay more for energy?We are talking about personal income of those small businesses not business income
Dealing with increased business costs is part of running a business. We never see this whining when a business has to pay more for raw materials or rent or advertising....they make adjustments
But as soon as you talk about increasing wages, all of a sudden it is "you know, we are going to have to lay people off"
Has never been the case with other minimum wage increases
What you fail to realize is that in a lot of those small business they are sole proprietors meaning their business income is there personal income and expenses vice versa. Also, small businesses don't hvae the cash flow of larger corporations to be able to increase those wages. Lot's of small businesses can't even get credit from banks due to dodd Frank regulatory bill that was passed. Of course they'd have to lay people off. Common sense.
Wages are another cost of doing business and minimum wage has been frozen for seven years. None of those other costs have been frozen for seven years
If cost of business in one state becomes to high that prohibits growth for the company that company transfers to a state with a better economic business environment meaning that state just lost jobs. Businesses get prior notices for taxes and some other things you mentioned, so they know and can prepare ahead of time and give out notices.
Same goes for wages. A minimum wage increase would be nation wide so there is no advantage in jumping states
How much of an increase are you talking about?
If it's a few percent no big deal.
If you're talking about a 40% increase like Obama or a more than 100% increase like the unions then that's another thing.
Now let's use the 15 an hour figure for the sake of this post.
If everyone making less that 15 an hour was given a raise overnight do you not think prices for everything would go up?
So now that 15 an hour doesn't really give them that much more purchasing power does it?
But what happens is that everyone making more than 15 an hour will see their purchasing power decline.
So i guess the question is: Do more people make 15 an hour now than less than 15 an hour?
If so is a very slight real increase in purchasing power for those making less than 15 an hour worth the decrease in purchasing power of the higher number of people making more?
You say wealth is infinite. Why then can't businesses with minimum wage workers tap into that infinity to pay their workers a higher minimum wage?
The parade of stupid is made up of all of you who still defend American capitalism as the best route to bottom to top prosperity the world has ever seen. That is clearly not the case and yet supply-side true believers such as yourself still get on message boards every day to spout the the same faith-based shit they have been saying for years. If adjusted working-class wages had even once went up since that shit infected the prevailing economic theory of our country I would not be so hostile to you "free market" true believers when you come on these boards with the same old shit.And the Parade of Stupid continues to march on!
Why not? Because it would be STOOPID. Also yours is an incredibly stupid question- thus favored by GOP voters...You say wealth is infinite. Why then can't businesses with minimum wage workers tap into that infinity to pay their workers a higher minimum wage?
So here is your mental retardation kicking in again. I did not say that someone who has wealth has an infinite resource that can never be depleted. I guess that's what you heard or maybe what you thought was meant by "wealth is infinite." I guess I should have said "the amount of wealth which can be obtained is infinite."
Business can pay people whatever amount you think is best. Why don't we increase minimum wage to $25 an hour, or better yet, why not $200 an hour? The more we increase it the more capitalists will raise their prices to compensate, so it really all becomes a matter of how much you want to pay for a gallon of milk and loaf of bread. The reason the rich people don't like you doing this is because you make dollars worth less. Now it doesn't really bother them that much because they have lots of dollars. The people who are hurt the most are those who don't have many dollars or who get a set number of dollars every month, or who work for a minimal amount of dollars every hour.
It's another wonderful example of how you are shooting your own soldiers in this war you can't win.
Only in your dreams and memes is this the case. Productivity has nothing to do with revenue or expenses, what has or hasn't been paid, or anything with regard to remuneration to the worker. Productivity is an average measure of the efficiency of production.
PROFIT is the amount gained by capitalists after expenses have been paid.
Uhm, because they earned it and you didn't? Again... this so-called "rich" person, invested his money in new technology to improve productivity. His workers did not invest or take any risk at all. Now it exists only because the "rich" person made the choice to invest his money in the new technology. If there was no consequential gain from him doing this... like if, all the extra productivity would have to be accounted for in pay increases to his employees, why in heaven's name would he ever make such a choice? You're not "giving" anything. You don't have any damn thing to give. A capitalist is capitalizing on new technology to increase productivity, the reward for that should go to the capitalist. It's his risk, it's his money.
If every CEO in that nation give themselves a 5 million dollar bonus this year,do you think that will make prices on everything go up for everybody?
What a crock of shit.
Rich people can't have anymore bonuses or increase in their incomes.. That'll make the prices go up for everything.
Why not? Because it would be STOOPID. Also yours is an incredibly stupid question- thus favored by GOP voters...You say wealth is infinite. Why then can't businesses with minimum wage workers tap into that infinity to pay their workers a higher minimum wage?
