Why Is The Latino Poverty Rate So High?

[Koios]

gee now you're afraid to engage?? I wonder why?? Why not wait till Econ 101 before you pontificate about things on which you are ignorant???

Yes; very. Your Newtonian brilliance intimidates the shit out of me.

That work for you, sweetcakes?

still trying to dodge becuase you lack the IQ for substance??? Are you fooling yourself at least??

Okay fuckit.

Labor prices paced productivity right up to the end of the 70s. Since then, corporate profits have risen faster than wages, by orders of magnitude, and middle class wages have not paced inflation nor productivity, save that of a few years in the 1990s.

Tell me how that can happen when businesses, as you posit, are paying higher wages in service of worker-retention.

Dazzle me, sweetcheeks.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes; very. Your Newtonian brilliance intimidates the shit out of me.

That work for you, sweetcakes?

still trying to dodge becuase you lack the IQ for substance??? Are you fooling yourself at least??

Okay fuckit.

Labor prices paced productivity right up to the end of the 70s. Since then, corporate profits have risen faster than wages, by orders of magnitude, and middle class wages have not paced inflation nor productivity, save that of a few years in the 1990s.

Tell me how that can happen when businesses, as you posit, are paying higher wages in service of worker-retention.

Dazzle me, sweetcheeks.

if I said businesses are paying higer wages I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away with your liberal tail and strawman between your legs.

 

[Koios]

still trying to dodge becuase you lack the IQ for substance??? Are you fooling yourself at least??

Okay fuckit.

Labor prices paced productivity right up to the end of the 70s. Since then, corporate profits have risen faster than wages, by orders of magnitude, and middle class wages have not paced inflation nor productivity, save that of a few years in the 1990s.

Tell me how that can happen when businesses, as you posit, are paying higher wages in service of worker-retention.

Dazzle me, sweetcheeks.

if I said businesses are paying higer wages I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away with your liberal tail and strawman between your legs.

OK; thanks for clarifying. Ignroing abject stupidity it is.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Okay fuckit.

Labor prices paced productivity right up to the end of the 70s. Since then, corporate profits have risen faster than wages, by orders of magnitude, and middle class wages have not paced inflation nor productivity, save that of a few years in the 1990s.

Tell me how that can happen when businesses, as you posit, are paying higher wages in service of worker-retention.

Dazzle me, sweetcheeks.

if I said businesses are paying higer wages I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away with your liberal tail and strawman between your legs.

OK; thanks for clarifying. Ignroing abject stupidity it is.

dear, you misquoted me and now you're showing your true character again by trying to change the subject? Why not quote accurately so we can continue your lesson? Are you opposed to learning??

You may be dumb now but you've got the rest of your life to be intelligent

 

[Koios]

if I said businesses are paying higer wages I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away with your liberal tail and strawman between your legs.

OK; thanks for clarifying. Ignroing abject stupidity it is.

dear, you misquoted me and now you're showing your true character again by trying to change the subject? Why not quote accurately so we can continue your lesson? Are you opposed to learning??

You may be dumb now but you've got the rest of your life to be intelligent

Oklay fine. They're paying the maximum to retain workers. Sorry for assuming that meant more. Which is it? Maximum = same, or less? How so; and since I lack your apparent benefit of economics post-doc studies, where might I read up on this novel fact of business economics. TIA.

 

[Koios]

PS: "strawman" is not misquoting / interpretting. It's making up a a person who does not exist, ergo, made of straw.

For example:

Some say that motherhood and apple pie is shit, but put me on record of saying those people (not actual people, ergo made of straw, metaphorically speaking) are dead wrong and that motherhood and apple pie are the cat's fucking pajamas.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Oklay fine. They're paying the maximum to retain workers.
Sorry for assuming that meant more. Which is it? Maximum = same, or less?

dear, they pay the most possible so as not to lose their workers to those who do pay the most possible.

How so; and since I lack your apparent benefit of economics post-doc studies, where might I read up on this novel fact of business economics. TIA.

