#91
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 7:40:21 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/3/2017 11:06 PM, Tim McNamara wrote: On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 13:32:48 -0500, AMuzi wrote: Without an educated populace the gatekeepers are powerless and wishing for an educated population is a fool's dream. And here we are. Yep. And unfortunately there is a large percentage of the American population who have opted to be stupid and proud of it. I have said this before and will say it again. I have for decades thought that a class in logic ought to be required in every high school.. In a participatory form of government- like, you know, democracy, a basic level of non-idiocy is required for success. Unfortunately someone decided that "education creates liberals," and thus far too many politicians have decided to oppose competent public education (at least here, don't know about other parts of the country). ISTM the "education creates liberals" effort is concentrating on denigrating university professors and college education. There's a gaggle of right-wing columnists who dig deep to find admittedly silly things occurring in some schools and leap to statements that academia is totally worthless. I think the tactic with K-12 has been entirely different. Corporations have focused on bad results from inner-city schools and gamed the system to promote, then run, for-profit charter schools. Then they've gotten rich by siphoning off the tax dollars. In Ohio, at least, these for-profit charter schools were promising to provide far better educations. But they've consistently delivered no better and often far worse results. After years of educational failure, many were closed down by the state, but later re-formed with most of the same administrators under a new name, as a "new" school that rakes in yet more taxpayer money. As a bonus, for years they were exempt from many of the standards that public schools must meet. Oh, and they pay teachers far less while paying administrators far more. Here I'll sound like a conservative: schools need to have standards and accountability for behavior and educational performance, parents (or someone in the home) need to be actively involved in their children's scholastic life. I'll agree, although bad family background makes it damned hard to get kids to behave and perform. Society seems to look at kids with absent fathers, layabout mothers, ramshackle homes and gang-banger role models, and blame the teachers for not turning those kids into hard-working geniuses. And we need to recognize that not everyone wants to or is able to attend college successfully, which seems to be the current goal of Americam education policy; there should be multiple educational tracks available to help students acquire the skills they need to be successful. I absolutely agree. Frank, education is good. But I have sat in on classes in which the professor mentions not one single word about what the course is about but spends an entire hour or more politically propagandizing young people whose minds are not yet adept at picking and choosing between truth and fiction. I was summarily kicked out of an calculus class for saying so. |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:47:15 PM UTC+2, wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? Hey Tom, you just posted 10 posts in a little more than half an hour, only in this thread. We can't keep up with you. Go ride bike and give us a break.. Lou |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 1:02:53 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:47:15 PM UTC+2, wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise.. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? Hey Tom, you just posted 10 posts in a little more than half an hour, only in this thread. We can't keep up with you. Go ride bike and give us a break. Just did 72 miles and nearly got heat prostration yesterday so you're condemned to me frozen to the sweat and raising hell. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? Migrant workers may or may not depress wages. They're offering $15-16/hr to cut grapes in Sonoma, and they're not getting home-grown workers. Anglos refuse to do certain things, e.g. hard work. A perfect market should fix all this, but look at the low unemployment and the lack of real wage growth. Something is not working, and I don't know what it is. In any normal market, wages would be rising, inflation would be rising, interest rates would be rising. Bonds would be going up; the market would be dipping a little as people moved into safer and now decent yield investments. None of that is happening. -- Jay Beattie. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 08:14:59 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2017 12:49 AM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 22:06:16 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 13:32:48 -0500, AMuzi wrote: Without an educated populace the gatekeepers are powerless and wishing for an educated population is a fool's dream. And here we are. Yep. And unfortunately there is a large percentage of the American population who have opted to be stupid and proud of it. I have said this before and will say it again. I have for decades thought that a class in logic ought to be required in every high school. In a participatory form of government- like, you know, democracy, a basic level of non-idiocy is required for success. Unfortunately someone decided that "education creates liberals," and thus far too many politicians have decided to oppose competent public education (at least here, don't know about other parts of the country). Here I'll sound like a conservative: schools need to have standards and accountability for behavior and educational performance, parents (or someone in the home) need to be actively involved in their children's scholastic life. And we need to recognize that not everyone wants to or is able to attend college successfully, which seems to be the current goal of Americam education policy; there should be multiple educational tracks available to help students acquire the skills they need to be successful. One thing I heard from Trump a while back was having some sort of system for apprenticeships, which Germany- probably among others- has done with success for decades; haven't heard a peep about it since, so maybe it fell off the radar. I think that would be a good idea. In my state we seem intent on dismantling the trade schools because of the emphasis on college as the be-all and end-all of education. Apprenticeship used to be a method of learning a trade. Abraham Lincoln, I believe, "read for the law" which was realistically an apprenticeship program. It eventually became a term used to describe a learning period for the manual trades (one might call them) and then the