So here is your mental retardation kicking in again. I did not say that someone who has wealth has an infinite resource that can never be depleted. I guess that's what you heard or maybe what you thought was meant by "wealth is infinite." I guess I should have said "the amount of wealth which can be obtained is infinite."
Business can pay people whatever amount you think is best. Why don't we increase minimum wage to $25 an hour, or better yet, why not $200 an hour? The more we increase it the more capitalists will raise their prices to compensate, so it really all becomes a matter of how much you want to pay for a gallon of milk and loaf of bread. The reason the rich people don't like you doing this is because you make dollars worth less. Now it doesn't really bother them that much because they have lots of dollars. The people who are hurt the most are those who don't have many dollars or who get a set number of dollars every month, or who work for a minimal amount of dollars every hour.
It's another wonderful example of how you are shooting your own soldiers in this war you can't win.
Only in your dreams and memes is this the case. Productivity has nothing to do with revenue or expenses, what has or hasn't been paid, or anything with regard to remuneration to the worker. Productivity is an average measure of the efficiency of production.
PROFIT is the amount gained by capitalists after expenses have been paid.
No that is incorrect. Revenue is what a business takes in. Productivity is what is left after non-labor expenses. Profit is what is left after all expenses.
Now, could you describe that- revenues after non labor expenses- as "a measure of the efficiency of production"? Sure, I supposed you could. That would be one way to figure out how efficient production is. But that's what it is measuring: revenues minus non-labor expenses.
Uhm, because they earned it and you didn't? Again... this so-called "rich" person, invested his money in new technology to improve productivity. His workers did not invest or take any risk at all. Now it exists only because the "rich" person made the choice to invest his money in the new technology. If there was no consequential gain from him doing this... like if, all the extra productivity would have to be accounted for in pay increases to his employees, why in heaven's name would he ever make such a choice? You're not "giving" anything. You don't have any damn thing to give. A capitalist is capitalizing on new technology to increase productivity, the reward for that should go to the capitalist. It's his risk, it's his money.
Er, what? How did an employer "earn" advances in technology or pay for them? The main boosts to productivity in modern time have been the computer and the Internet, both developed at least in part by the government and certainly not by the owner of the local McDonalds...
Remember, any technology that the employer pays for is already taken out before you get down to the productivity number. Productivity increases, in part, because of generally improving technology like the Internet and so forth, and partly because the workforce gets more educated. Neither of those things are paid for by the employers generally.
And the Parade of Stupid continues to march on!
Don't be retarded, prices are (mostly) set by supply and demand, a gigantically unreasonable raise like you suggest would just result in inflation and an eventual stabilization with people being poorer then they began. It is shameful that the government must step in and mandate a minimum wage when your economic theory suggests that wages naturally keep pace with the cost of living but they have not. Why is that? Don't say "the government" because they have a real interest in taxing more income.Why not? Because it would be STOOPID. Also yours is an incredibly stupid question- thus favored by GOP voters...You say wealth is infinite. Why then can't businesses with minimum wage workers tap into that infinity to pay their workers a higher minimum wage?
So here is your mental retardation kicking in again. I did not say that someone who has wealth has an infinite resource that can never be depleted. I guess that's what you heard or maybe what you thought was meant by "wealth is infinite." I guess I should have said "the amount of wealth which can be obtained is infinite."
Business can pay people whatever amount you think is best. Why don't we increase minimum wage to $25 an hour, or better yet, why not $200 an hour? The more we increase it the more capitalists will raise their prices to compensate, so it really all becomes a matter of how much you want to pay for a gallon of milk and loaf of bread. The reason the rich people don't like you doing this is because you make dollars worth less. Now it doesn't really bother them that much because they have lots of dollars. The people who are hurt the most are those who don't have many dollars or who get a set number of dollars every month, or who work for a minimal amount of dollars every hour.
It's another wonderful example of how you are shooting your own soldiers in this war you can't win.
I assume you mean it would be stupid to raise the minimum wage to $25 or $200... but please.... tell us WHY that would be stupid? Just think of how nice it would be for all those poor minimum wage workers to suddenly be making $200 an hour to do their menial jobs? I mean, that's $8k per 40hr week... pretty sweet!
Don't be retarded, prices are (mostly) set by supply and demand, a gigantically unreasonable raise like you suggest would just result in inflation and an eventual stabilization with people being poorer then they began. It is shameful that the government must step in and mandate a minimum wage when your economic theory suggests that wages naturally keep pace with the cost of living but they have not. Why is that? Don't say "the government" because they have a real interest in taxing more income.
