#101
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 07:44:32 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
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 Ah but that was the communists that shot him. Had the right wing caught him they might have crowned him king. After all, the trains ran on time :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 5:44:07 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
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 This indeed happened. And who did it? The cowards that hid in the shadows for the entire war. They called themselves the Antifa for "Anti-Facists". While the Catholics spent the entire war smuggling Jews and other enemies of the Germans to safety, the Antifa did nothing but kill Mussolini after he had been disarmed and put safely in a jail and they wouldn't put themselves in danger by dragging a defenseless man out and murdering him instead of waiting for the trial. We are seeing the same thing occurring in the USA - Is it the so-called "white nationalists" whom the media are painting as "the KKK or Neo-NAZIs" who are hiding in the shadows? No, it is the Antifa showing up for "protests" wearing hard hats and anti-tear gas goggles. Carrying weapons and with pillow cases pulled over their heads died black so they can claim that they really aren't the sons of the real KKK. The Antifa ARE a terrorist organization and every one of them should be arrested and stand trial before a jury of their peers so that they can see what real people think of them. |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On 9/4/2017 10:41 PM, John B. wrote:
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." I think demonizing muslims happens much more often than demonizing gun owners. Seems to me the gun control crowd mostly asks for background checks and bans on guns designed to kill people (as opposed to guns designed for hunting). I don't see much call for jailing or deporting gun owners. Supposedly, a majority of NRA members want better background checks. I doubt that those NRA members consider gun owners lunatics. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:30:37 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote: On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 8:06:23 PM UTC-7, 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. And unfortunately, they're incredibly fertile. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDGGZpAmZr4 President Camacho 2020! But it has electrolytes! |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 12:49:06 +0700, John B wrote:
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? Yes to people getting up early to make tomorrow's bread. We have dozens of bakeries around here with people doing exactly that. Ditches seem to be dug with mechanized equipment rather than a shovel these days, and that's probably just as well. That kind of labor ends up being destructive to the laborer. 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. My apprenticeship, as such, was as a glazier which was my father's trade. I did that for 7 years during high school and college. But even in more technical fields like medicine, nursing, etc., there is a period of apprenticeship by another name. 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. Well, he's made plenty of progress in being a douchebag. Now there is an exercise in logic. (1) Increase wages which certainly contributes to higher sales prices, and (2) reduce costs? -- Cheers, One of the many knots in capitalism. It's a system we're dedicated to but doesn't really work that well- even though it works better than all the alternatives tried thus far. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 08:14:59 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
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? LOL. Raising the cost of cigarettes does reduce the numbers of people smoking and how much they smoke, good data on that. Since many of those people end up with severe expensive chronic illnesses on public health programs, there would be a pretty significant net reduction of public expenditure if we could cut smoking rates in half. My Mom was a smoker for some 50 years and ended up costing Medicare and BCBS well over a million dollars in hospital and other health care costs (surgeries, medications, doctor visits, ER visits, various procedures, oxygen tanks, concentrator, etc., over some 10 years of ill health). Multiply her situation by millions of chronic smokers. Raising the minimum wage costs some jobs and creates others. Whether that specific worker can migrate from the job lost to the job created is the difficulty. And interesting tidbit is that wages in the US are now effectively lower than in 1968. IMHO the only thing preventing outright wage riots in the street is the ready access of easy- if very expensive- credit that most people have no intention of fully paying back (e.g., credit cards). This allows most Americans to live beyond their means and not notice so much that they are making an inadequate wage. I have only glanced at this: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995 Also: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/b...at-effect.html http://news.berkeley.edu/2016/03/10/...to-15-an-hour/ My knowledge of economics is not frankly good enough to evaluate all of these arguments and counter-arguments. For one thing, the economics classes I took (both of 'em) were 37 and 41 years ago, respectively. Seems like the invisible hand of Adam Smith has tended to become the immaterial hand... |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 11:45:52 -0700 (PDT), 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. The minimum wage is a *minimum* wage, not a *standard* wage. It seems like that gets lost in these discussions. A point made in the following article, although I disagree with much of his opinion otherwise. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepat.../#12d1246833a1 |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On 9/5/2017 5:26 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 08:14:59 -0500, AMuzi wrote: 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? LOL. Raising the cost of cigarettes does reduce the numbers of people smoking and how much they smoke, good data on that. Since many of those people end up with severe expensive chronic illnesses on public health programs, there would be a pretty significant net reduction of public expenditure if we could cut smoking rates in half. My Mom was a smoker for some 50 years and ended up costing Medicare and BCBS well over a million dollars in hospital and other health care costs (surgeries, medications, doctor visits, ER visits, various procedures, oxygen tanks, concentrator, etc., over some 10 years of ill health). Multiply her situation by millions of chronic smokers. Raising the minimum wage costs some jobs and creates others. Whether that specific worker can migrate from the job lost to the job created is the difficulty. And interesting tidbit is that wages in the US are now effectively lower than in 1968. IMHO the only thing preventing outright wage riots in the street is the ready access of easy- if very expensive- credit that most people have no intention of fully paying back (e.g., credit cards). This allows most Americans to live beyond their means and not notice so much that they are making an inadequate wage. I have only glanced at this: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995 Also: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/b...at-effect.html http://news.berkeley.edu/2016/03/10/...to-15-an-hour/ My knowledge of economics is not frankly good enough to evaluate all of these arguments and counter-arguments. For one thing, the economics classes I took (both of 'em) were 37 and 41 years ago, respectively. Seems like the invisible hand of Adam Smith has tended to become the immaterial hand... I think in both cases the easy gains have been made already. The question is the effect at the margin. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...tes-tax-stamps https://www.villagevoice.com/2015/04...new-york-city/ " In dollar figures, the best estimates suggest that New York loses about $1.5 billion in revenue every year to tobacco tax evasion in its various forms." Many labor markets function similarly. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 6:59:41 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 5:44:07 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote: 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 This indeed happened. And who did it? The cowards that hid in the shadows for the entire war. They called themselves the Antifa for "Anti-Facists". While the Catholics spent the entire war smuggling Jews and other enemies of the Germans to safety, the Antifa did nothing but kill Mussolini after he had been disarmed and put safely in a jail and they wouldn't put themselves in danger by dragging a defenseless man out and murdering him instead of waiting for the trial. We are seeing the same thing occurring in the USA - Is it the so-called "white nationalists" whom the media are painting as "the KKK or Neo-NAZIs" who are hiding in the shadows? No, it is the Antifa showing up for "protests" wearing hard hats and anti-tear gas goggles. Carrying weapons and with pillow cases pulled over their heads died black so they can claim that they really aren't the sons of the real KKK. The Antifa ARE a terrorist organization and every one of them should be arrested and stand trial before a jury of their peers so that they can see what real people think of them. The news reports of the conflict in people's park in berkely were hilarious.. "The clash has been mostly peaceful so far; however, some bagels and a hard-boiled egg were thrown" |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 3:56:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/5/2017 5:26 PM, Tim McNamara wrote: On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 08:14:59 -0500, AMuzi wrote: 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? LOL. Raising the cost of cigarettes does reduce the numbers of people smoking and how much they smoke, good data on that. Since many of those people end up with severe expensive chronic illnesses on public health programs, there would be a pretty significant net reduction of public expenditure if we could cut smoking rates in half. My Mom was a smoker for some 50 years and ended up costing Medicare and BCBS well over a million dollars in hospital and other health care costs (surgeries, medications, doctor visits, ER visits, various procedures, oxygen tanks, concentrator, etc., over some 10 years of ill health). Multiply her situation by millions of chronic smokers. Raising the minimum wage costs some jobs and creates others. Whether that specific worker can migrate from the job lost to the job created is the difficulty. And interesting tidbit is that wages in the US are now effectively lower than in 1968. IMHO the only thing preventing outright wage riots in the street is the ready access of easy- if very expensive- credit that most people have no intention of fully paying back (e.g., credit cards). This allows most Americans to live beyond their means and not notice so much that they are making an inadequate wage. I have only glanced at this: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995 Also: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/b...at-effect.html http://news.berkeley.edu/2016/03/10/...to-15-an-hour/ My knowledge of economics is not frankly good enough to evaluate all of these arguments and counter-arguments. For one thing, the economics classes I took (both of 'em) were 37 and 41 years ago, respectively. Seems like the invisible hand of Adam Smith has tended to become the immaterial hand... I think in both cases the easy gains have been made already. The question is the effect at the margin. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...tes-tax-stamps https://www.villagevoice.com/2015/04...new-york-city/ " In dollar figures, the best estimates suggest that New York loses about $1.5 billion in revenue every year to tobacco tax evasion in its various forms." Many labor markets function similarly. Smuggled, untaxed [fill in the blank] are everywhere in NYC. Judging by all the guys with tables filled with knock-off watches and sunglasses, one can argue that NYC has its own, peculiar economy unaffected by the criminal laws. There were probably smuggled, untaxed cigarettes when cigarettes were $.20 a package. My paradigm for NYC and environs was going to a supposed high-class theater in Jersey City, killing a few hours before flying back to PDX. 20% of the seats had sheets pulled around them in lieu of fixing the knife holes. I went to use the bathroom, and their was **** on the floor all around the urinal. Nobody cared about aiming, and nobody cared about cleaning up. "F*** it." Pedestrians would look you in the eye and step into the intersection against a light. "F*** you." Everyone is getting their own. Then I came back to PDX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aIfarMPmPQ It's own kind of annoying. We pay an Arts Tax. -- Jay Beattie. |
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 09:28 PM |
Jobst | Brad Anders | Racing | 20 | January 19th 11 05:31 PM |
Jobst | TriGuru55x11 | Rides | 1 | January 19th 11 01:13 PM |