manual trades became obsolete. Does anyone get up in the middle of the night to knead tomorrow's bread? Or dig a ditch by hand? I completed an apprenticeship to be a "Machinist", although I subsequently went to an engineering school, but I can remember as early as the mid-late 1960's that very little work for a qualified machinist existed. One or maybe two in a big shop and the rest were machine operators. I know that The Donald talked about apprenticeships, and increasing employment, and increasing minimum salaries, and reducing costs, and, and, but I haven't seen much progress being made. Now there is an exercise in logic. (1) Increase wages which certainly contributes to higher sales prices, and (2) reduce costs? Mayor Comerade Bill in NYC says that increasing cigarette taxes will stop smoking but increasing the minimum wage will not stop employment. Hey Tim McNamara - could you loan him a logic textbook? Somewhere I read something about "Why are we are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics." -- Cheers, John B. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 09:52:17 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Cheers A few years ago Thailand raised the minimum wage. Prices went the next morning. And, that is not a generalization. I was shopping for a sink faucet and noticed some plumbing bits were higher then they had been "last week" and asked the owner of the shop and he told me that yes, prices are higher "because we have to pay higher wages". I took the trouble to check prices in several other shops where I shopped frequently and all the prices had gone up. I read a survey taken among "working folks" which showed that two years after the minimum wage was raised they didn't think that they were any better off then they had been before wages went up. On the other hand raising legal wages does show that the government has the workers interests at heart. -- Cheers, John B. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 14:39:09 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? Migrant workers may or may not depress wages. They're offering $15-16/hr to cut grapes in Sonoma, and they're not getting home-grown workers. Anglos refuse to do certain things, e.g. hard work. A perfect market should fix all this, but look at the low unemployment and the lack of real wage growth. Something is not working, and I don't know what it is. In any normal market, wages would be rising, inflation would be rising, interest rates would be rising. Bonds would be going up; the market would be dipping a little as people moved into safer and now decent yield investments. None of that is happening. -- Jay Beattie. I suspect that one of the larger problems is the democratic political system where a politician says "Vote for me" and the population says "Why?" -- Cheers, John B. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On 9/4/2017 4:39 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? Migrant workers may or may not depress wages. They're offering $15-16/hr to cut grapes in Sonoma, and they're not getting home-grown workers. Anglos refuse to do certain things, e.g. hard work. A perfect market should fix all this, but look at the low unemployment and the lack of real wage growth. Something is not working, and I don't know what it is. In any normal market, wages would be rising, inflation would be rising, interest rates would be rising. Bonds would be going up; the market would be dipping a little as people moved into safer and now decent yield investments. None of that is happening. -- Jay Beattie. or current thought among economists, "Somethings badly awry with the economy. Actual facts as observed just don't fit our model." -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On 9/4/2017 9:58 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 14:39:09 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 11:45:56 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:24:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped Well, you can pass the cost of wages along in price, assuming price elasticity. Smokers don't have a similar option for increasing revenues to cover the cost of cigarettes -- so the markets do operate differently. Paying a higher minimum wage also stimulates the economy because workers have more buying power. It's trickle-up instead of trickle-down. My son earned sh** in a bike shop and then took all his earnings and bought a bike from the shop. Good discount, but still a money maker for the shop. -- Jay Beattie. But how long before the price increases due to the mimimum wage increase negates the minimum wage increase? It seems to negate it pretty quickly here. Depends on the market and the amount increase in minimum wage, and I'm not saying there should be an astronomical minimum wage. I'm just saying that the market effect of raising minimum wage is complex and not like the effect of spiking the price of cigarettes. It is not some form of economic punishment to curb unhealthy behavior. Here's the way higher wages work: you don't bring in workers from all over the world. That means that production is limited by the number of workers who can then demand a higher wage. The way it presently is these so-called minimum wage jobs are those that can and should be largely automated and will be if the minimum wages rise. This then leaves more workers than jobs and the person willing to accept the lowest wage wins out. My last paying position I was making a quarter of a million a year. The same position now is paying 125-175. Do you think they will pay an American 175 or an Indian 125? Migrant workers may or may not depress wages. They're offering $15-16/hr to cut grapes in Sonoma, and they're not getting home-grown workers. Anglos refuse to do certain things, e.g. hard work. A perfect market should fix all this, but look at the low unemployment and the lack of real wage growth. Something is not working, and I don't know what it is. In any normal market, wages would be rising, inflation would be rising, interest rates would be rising. Bonds would be going up; the market would be dipping a little as people moved into safer and now decent yield investments. None of that is happening. -- Jay Beattie. I suspect that one of the larger problems is the democratic political system where a politician says "Vote for me" and the population says "Why?" Sometimes the population has had enough and resorts to beating Dear Leader to death hanging from his heels. https://rasica.files.wordpress.com/2...pg?w=538&h=373 -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is jobst gone? | Crescentius Vespasianus | Techniques | 7 | June 23rd 11 12:08 AM |
When Jobst ... | Steve Freides[_2_] | Techniques | 1 | January 20th 11 10:28 PM |
Jobst | Brad Anders | Racing | 20 | January 19th 11 06:31 PM |
Jobst | TriGuru55x11 | Rides | 1 | January 19th 11 02:13 PM |