One of the flaws of capitalism, a stable economy is a loser, stable growth linked to population growth would transform mankind into a relative utopia but the capitalists would be jumping out of windows if that happened. Growth must always occur, always, in the absence of real growth cutting costs is the only way to increase the profit margin. For far too long gains have been made mostly in productivity and not nearly enough in revenue, and so gains have been made to the detriment of the workforce. Is it wrong to see this negative movement in wages as a death spiral of endless bubbles?Don't be retarded, prices are (mostly) set by supply and demand, a gigantically unreasonable raise like you suggest would just result in inflation and an eventual stabilization with people being poorer then they began. It is shameful that the government must step in and mandate a minimum wage when your economic theory suggests that wages naturally keep pace with the cost of living but they have not. Why is that? Don't say "the government" because they have a real interest in taxing more income.
You either know more than your lefty peers, or quickly looked up a Wiki article. Either way, much of your post is correct.
What you describe is known in economics as the "value proposition." The value of a product or service does not change simply because the medium of fiat currency changes.
There is no valid theory that "wages naturally keep pace with the cost of living." I have no idea where you got this idea. Certainly not from Adam Smith or any of the other classical economists. In fact, entropy is expected in labor, As techniques and processes are refined, the scarcity of skilled labor declines, causing it to be of less value.
Wages naturally decline in value in a static job. This is why a button pusher cannot command $80 an hour anymore. Someone with a brain automated the press and a machine pushes the button now. Refinement of technique will always lower the compensated value of routine tasks.
You say wealth is infinite. Why then can't businesses with minimum wage workers tap into that infinity to pay their workers a higher minimum wage?
So here is your mental retardation kicking in again. I did not say that someone who has wealth has an infinite resource that can never be depleted. I guess that's what you heard or maybe what you thought was meant by "wealth is infinite." I guess I should have said "the amount of wealth which can be obtained is infinite."
Business can pay people whatever amount you think is best. Why don't we increase minimum wage to $25 an hour, or better yet, why not $200 an hour? The more we increase it the more capitalists will raise their prices to compensate, so it really all becomes a matter of how much you want to pay for a gallon of milk and loaf of bread. The reason the rich people don't like you doing this is because you make dollars worth less. Now it doesn't really bother them that much because they have lots of dollars. The people who are hurt the most are those who don't have many dollars or who get a set number of dollars every month, or who work for a minimal amount of dollars every hour.
It's another wonderful example of how you are shooting your own soldiers in this war you can't win.
If every CEO in that nation give themselves a 5 million dollar bonus this year,do you think that will make prices on everything go up for everybody?
What a crock of shit.
Rich people can't have anymore bonuses or increase in their incomes.. That'll make the prices go up for everything.
Here is another myth in the sea of stupidity you swim around in. CEOs do not give themselves anything, they are hired, fired and compensated by a board of directors. If they get a bonus, it is part of their compensation. It doesn't cause inflation because it's already factored into the formulas for profit and expenses.
Now I will bet you any amount, you do not have the first inkling of an idea what a CEO actually does. You've heard about them from your left-wing blogs, you know they are the bad guys, they make a lot of money, accumulate a lot of wealth... but you don't know beans about what they do. This isn't a problem since you're never going to be hired to be one, but it is important that people get some education about what a good CEO actually does.
I've been a CEO before, so I already know it's more than flying around in the corporate jet, playing golf, eating caviar and drinking champagne while burning the money of poor and middle class workers and laughing evilly.
If every CEO in that nation give themselves a 5 million dollar bonus this year,do you think that will make prices on everything go up for everybody?
What a crock of shit.
Rich people can't have anymore bonuses or increase in their incomes.. That'll make the prices go up for everything.
Here is another myth in the sea of stupidity you swim around in. CEOs do not give themselves anything, they are hired, fired and compensated by a board of directors. If they get a bonus, it is part of their compensation. It doesn't cause inflation because it's already factored into the formulas for profit and expenses.
Now I will bet you any amount, you do not have the first inkling of an idea what a CEO actually does. You've heard about them from your left-wing blogs, you know they are the bad guys, they make a lot of money, accumulate a lot of wealth... but you don't know beans about what they do. This isn't a problem since you're never going to be hired to be one, but it is important that people get some education about what a good CEO actually does.
I've been a CEO before, so I already know it's more than flying around in the corporate jet, playing golf, eating caviar and drinking champagne while burning the money of poor and middle class workers and laughing evilly.
You are SO fucking stupid.
The issue isn't who gives the CEO his/her 5 million. It is not what the fuck a CEO does.
It is the fact that their income goes up dramatically. AND THE PRICE OF EVERYTHING DOES NOT GO UP.
So how do the guys and gals making a little higher (9 bucks lets say) minimum wage make the price of everything go up but CEO's getting millions of bonus money each year in income doesn't cause prices for everything to go up?
How the fucks that work? Those little guys with their little incomes have more economic power than those multi millionaires do. You really believe that?
