What would happen to the economy if minimum wages are raised?

[danielpalos]

More people would spend more money,

impossible of course because the amount of money would stay the same. Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberal don't know that??? Amazing.

no, it doesn't stay the same. we have a central bank to ensure money circulates and multiplies.

Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberals don't know that??? Amazing.

more people will be spending more money.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

More people would spend more money,

impossible of course because the amount of money would stay the same. Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberal don't know that??? Amazing.

no, it doesn't stay the same. we have a central bank to ensure money circulates and multiplies.

Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberals don't know that??? Amazing.

more people will be spending more money.

Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberals don't know that??? Amazing.

 

[danielpalos]

More people would spend more money,

impossible of course because the amount of money would stay the same. Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberal don't know that??? Amazing.

no, it doesn't stay the same. we have a central bank to ensure money circulates and multiplies.

Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberals don't know that??? Amazing.

more people will be spending more money.

Govt does not print more money when it raises the MW. Liberals don't know that??? Amazing.

we don't need government to print money; the private sector can use private paper to create money.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

we don't need government to print money;

so why doesn't the typical liberal tell the Fed to close up shop since you discovered that they are not needed??

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Our Constitution secures equal protection of the law.

Yup.
Employed people who are laid off have earned and are eligible for unemployment compensation, under law.
Employed people who quit are not eligible for unemployment compensation, under law.
People who never worked are not eligible for unemployment compensation, under law.

the is employment at will.

Employment at will simply means "the employer does not have to have good cause to terminate your employment. Most employers take advantage of this protection. Unless you signed some sort of employment contract that states you cannot be terminated without good cause, it is assumed that you are an at-will employee"

At-Will Employee FAQ's - FindLaw

equal protection of the law is not negotiable.

And it's not violated by unemployment benefits.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will. EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will.

That law isn't violated when workers who quit get no UE benefits.

EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Post the California law and I'll point out your error.

 

[hadit]

Jobs would be cut, investment diminished.

It's the value of the work that determines the pay.

BS, if the value of the job determined the pay, CEOs wouldn't be making several hundred times what their employees make and a man with a helmet defending a football wouldn't be making $millions while a man with a helmet defending our country barely makes a living.

Take a good CEO out of a company and the company fails. I saw it happen first hand at Circuit City, which went from a $10 billion company to nothing in a short period of time. As for entertainment figures making a lot of money, that's a function of the market too. When millions of people want to watch you or listen to you do something, you can make a lot of money charging them for the privilege. If millions of people wanted to watch soldiers living and fighting in a desert, soldiers would make a lot of money too.

The point is that the value of the work does not determine the pay.

You may not agree with it, but that's the value society sets.

a minimum wage can be fixed as a Standard.

Which makes it arbitrary. We knew that.

 

[hadit]

Would you demand that Donald Trump get welfare benefits?

no one is requiring Mr. Trump to exercise a work ethic from the Age of Iron, either.

why value a work ethic in modern times?

You're dodging the question. Tell you what, don't have a work ethic and don't work. You have that freedom, you know. Of course, you have to handle the consequences of that decision, but that's what freedom is. So, for the third time, would you demand that Donald Trump get welfare benefits?

the consequences are recourse to the law. the law is employment at will. only the right wing, never gets it.

how is that relevant?

who cares how much Mr. Trump makes or how much he works for it? only nosey right wingers gossip about stuff like that.

Obviously, you don't want to address the question.

equal protection of the law is a natural right.

That's one vote for Donald Trump getting welfare benefits.

 

[danielpalos]

we don't need government to print money;

so why doesn't the typical liberal tell the Fed to close up shop since you discovered that they are not needed??

we need the fed to help command economize our economy. the private sector is Only in it for the private profit.

 

[danielpalos]

equal protection of the law is not negotiable.

And it's not violated by unemployment benefits.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will. EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will.

That law isn't violated when workers who quit get no UE benefits.

EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Post the California law and I'll point out your error.

that is a violation of equal protection of the law; employment at the will of either party. only the right wing, never gets it.

 

[danielpalos]

BS, if the value of the job determined the pay, CEOs wouldn't be making several hundred times what their employees make and a man with a helmet defending a football wouldn't be making $millions while a man with a helmet defending our country barely makes a living.

Take a good CEO out of a company and the company fails. I saw it happen first hand at Circuit City, which went from a $10 billion company to nothing in a short period of time. As for entertainment figures making a lot of money, that's a function of the market too. When millions of people want to watch you or listen to you do something, you can make a lot of money charging them for the privilege. If millions of people wanted to watch soldiers living and fighting in a desert, soldiers would make a lot of money too.

The point is that the value of the work does not determine the pay.

You may not agree with it, but that's the value society sets.

a minimum wage can be fixed as a Standard.

Which makes it arbitrary. We knew that.

fiat money is arbitrary; our Congress can fix the value of it by enacting a Standard. you have no valid point in our First World economy.

 

[danielpalos]

no one is requiring Mr. Trump to exercise a work ethic from the Age of Iron, either.

why value a work ethic in modern times?

You're dodging the question. Tell you what, don't have a work ethic and don't work. You have that freedom, you know. Of course, you have to handle the consequences of that decision, but that's what freedom is. So, for the third time, would you demand that Donald Trump get welfare benefits?

the consequences are recourse to the law. the law is employment at will. only the right wing, never gets it.

how is that relevant?

who cares how much Mr. Trump makes or how much he works for it? only nosey right wingers gossip about stuff like that.

Obviously, you don't want to address the question.

equal protection of the law is a natural right.