Great question! Modern Republican economics started in 18th Century France. In fact, Jefferson translated DeTracy into English for use as the first American economics text. But, in the end Adam Smith won out for his lengthly and thorough explication of capitalism with The Wealth of Nations. If you're in a hurry I suggest you try Ayn Rand, Capitalism-The Unknown Ideal, or Milton Friedman's, Free to Choose, or Henry Hazlits, Economics in One Lesson.

If you don't know these huge classics already its because you've been brainwashed. Better to know than not- right?

 

[Koios]

Oklay fine. They're paying the maximum to retain workers.
Sorry for assuming that meant more. Which is it? Maximum = same, or less?

dear, they pay the most possible so as not to lose their workers to those who do pay the most possible.

How so; and since I lack your apparent benefit of economics post-doc studies, where might I read up on this novel fact of business economics. TIA.

Great question! Modern Republican economics started in 18th Century France. In fact, Jefferson translated DeTracy into English for use as the first American economics text. But, in the end Adam Smith won out for his lengthly and thorough explication of capitalism with The Wealth of Nations. If you're in a hurry I suggest you try Ayn Rand, Capitalism-The Unknown Ideal, or Milton Friedman's, Free to Choose, or Henry Hazlits, Economics in One Lesson.

If you don't know these huge classics already its because you've been brainwashed. Better to know than not- right?

I'm cursorily familiar with some, albeit not much DeTracy since philosophy is not one of my faves. And of course most if not all of us have had Rand on the reading list; and with it Objectivism until you vomit.

But once again, this thesis that employers pay the maximum they must to retain workers, organically, is a novel concept ... or perhaps I missed it when reading some of the works you mention. So if you would, kindly, can fill me in on the specifics of how any one of them spoke to what you contend is a widely accepted principle in economics.

Thanks in advance.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I'm cursorily familiar with some, albeit not much DeTracy since philosophy is not one of my faves.

he was an economist,mostly

And of course most if not all of us have had Rand on the reading list; and with it Objectivism until you vomit.

but apparently not her most significant: Capitalism the Unknow Ideal

But once again, this thesis that employers pay the maximum they must to retain workers, organically, is a novel concept ...

not novel just an absolute necessity of capitalism. Do you think A-Rod gets 20 million because they like him?? Or a Rolls cost more than a VW for fun???

or perhaps I missed it when reading some of the works you mention. So if you would, kindly, can fill me in on the specifics of how any one of them spoke to what you contend is a widely accepted principle in economics.

Thanks in advance.

dear, how do you think prices are set??? You must pay wages higher than your competitor or go bankrupt and have prices lower than your competitor or go bankrupt as 5 million world wide do each year. It is truly survival of the fittest for business and heaven for workers and consumers. Capitalism instantly reversed the first 5 million years of human history in 250 years.

 

[Koios]

I'm cursorily familiar with some, albeit not much DeTracy since philosophy is not one of my faves.

he was an economist,mostly

And of course most if not all of us have had Rand on the reading list; and with it Objectivism until you vomit.

but apparently not her most significant: Capitalism the Unknow Ideal

But once again, this thesis that employers pay the maximum they must to retain workers, organically, is a novel concept ...

not novel just an absolute necessity of capitalism. Do you think A-Rod gets 20 million because they like him?? Or a Rolls cost more than a VW for fun???

or perhaps I missed it when reading some of the works you mention. So if you would, kindly, can fill me in on the specifics of how any one of them spoke to what you contend is a widely accepted principle in economics.

Thanks in advance.

dear, how do you think prices are set??? You must pay wages higher than your competitor or go bankrupt and have prices lower than your competitor or go bankrupt as 5 million world wide do each year. It is truly survival of the fittest for business and heaven for workers and consumers. Capitalism instantly reversed the first 5 million years of human history in 250 years.

Based on what the market will bear, then secondarily on perceived value. Also commodities which are often manipulated, if not exclusively manipulated, tend to go up in price to the point of diminishing return. Get the maximum for the product, is indeed, central in the minds of those selling them.

But those are products; and labor is different, with monetary compensation merely being one aspect, and businesses are increasingly finding other ways, beyond higher pay, to fulfill the desires of more prized employees, while at the same time, endeavoring to reduce labor costs among those employees for which turnover is less costly.