That's one vote for Donald Trump getting welfare benefits.

Only in right wing fantasy.

 

[hadit]

Take a good CEO out of a company and the company fails. I saw it happen first hand at Circuit City, which went from a $10 billion company to nothing in a short period of time. As for entertainment figures making a lot of money, that's a function of the market too. When millions of people want to watch you or listen to you do something, you can make a lot of money charging them for the privilege. If millions of people wanted to watch soldiers living and fighting in a desert, soldiers would make a lot of money too.

The point is that the value of the work does not determine the pay.

You may not agree with it, but that's the value society sets.

a minimum wage can be fixed as a Standard.

Which makes it arbitrary. We knew that.

fiat money is arbitrary; our Congress can fix the value of it by enacting a Standard. you have no valid point in our First World economy.

They can fix the value of the currency, but they cannot fix the actual costs involved in producing goods and services. Face it, socialism has been tried several times and always fails when enough people realize they don't have to be productive to get paid. Then it all collapses, every time. You can't fight human nature.

 

[hadit]

You're dodging the question. Tell you what, don't have a work ethic and don't work. You have that freedom, you know. Of course, you have to handle the consequences of that decision, but that's what freedom is. So, for the third time, would you demand that Donald Trump get welfare benefits?

the consequences are recourse to the law. the law is employment at will. only the right wing, never gets it.

how is that relevant?

who cares how much Mr. Trump makes or how much he works for it? only nosey right wingers gossip about stuff like that.

Obviously, you don't want to address the question.

equal protection of the law is a natural right.

That's one vote for Donald Trump getting welfare benefits.

Only in right wing fantasy.

So answer the question, yes or no.

 

[danielpalos]

The point is that the value of the work does not determine the pay.

You may not agree with it, but that's the value society sets.

a minimum wage can be fixed as a Standard.

Which makes it arbitrary. We knew that.

fiat money is arbitrary; our Congress can fix the value of it by enacting a Standard. you have no valid point in our First World economy.

They can fix the value of the currency, but they cannot fix the actual costs involved in producing goods and services. Face it, socialism has been tried several times and always fails when enough people realize they don't have to be productive to get paid. Then it all collapses, every time. You can't fight human nature.

yes, they can; it is called, taxation and regulation. this is why, no one takes the right wing seriously about economics.

 

[danielpalos]

the consequences are recourse to the law. the law is employment at will. only the right wing, never gets it.

how is that relevant?

who cares how much Mr. Trump makes or how much he works for it? only nosey right wingers gossip about stuff like that.

Obviously, you don't want to address the question.

equal protection of the law is a natural right.

That's one vote for Donald Trump getting welfare benefits.

Only in right wing fantasy.

So answer the question, yes or no.

you are the one begging the question. only the right seems to care about that gossip.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And it's not violated by unemployment benefits.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will. EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will.

That law isn't violated when workers who quit get no UE benefits.

EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Post the California law and I'll point out your error.

that is a violation of equal protection of the law; employment at the will of either party. only the right wing, never gets it.

that is a violation of equal protection of the law;

Post the California law and I'll point out your error.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You may not agree with it, but that's the value society sets.

a minimum wage can be fixed as a Standard.

Which makes it arbitrary. We knew that.

fiat money is arbitrary; our Congress can fix the value of it by enacting a Standard. you have no valid point in our First World economy.

They can fix the value of the currency, but they cannot fix the actual costs involved in producing goods and services. Face it, socialism has been tried several times and always fails when enough people realize they don't have to be productive to get paid. Then it all collapses, every time. You can't fight human nature.

yes, they can; it is called, taxation and regulation. this is why, no one takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Socialism worked in Venezuela.....but only for people who don't need food or toilet paper.

 

[hadit]

You may not agree with it, but that's the value society sets.

a minimum wage can be fixed as a Standard.

Which makes it arbitrary. We knew that.

fiat money is arbitrary; our Congress can fix the value of it by enacting a Standard. you have no valid point in our First World economy.

They can fix the value of the currency, but they cannot fix the actual costs involved in producing goods and services. Face it, socialism has been tried several times and always fails when enough people realize they don't have to be productive to get paid. Then it all collapses, every time. You can't fight human nature.

yes, they can; it is called, taxation and regulation. this is why, no one takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Taxation and regulation just end up killing the economy and ultimately the nation. You know this to be true, we all do. I have no idea why you continue spouting this line when we've seen untold millions of people die because their leaders are determined to force them to stay in socialist hellholes. When given a choice, people always go for freedom.

 

[hadit]

Obviously, you don't want to address the question.

equal protection of the law is a natural right.

That's one vote for Donald Trump getting welfare benefits.

Only in right wing fantasy.

So answer the question, yes or no.

you are the one begging the question. only the right seems to care about that gossip.

You don't want to answer, because your ideology insists on no means testing, but you don't want to be caught advocating that Trump should receive welfare benefits. You can dance all you want, but it won't help at all.

 

[danielpalos]

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

it is violated by a lack of unemployment benefits

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will. EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Which law is violated? Post the text of the law, I'll point out your error.

employment at will.

That law isn't violated when workers who quit get no UE benefits.

EDD should have to prove for-cause employment to deny benefits.

Post the California law and I'll point out your error.

that is a violation of equal protection of the law; employment at the will of either party. only the right wing, never gets it.

that is a violation of equal protection of the law;

Post the California law and I'll point out your error.

employment at will is the law. the only error is your ignorance of the law.

Ca Labor Code 2922 is declared the law in California regarding employment relationships. EDD has to prove for-Cause employment to deny benefits.