And supporting, or even funding pseudo-economic "studies," which influence policies designed to compress wages, is indeed a popular endeavor via business associations and folks in "think" tanks who are drunk on the koolaid of laissez-faire, which your reading list seems replete with.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Based on what the market will bear,

dear what is the subject of your sentance????????

Are you saying, Capitalism instantly reversed the first 5 million years of human history in 250 years based on what the market will bear????????????.

 

[Koios]

Based on what the market will bear,

dear what is the subject of your sentance????????

Well, honey bunches, it's a market, with limits. Say you build a car that is within the financial reach of 12% of the market, based on income studies. That's it. It's your market, and you'll do battle with other companies vying for those same consumers, who are a target-rich environment for your product; and thus you can estimate that you'll sell X units, which hopefully surpasses your cost of making and getting it to market. In short, what the market will bear.

Does that help?

 

[Koios]

Based on what the market will bear,

Are you saying, Capitalism instantly reversed the first 5 million years of human history in 250 years based on what the market will bear????????????.

No. That's what you're saying. And it's purely rhetorical; and thus meaningless.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Based on what the market will bear,

dear what is the subject of your sentance????????

Well, honey bunches, it's a market, with limits. Say you build a car that is within the financial reach of 12% of the market, based on income studies. That's it. It's your market, and you'll do battle with other companies vying for those same consumers, who are a target-rich environment for your product; and thus you can estimate that you'll sell X units, which hopefully surpasses your cost of making and getting it to market. In short, what the market will bear.

Does that help?

yes, markets have limits, all agree, but what on earth is your point and your subject?????????

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

drunk on the koolaid of laissez-faire, which your reading list seems replete with.

if capitalism is incorrect why be so afraid to present your best example.

 

[Koios]

dear what is the subject of your sentance????????

Well, honey bunches, it's a market, with limits. Say you build a car that is within the financial reach of 12% of the market, based on income studies. That's it. It's your market, and you'll do battle with other companies vying for those same consumers, who are a target-rich environment for your product; and thus you can estimate that you'll sell X units, which hopefully surpasses your cost of making and getting it to market. In short, what the market will bear.

Does that help?

yes, markets have limits, all agree, but what on earth is your point and your subject?????????

That labor markets naturally create a poverty class unless policies are put in place to insure wages sufficient to support the society and businesses within it.

 

[Koios]

drunk on the koolaid of laissez-faire, which your reading list seems replete with.

if capitalism is incorrect why be so afraid to present your best example.

What best example? That the mixed economies Ayn decried are in fact the leading economies in the world and have thus rendered laissez faire an utterly debunked concept?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

That labor markets naturally create a poverty class unless policies are put in place to insure wages sufficient to support the society and businesses within it.

how can they create a poverty class when capitalism forces them to pay the maximum possible???? Capitalism reversed the first 5 million years of human history in 250 years and everyone is now rich by comparison.


The idiot liberal wants a policy wherein a liberal bureaucrat sets all prices and wages???? Tell us

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

drunk on the koolaid of laissez-faire, which your reading list seems replete with.

if capitalism is incorrect why be so afraid to present your best example.

What best example? That the mixed economies Ayn decried are in fact the leading economies in the world and have thus rendered laissez faire an utterly debunked concept?

dear, lets be precise, conservative intellectuals know that America is the richest country in human history by far and it is the most mixed toward capitalism.

Dear, China just switched to capitalism and now everyone is getting rich whereas they had been starving to death under liberal brainpower that though it was superior to capitalism. Starving to death under liberal management is a bad thing- right??

 

[Koios]

if capitalism is incorrect why be so afraid to present your best example.

What best example? That the mixed economies Ayn decried are in fact the leading economies in the world and have thus rendered laissez faire an utterly debunked concept?

dear, lets be precise, conservative intellectuals know that America is the richest country in human history by far and it is the most mixed toward capitalism.

Dear, China just switched to capitalism and now everyone is getting rich whereas they had been starving to death under liberal brainpower that though it was superior to capitalism. Starving to death under liberal management is a bad thing- right??

As unicorns/the Easter Bunny/conservative intellectuals can tell ya, Ed, the PRC is not a capitalist country. Sorry to disappoint.